Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-09-15 City Council Agenda Packet
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL September 15, 2015 Special Meeting Council Chambers 5:30 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting. 1 September 15, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. TIME ESTIMATES Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called. HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applicants and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. Call to Order Closed Session 5:30-6:00 PM Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1.CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY-Existing Litigation Joanne Jacobs v. City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara Superior Court, Case No. 1-15-CV-275467 Subject Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) Special Orders of the Day 6:00-6:10 PM 2.Presentation of Proclamation to Midpen Media Center Honoring the Center's 25th Anniversary 3.Selection of Applicants to Interview on September 29, 2015 for the Architectural Review Board, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Planning and Transportation Commission REVISED 2 September 15, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Oral Communications 6:10-6:25 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Study Session 6:25-7:55 PM 4.Finance Committee Recommends the City Council Review the Assessment Results of the Enterprise Resource Planning System (ERP) Needs; Review Recommendation to Plan for the Acquisition of a New Integrated Government- oriented ERP System and Separate Provisioning of Utilities Billing Systems (Continued to a date uncertain) 7:55-8:55 PM 5.Prescreening of a Proposal to Re-zone the Former VTA Park and Ride Lot at 2755 El Camino Real From Public Facility (PF) to Community Commercial (CC(2)) With a Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Amendment From Major Institution/Special Facilities to Regional Community Commercial, Allowing Development of a Four Story Mixed-use Building With Below Grade Parking 8:55-9:55 PM 6.Carl Guardino, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, Presentation and Council Discussion Regarding Potential 2016 Santa Clara County Transportation Funding Measure Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 9:55-10:05 PM Consent Calendar 10:05-10:10 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 7.Approval of Amendment Number 4 to Contract C08125506 With thePlanning Center ¦ DCE, Now Known as Placeworks, to Increase the Contract by $482,612 to an Amount Not to Exceed $2,377,343 and Adoption of a Related Budget Amendment Ordinance 8.Approval of a Five-Year Contract Number C16159540 With Palo AltoCommunity Child Care, Inc. (PACCC) for Management of the City's Child Care Subsidy Program in the Amount of $459,841 Per Fiscal Year Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 16.Update to Council on Business Registry and Council Discussion and Direction Regarding Phase 2 At Place Memo 3 September 15, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. 10.Approval of an Agreement for Professional Services With EES Consulting, Inc. in a Not to Exceed Amount of $200,000 for the Performance of Electric Utility Financial Planning and Rate Consulting Services on an On-Call Task Order Basis for Fiscal Year 2016 through Fiscal Year 2020 11.Approval of $43,125 for Expenses Associated With the Creative Ecology Project at the Palo Alto Art Center and Junior Museum & Zoo for Fiscal Year 2016 and Adoption of the Associated Budget Amendment Ordinance 12.Finance Committee Recommendation That the City Council Approve Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis 13.Authorize the Mayor to Sign, on Behalf of the City, Letters to the "Compact of Mayors" (Global) and the "Mayor’s National Climate Action Agenda" (Domestic), Committing to Climate-Related Actions the City has Already Undertaken or Set in Motion, and Calling on the President of the United States to Pursue the Strongest Possible Climate Agreement at the Upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris, France 14.Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Initiate Neighborhood Engagement Activities by Conducting Town Hall Meetings, Adopting Changes to the Know Your Neighbors GrantProgram, Referring the Co-Sponsorship Agreement and Discussion of Additional Initiatives to Policy and Services Committee, and Transferring $35,000 from City Council Contingency to the City Manager's Office 15.Appointment of Julia Moran to the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Comprehensive Plan Update Action Items 10:10-10:30 PM Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 17.League of California Cities Annual Conference Adoption of Resolutions At-Place Memo 9.Approval of a Five-Year Contract Number C16159539 With Avenidas, Inc. for Provision of Comprehensive Services to Older Adults in theAmount of $453,897 Per Fiscal Year 4 September 15, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. 5 September 15, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Standing Committee Meetings Special City Council Meeting, Wednesday, September 16, 2015 Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meeting Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report City of Palo Alto's Energy Risk Management Report for the Third Quarter, Fiscal Year 2015 Public Letter to Council Set 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK September 15, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Presentation of Proclamation to Midpen Media Center Honoring the Center's 25th Anniversary ATTACHMENTS: Palo Alto Media Center Proclamation (DOC) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO PROCLAMATION Midpen Media Center 25th Anniversary WHEREAS, on September 13, 2015, the Midpen Media Center will host the Midpen Media Mosaic event celebrating 25 years of community storytelling, and upon this occasion will feature: a live television show from Midpen’s new high-definition studio; opportunities to learn storytelling techniques; a sports broadcasting event, broadcast some of the best stories from our community; an interview for the regional Bay Voice channel and inside tips about what makes a successful field production; and WHEREAS, this event will present keynote speaker John C. Hollar, President of the Computer History Museum, who will discuss the future of community media; and WHEREAS, serving the communities of Atherton, East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Stanford and unincorporated portions of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties, the Midpen Media Center provides communication resources to inform, inspire and empower people to speak and act on behalf of their communities, the Midpen Media Center also offers classes, lends equipment and produces programs that showcase the community; and WHEREAS, the Midpen Media Center envisions a community that explores and uses video and other electronic communication technologies to tell its stories, learns about the diversity of the community, and engages in a dialogue that crosses political and cultural boundaries; and WHEREAS, all residents and community organizations have the opportunity to learn how to use these tools and to share their opinions with the rest of the community, thereby promoting and celebrating individual expression, local achievements, education, cultural exchange, arts appreciation, and civic engagement. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Karen Holman, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, on behalf of the City Council do hereby proclaim September 13, 2015 as Midpen Media Center Day in Palo Alto and recognize the 25th Anniversary of the Midpen Media Center, giving commendation to the Center for the vital role they play in building up the community through media production. Presented: September 15, 2015 ______________________________ Karen Holman Mayor CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK September 15, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Selection of Applicants to Interview on September 29, 2015 for the Architectural Review Board, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Planning and Transportation Commission Staff is requesting the City Council select the candidates to be interviewed for the Architectural Review Board, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Planning and Transportation Commission. Interviews are scheduled for Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 6:00 P.M. Each Council Member will receive a selection sheet to use in determining who will be interviewed. Copies of all applications are attached. Some applications may be redacted at the request of the applicant. A full set of non-redacted applications will be emailed to Council Members directly. Enclosed are: 1) Five applications submitted for the Architectural Review Board for three terms (Gooyer, Lew, and Popp) ending on December 15, 2018; and 2) Three applications for the Parks and Recreation Commission for three terms (Ashlund, Crommie, and Markevitch) ending on December 15, 2018; and 3) Four applications submitted for the Planning and Transportation Commission for one term (Michael) ending on December 15, 2019. Recommendation The requested action is for each Council Member to fill out the selection sheet indicating which of the candidates they will be interviewing. The City Clerk will announce who will be interviewed at the same meeting. Candidates who receive five or more votes will be scheduled for an interview. Page 2 APPLICANTS Architectural Review Board 1. Peter Baltay 2. Steven Eichler 3. Robert Gooyer (incumbent) 4. Alexander Lew (incumbent) 5. Flore Schmidt Parks and Recreation Commission 1. Anne Cribbs 2. Cybele LoVuolo-Bhushan 3. David Moss Planning and Transportation Commission 1. Louis Fried 2. John Hamilton 3. William Ross 4. Asher Waldfogel ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: ARB Baltay, Peter (PDF) Attachment B: ARB Eichler, Steven (PDF) Attachment C: ARB Gooyer, Robert (PDF) Attachment D: ARB Lew, Alexander (PDF) Attachment E: ARB Schmidt, Flore (PDF) Attachment F: PARC Cribbs, Anne (PDF) Attachment G: PARC LoVuolo-Bhushan, Cybele (PDF) Attachment H: PARC Moss, David (PDF) Attachment I: PTC Fried, Louis (PDF) Attachment J: PTC Hamilton, John (PDF) Attachment K: PTC Ross, William (PDF) Attachment L: PTC Waldfogel, Asher (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 3 .f Architectural Review Board Application Personal Information Name: Peter Baltay W�IY Of PAL8 l\Lr@ldJA erry CLERK'S ef'P+et: Address: 450 Kipling Street, Palo Alto CA 94301 Cell Phone: 415 407-1621 0 Home t®office Phone: 650 327-7573 E-mail: peter@toposarchitects.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident?QYes @ No 15 HAY -5 PH 2: I 0 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who ar . e employed by the City o.L.ealo A.Jle., who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? UYes(!} No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ®vesO No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Oves®No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? ()v es @No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Architectural Review Board? Ocommunity Group [{]Email from City Clerk 0Palo Alto Weekly 0Daily Post Deity Website 0Flyer Other:_�----------------------------- List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Bachelor of Arts-Columbia University 1984 Master of Architecture-University of Washington 1990 Licensed California Architect since 1995 Owner and Principal Architect of TOPOS Architects since 2000. Employment TOPOS Architects (www.toposarchitects.com) Present or Last Employer: Occupation: Architect and builder Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Past member of the San Mateo County Design Review Board Past member of the Redwood City Architectural Review Board Member of the Santa Clara County AIA Page 1 Architectural Review Board 1. What is it about the Architectural Review Board that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? I am an experienced local architect. I have worked successfully with the Palo Alto Planning and Buildnig Department on many projects. I have served on other design review boards and am familiar �ith the procedures and practices of public service. I believe that it is important to "give back" to the community. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. 429 University Avenue is a project meeting the 'objective' requirements (parking, FAR, height) yet still not fulfilling the 'subjective' requirements (compatibility, scale, massing). Much contention could have been avoided had the ARB been more insistent that the project comply with the subjective requirements of the Design Guidelines and Comprehensive Plan, even if it reduced the allowed maximums of the Zoning Code. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Architectural Review Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? 1. I would like to see the Architectural Review Board be more willing to compromise on the objective standards of the Zoning Code to fullfill the subjective standards of the Design Guidelines and Comprehensive Plan. 2. I would like to see the Architecture Review Board (and City Council, and Planning Staff) provide more concrete feedback to reduce the number of design review cycles and move projects through the review process efficiently. 4. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of good architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the interviews. 1. 520 Cowper Street (Garden Court Hotel)-a wonderfully pedestrial friendly street front with e spacious end well designed vehicular entrance at the hotel help mask the mas of the buildng. Careful and playful detailing and lots of balconies provide en attractive link to Palo Alto's architecture heritage. 2. Courthouse Square, Redwood City-sometimes no buildng is best of all. A we;; used and loved public space created with lots of community input. Small flanking gazebos enhance the pedestrian nature of the public square. 3. 1600 El 'Gamino, Menlo Park (NE corner of El Camino end Encinal)-a beautifully executed rendition of a Mediterranean style building built in the twentieth-first century. The materials, detailing and massing fit the site and community and, while gently evoking the past, are not reproductions of outdated building techniques. 4. 270 University Avenue (Jos. A Banks store)-a well designed urban storefront that is both of our time (contemporary detailing and sustainable) yet of a scale and massing to fit into the University Avenue streetscape as a good neighbor. Not every building should be this dramatic, yet once in a while it is refreshing. 5. Architectural Review Board Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK El Camino Real Design Guidelines LINK El Camino Real Master Plan Study LINK and Appendices LINK Area Plans such as the South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) I and II Plans LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK Permit Streamline Act LINK Density Bonus Law LINK Secretary of the Interior's Standards LINK Page2 Architectural Review Board / Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: 0 I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. · OR 0 I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: 0Home 10office Phone: E-mail: l DigltallyslgnedbyPeterBaltay 5/5/2015· Peter Ba 1. ta yr �{:�:�::��:�;�,�;=,���::�··"· Signature: --------""-;;_·o._,.,_2m_s.o_s.o_s1_B_2,,_3-0_,. .. _. ----------Date:------ Page3 Architectural Review Board _,, �CITY OF PALO ALTO, CA Architectural Review Board Applicatio � cITY cLERK's oFF1cE u Personal Information � 15 Aug 26 I 3:36 pm Name: Steven J Eichler Address: 592 Sand Hill Cir, Menlo Park, CA 94025 Cell Phone: 650.387.0080 0 Home 1@office Phone: 650.328.4013 E-mail: steven@eichlerdesigns.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident?QYes @ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City ot.ealo A�, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? UYes\!) No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ®vesO No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Oves@No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Oves @No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Architectural Review Board? [{]community Group 0Email from City Clerk 0Palo Alto Weekly Other: O oaily Post Deity Website 0Flyer ======�������������- List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: BA, Architecture, University of California, at Berkeley Designer, Kitchen & Baths Chief Financial Officer, Mortgage Bank Project Manager, Bayview District, Third Street Corridor Fagade Improvement Project Employment Present or Last Employer: Eichler Designs Occupation: Designer Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Founding Board Member, Hometown Peninsula, an Independent Business Alliance Board of Director, Abilities United Page 1 Architectural Review Board 1. What is it about the Architectural Review Board that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? As a designer and project manager, I am constantly working towards the highest possible solution for any given situation. A one size fits all approach rarely works. What interests me most about being on the Architectural Review Board, is the opportunity to have a meaningful influence on the future of the City of Palo Alto as it is seen by its buildings and dwellings. This includes consideration for the past builders who have contributed to the architectural value of the City, and encouraging today's builders to take the long view about how the City will be seen in the future. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. There have been several submissions that have come before the Board in the past few years that did not meet the Design Guidelines, and architecturally were out of scale and out of character with the neighboring structures. Progress does not need to be done at the expense of destroying the past in every facet. Preservation does not only have to be about saving the existing structures, it can also mean preserving the scale and character of neighborhoods with whatever is newly built. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Architectural Review Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? The most significant goal I have for the Architectural Review Board to achieve is pursuing a balance between progress and preservation. I believe that one of the first steps to achieving this is better communication between the Applicant and their neighbors, before making a submission. Then upon reviewing a submission, evaluating the effort of the Applicant to develop within the Design Guidelines, Zoning, Planning and Building Codes, as they apply, or demonstrating that a deviation from these is in the best interest of the neighborhood and City as much as it may be for their project. 4. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of good architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the interviews. The David & Lucile Packard Foundation Building, Los Altos -energy efficiencient, excellent use of daylight, sustainable design, and it is artful in appearance. New Mitchell Park Library Branch -also an environmentally friendly building, including the landscaping, with a good blend of differing public spaces for different uses. . · Ramona Street National Historic District - beautiful example of the retention and repair of the character of an historic building and area 5. Architectural Review Board Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK El Camino �eal Design Guidelines LINK El Camino Real Master Plan Study LINK and Appendices LINK Area Plans such as the South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) I and II Plans LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK Permit Streamline Act LINK Density Bonus Law LINK Secretary of the Interior's Standards LINK Page 2 Architectural Review Board \ .i' Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first ·obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: 0 I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR 0 I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: 0Home 1Qoffice Phone: E-mail: Digitally si_gned by Steven J Eichler 08.26.2015 S., nat re· Designs,ou, Date· �. DN:cn=StevenJ Eichler,o=Eichler g U • _ &"1iil Gt•"••@•iol:il&r<lo&igo"9"'' · -------- c=US Date: 2015.08.2614:08:22 -08'00' Page 3 Architectural Review Board Architectural Review Board Application Personal lnfonnation Name: Robert Gooyer Address: 1900 South Norfolk Street, Suite 216 San Mateo. CA 94403 Cell Phone: (650) 740-8007 0 Home1@office Phone: (650) 349-6549 E-mail: Robert@rcgarchitecture.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident?Oves @ No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City 01.ealo AJte.. who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? UYes\!,) No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ®vesONo California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Oves@No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto?()ves @No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Architectural Review Board? Ocommunity Group Ooaily Post [Zieman from City Clerk Deity Website 0Palo Alto Weekly 0Flyer Other: Current Member of Architectural Review Board List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or profe88ional registration: Bachelor's of Architecture degree from University of Arizona Licensed architect in the state of California since 1980 #C-11 ,242. National Council of Architectural registration Boards member #50,961 Principal of my own architectural firm since it's inception in 1990 Employment Present or Last Employer: RCG Architecture Occupation: Principal Architect Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Current or past involvement with: Palo Alto ARB (including Chair), San Mateo Planning Commission (including Chair), Board member & Volunteer President of Coyote Point Museum, SMFCSD Facilities Implementation Plan Advisory Committee, PTA & Site Council K-12, Board member -American Institute of Architects, Master Commissioner -California Architects Board, Emergency Safety Assessment Inspector of the Office of Emergency Services, State of California & SMFCSD Foundation "Bids for Kids" Committee. Page 1 Architectural Review Board 1. What ls it about the Architectural Review Board that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? I currently serve as the Chair for the Palo Alto Architectural review Board. Service to my community is very important to me. I have also served as a Planning Commissioner including being ifs Chair for the City of San Mateo for the 2 four year terms allowed by law. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. As a current Board member in my opinion, there is no one over riding issue that compels me to serve or is more important than another. I believe all projects brought before the Board need attention to make them a good fit for the residents of the city. A big issue to me is the misconception that the Board is only there to serve the developers who come before us. I believe our most important role is to be fair to all. Neighbors, City residents and applicants. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Architectural Review Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? Continue my quest to show that the Board is there to serve the entire community. Homeowners as well as applicants and strive to have the final approved project be the best solution for all. A sort of win-win solution. A good final solution takes hard work by the Board as well as cooperation from the applicant and some give-and-take from the neighborhood. 4. Please Identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of good architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the interviews. 1451 California Avenue -A good infill residential project. 450 Bryant -Good reuse of the Historic Police Department building in lieu of tearing it down. Palo Alto Medical Clinic infill. The development of a nice residential area where the old clinic was formerly located. 5. Architectural Review Board Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK El Camino Real Design Guidelines LINK El Camino Real Master Plan Study LINK and Appendices LINK Area Plans such as the South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) I and II Plans LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK Pennit Streamline Act LINK Density Bonus Law LINK Secretary of the Interior's Standards LINK In my work as an architect, I have delt with all of the above items to one degree or another except for the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Page2 Architectural Review Board ' ' Consent to Publish Personal lnfonnation on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual.• The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: ® I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR 0 I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: 0Home E-mail: August 18, 2015 Signature: ______________________ Date:----- Page3 Architectural Review Board Architectural Review Board Application Personal Information Name: Alexander Lew Address: 372A Bush St Mountain View Cell Phone: 650-537-7445 (!)Home 10ottice Phone: 650-694-4662 E-mail: alexanderlew@att.net Are you a Palo Alto Resident?QYes (!)No c;, /er PALO ,;r_rr:. C/\ CiTf CLE:i:::K's OFFICE IS AUG 26 PM 4: 53 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City o�alo A�. who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? UYes � No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? @vesONo California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Oves0No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? @ves Q No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Architectural Review Board? Ocommunity Group [{]Email from City Clerk 0Palo Alto Weekly 0 Daily Post D eity Website 0 Flyer Other:--------------------------------- List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Associate, project manager, & designer at Solomon Ellis Tomey Architecture and Urban Design Junior designer at Carrasco & Associates Drafter at Stanford University Planning Office Columbia University, master of architecture Washington University, bachelor of arts in architecture Passed national board exams, but not the California exam. Employment Self-employed Present or Last Employer: Occupation: Residential designer Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Palo Alto Architectural Review Board (2 terms and 1 partial term). Board Member, coordinator, and ride leader at Western Wheelers, a Palo Alto cycling club. Volunteer for the Palo Alto "Dream Team" Charrette for an intermodal transit station. Research and organize walking and cycling tours of historic sites on the peninsula. Page 1 Architectural Review Board nd rea Schaffer 25' VEHICLES 15' FLEX ZONE 11' SW 26' SW OR CAFE __ _,..,__,.._. _____ _,. _____________ _,. ._. ____ _,. +---+ .------+ + 130' OVERALL WIDTH 1. Le Cours Mirabeau, Aix-en-Provence / Alexander Lew 25' 2. Old Market District, Omaha Photo Wikimedia CITY BEAUTIFUL MOVEMENT CIRCA 1920 GEORGE KESSLER (PLANNER) AND J.C. NICHOLS (DEVELOPER) 3. Country Club Plaza and Ward Parkway, Kansas City Architectural Review Board Application Personal lnfonnatlon Name: Flore Schmidt E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident?@Ves Q No �CITY OF PALO ALTO, CA � CITY CLERK'S OFFICE � 15 Aug 26 I 5:26 pm Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City o!,Ealo AJ.12..., who are currently serving on tile City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? UYea� No Are you ava'ilable and committed to complete the term applied for? ®vesONo California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe Is lll<ely to: 1) engage in business witn tne City; 2) provide products or services for City projects: or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? 0Yes@No Excluding your principal residence. do you own real property in Palo Alto? Oves @No How·did you Leam about the vacancy on the Architectural Review Board? Ocommunlty Group [l]Email from City Clerk 0Palo Alto Weekly Ooaily Post Deity Website 0Flyer Other: ________________________________ _ List relevant education, training, expertence, certificates of training, llcenses, or professional registration: Universite de Paris-Versailles UP3 Architecture Graduate-France 1988 1990 Italy -University Rome La Sapienza Co founder and run 20 architecrs Architecture POIVET's finn in Paris area. France 1991-2013 Experience includes: Residentials & multi apartment buildings I education (middle. high schools) I remodelling university Orsay/ government (Civic hall, Librory .. ) I sport facilities (Stadium saran) I international experience I many competitions http:/larchitizer.comfblog/stades-de-france/ '7 winning Sporting Venues of Various Shapes and Sizes" Employment Present or Last Employer: Moved to Silicon Valley 2014 Occupation: Currently works with Sunplanter INC a Solar building start up company, Palo Alto. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I used to be member of many architecture competition juries and involved in cities planning projects from small to very large scale Now familiarized with the American way of thinking and how does it work here, I am looking for involveme nt opportunities in subject I am deeply interest in. P::ige 1 Architectural Review Board 1. What Is It about the Architectural Review Board that Is compatible with your experience and of specific Interest to you, and why? Based on my own knowledge "della fabrica", the way you explore and develop ideas and work on it to pursue the purpose "to make them real". I mean significant and relevant to the site (history I nature) and who can be more or less gradually revealed to the conscience of everyone. I will be interested to switch place and point of view to try to help projects go further, trying to make rich and profitable the difference of culture, of architectural practice and of the way to built. 2. Please describe an Issue that recently came before the Board that Is of particular Interest to you and descrtbe why you are Interested In It If you have never been to a Board meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. I have no specific information about a particular case, but I have been witnessing over the last few years the restart of a cycle of tearing down small things and replacing them with huge structures, all over the bay area and very so oin Palo alto, and I am concerned about how the board can help maintain high qual�y standards through a period of shifting life style. I was in arcMecture school in the BO's in Paris when 6 "new cities" were built in a rush in the fields around Paris, with very l�Ue previous thinking and while are historic cities were being bulldozered by developers. Nobody had envisionned the society problems this ideological c�y planning would generate, but we all spent our carrier years to fix the problems due to density and lack cl upstream thinking and control. I would be very motivated to help the Architectural Review Board keep Palo alto friendly, green and residential. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Architectural Review Board achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? Building on my experience, I hnk Pat> Alto's miSlion as a forward looking and glcbaly a<rrWed city Is to set �standards about how nelgl"bahoods can be "4brant and quiet, busy and green. Palo alto should harmoRously develop the em.4rooment but �Ml every aie's Identity and freedom. I think It Is a fascinating miStion. How does "city planrktg" el'ICClUrage "IMng together", •energy and ressouce conservation", meamlngfuil life", "elllclent business"? It seemi Impossible to 11gin out Iha athemy WhO can rTBke an �esslve poem or a strong nove� and to be a physical 30 product Is not enough to C001Jlete Iha goel of to be "arcNledtn". Production of "archllec!IA" begin \!otlere thoughts and material merge together t> jj\18 form and meanlng-maldng regarding t> the en"4ronment In any of Its aspects: slle, local history, imarism, �rarrmlng ... by respect of hannonlous oldomanoe scupled by scales, oomposilon Ines, masses, materials, cobrs ... and volUmes. I do belew that "archltec\Jre" can be touchable a bite by neophyle people and that's the key point to 81'1CClUrage will ent1'1Jsla1111 an archllectwal prodUcifoo. 4. Please Identify a project or projects that you find to be examples �good architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples, Identify project addresses, or provide links. If you attach samples, staff may request that you bring hard copy print outs to the Interviews. Let me talk about Palo Alto City Hall. I doni know if it v.iorks well internally, but I feel it provides PA downtown with remaquable qualities. Its volume make it Sland out like a gOYl!l'nment bu !ding shwld, its crchitectual design, the material employed giws a scale and style reference. It's a landmark This also manage to aeate a Euupean style "piazza• which is both a focal point. a breath In the cly, a gap in the canol7)', a hartxu while it reveals the Institution's importance, providing pUblic parking too. I absolutely do no mean private buldlngs should be allowed v.t\81 the city hall ls. I mean that architectural design, volume, laycut building implementation must be use to bull a nelghboftlood quality, an ader in the City meaning and hierarchy. However br the Mure, I strongly believe buildings should be design Cl'OUnd the sun so they are positive energy sdCI' powered, so they treat the sunlight and allOIN quality Inner spaces while reducing the need of air condltiCl'lning and artificial lighting. To my European eyes, LEED Platinum Is an easy target. I Wish Palo Alto Will really invent the next step ... &. Architectural Review Board Members work with the documents listed below. f you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents Is not required for sel�)Jo n. Palo Alto Co!Tl)rehensive Plan .LINK V Zoning Code LINK v· . El Camino Real Design Guidelines LINK t/ 1 / El Camino Real Master Plan Study .blli.!S and Appendices LINK // Area Plans such as the South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) I and II Plans LINK/,,/' Cslifomia Environmental Quality Act LINK Pennit Streamline Act LINK t/ Density Bonus Law LINK //' Secretary of the Interiors Standards LINK ,.· v Page 2 Architedural Review Board Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual.· The full code is attached. This consent fonn will not be redaded and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: 0 I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR 0 I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone:(650) 494 4341 0Home I ®office Phone: E-mail: Signature: __ ��...__ __ J-_______ Date: _0_8_2_6_20 1 5 Page 3 Architectural Review Board Personal Information Name: Anne Warner Cribbs Address: 2450 Aanes Wav. Palo Alto. CA 94303 Cell Phone: 415.264.2067 Q Home t 0 Office Phone: E-mail: cribbsaw@pacbell.net Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ..@Yes Q No G]lry uF i9l1LO ;.\LHhCA C IT i' etEHK'S BFFJO{ I 5 AUG 3 I PM 12: 3 8 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members?Q Yes 0 No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for?� Yes Q No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? QYes ®No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? QYes ®No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Commission? §ommunity Group Baily Post mail from City Clerk ity Website alo Alto Weekly Q1yer Other: _______________________________ _ List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: 1. 5S S�lA--Foen l q -q 9 -5oo..o-Q... s�� 2 . rov�� 'LDC>q Su,m� f\....O.._,nCM...� �C/Lqa� Page 1 Parks & Recreation Commission Employment Present or Last Employer: San Francisco Bav Area Sports Qrqanizinq Committee Occupation: President & CEO Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organiZ'..@tions: I . <B<IAAcL rY\eNn� R-Lctt-� firiu.LO-CA.-l.-t.C!VG L b� d via--�a . �"'7'1 �d � �Sf" P� MD z.. B<YMcL\llA..-Q/W-f,..<A_ SilM-Jn<_ Sp� �ol 'S. 11\,U;vy\_l).e,L -pt(/)t � c.cfh(<..LLC.. 6 - 4. PA°;,1 E:i\ATI.-)1\.Lcc__ + q CAJ__ s� \Ju-c,l.u_ t �q,' �CW-'V\<1) � �CC& C£P.__c..i'1 S. kovtsC/Ui e,� �c./J � � � 1. What is i� �b.out the Parks and Recreation Commission that is compatible with your experience and of spec1f1c interest to you, and why? �V-€fl:>T l\A_ LL h.lCM-9 V\.Q_� � 6� (JA.4 oPP°'-fl.L� fr:_ cUL � fv � CM-J- LA.a_ v-€_ CAd:-e SS fn pt1vL1L + V'e._OLUVl� it-� . �� � ltA.., peu-tC-? 4 f'JJ.-CA.u;..._h� l� �<n.� n;, � � 0- �� '{) �<(:_. I' V\.o...,ve � llAOJ\c.J-ecf.. lV-. tAJ...l... � oLJ o._H,,..L.ri:fu_ � � CAJ_J. Q_ll-t.<:> CUUL �<-< �. � � \/\A� S p OLP::> b� l�lvi..e). Page2 Parks & Recreation Commission 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. f. fl aO ti �'6.n Ll 0� l;t/.)L. � �S Af'uc l-S W-th.L pv' €%<'z>\A/\c. OVL (rv-cf,.-, -l-tt � t\wvvt, � �· PA I Thj_ � 5�c) �hiu.L .f, �f f �"<>l..u..{h fo 01,<./J� � � 6"-� � 2. C!.,(LQ_f>f'l'\-A- � "'\) LLFZ:-� �t � l\A.-� PAuo A-im (l,t;fl� 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Parks and Recreation Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? l · tA..JCA..\c u .. :>" l'\\\-o � S\x\�c hold� � O\iL \A-�t uv·i ff �I� (A,rM_VV\_� � t <L.. �V\.V\.Q.. h, eAT-�t.:>u �Li p��� cfo �pvcr pcu.Jc s pvo �va��. Page 3 Parks & Recreation Commission 4. Parks and Recreation Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan: Community Services and Facilities Element LINK Natural Environment Element LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK Park Dedication Ordinance (Municipal Code) LINK Bicycle -Pedestrian Transportation Plan LINK Youth Master Plan LINK Foothill Park Fire Management Plan LINK Cubberley Community Advisory Committee Report LINK x \A_o._0 ��-� 1'u-!JM\ ��� �LM.. �--. '{}-w OUU'-Ot tr-Pet.Lo ()JJo �,,Jr, D-V\. � � � flp-CL� pea�- Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: _..Gl. I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR _Q_ I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: Q_ Home 10 Office Phone: E-mail: Signature:b \A.), �'l,,.y, Date: cg-\ 2. (o (IS- Page4 Parks & Recreation Commission Employment Present or Last Employer: Fujitsu Corporation Occupation: ESL WritinQ Curriculum Instructor Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Jv,.\JcQ Cu:� �c._'f:<uf 1 cr1 W av� 1 � Stt .p 5 , :'bea-vt : vt Ve>{JcPf w,1 flt .. � ce1 rt f '*'_ cz /fc(i rn ;_·� be ./c/ V!;\c.._ (/Jb,_ ?\ \fUl�"-1,u 1 ftr � r�·'/ll"IJ.«SuJtt G�se,'J<t'tu1 T-te �e/vL-f I 1 /Y\ .\£� ·-gc,CN <J (P- M 1i,.._ rf �\) I r¥tM :z:� \)Ci ( v . .p cQ w c C o rvb\ "'"l lL'\1 ;i l(' c'f1 '\;, s 'Ytl Tc_') --e)�"'-ec� ;s t(L tv'lvbJe #i:.� 'Yl f Qlo fflfc.,. Page2 Parks & Recreation Commission 2. Please describe an issue that recently came b f . . to you and describe why you are interested in it �t°re t�e Commission that is of particular interest you can view an archive here: · you ave never been to a Commission meeting £"-"-" "� \j \ £\;_ • f\,,, lJ, { <' () 'l!LO_ f OA k , Sf-" Cc \� <if C CO Ll '/.-C; ( �.<?� ·t,J '> U i\j'" 6" � Co c•-"c; / 1/Y\ J2 'IV\ L.,'-'1 ''to \) c:tl UL '(' T� _(> c pil awt I c "/-c_ ul tlA<l d' ; f� rft d T3. V, JWA 1 efl, A� b, eiN' E. V ; s , 7 a ..z. j/-/fc) .y-s1 s : Io °"'-{ \) ll l � C'� CJ._ c 6'Nl otl \, 1 4. Parks and Recreation Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience �ith any of.these docum�nts, please describe that experience. Experience wi�h documents 1s not required for selection�. 1 ( , --· , CL ,4tw,ej <. � Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan: t<. Community Services and Facilities Element /lf ce«..c( r/I Natural Environment Element J:.J Baylands Master Plan Park Dedication Ordinance (Municipal Code) Bicycle -Pedestrian Transportation Plan k,IN!S /Vc:Y Youth Master Plan .hl!':J Foothill Park Fire Management Plan Cubberley Community Advisory Committee Report .h!NI< Consent to Publish Personal Information on the of Palo Alto Website � {))\_'Yvt C) 5 ( California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead._ . 6 � Address:..: ,, Cell Phone: .Lft 5 l/ �:} 1, 3 0 Home 10 Office Phone: - E-mail: b h_u. <;: ' Page4 Parks & Recreation Commission Parks and Recreation Commission Application Personal Information Name: David Moss Address: Cell Phone €) Home I Office Phone: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? ®Yes 0No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? 0Yes G)No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? @Yes No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? 0Yes @No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? 0 Yes @ No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Commission? §Community Group D Daily Post Email from City Clerk D City Website Palo Alto Weekly D Flyer List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: MBA from Santa Clara University. I've made a career here in Palo Alto and elsewhere in Silicon Valley as a programmer, business analyst, data quality analyst, and IT project manager. Employment Present or Last Employer: Wells Fargo occupation: Business Analyst and IT Project Manager Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: My wife and I have raised 3 kids here in Palo Alto. I have held several volunteer positions through the years in the schools (Ohlone playground remodel, Gunn Foundation, Gunn Sports Boosters, Gunn new pool committee) and in AYSO (soccer coach, league ball manager), as well as East Palo Alto reading tutor, and Boy Scout troop trip coordinator. We went with the City Council last year to Oaxaca to help represent the city at the 50th anniversary of Neighbors Abroad. Page 1 Parks & Recreation Commission 1. What is it about the Parks and Recreation Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? I love biking throughout the city and utilizing Foothills and Arasterdero preserve and my local parks, and have always been interested in issues that affect them. My work as a business analyst and IT project manager has given me years of experience as a productive member of teams, and a leader of teams to develop and deliver complex IT solutions. My volunteer activities have almost always been as a member of a committee, and I love the people interaction. As an analyst I am very good at breaking down issues into manageable activities, stating requirements, being a liaison between users, technical staff, and management, and also analyzing data. These skills are valuable in every committee and team. My areas of particular interest include expansion of and threats to open space, urban park fair usage, biking and hiking access, ongoing relations between city, PAUSD, athletic leagues, and Stanford. All these could use someone like me who can be analytical yet empathetic, a good listener, a team player, a leader, patient, persistent, and polite. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. I am Interested In any issue that represents an extension of or threat to our current open space and also the connectMty to those spaces from all parts of the city, In order to make them more accessible. I want more people out ot their houses and out of their cars and Into nature. Some recent Issues that most Interested me: the refuse digester plant's Impact on the Baylands, golf course changes and Impact on the Baylands, the trail around Stanford to give us more quasi open space, the walking/biking trail extension near Page Mill and Arastradero Rd, the bike bridge across 101 to give more people year-round access to the Baylands and Shoreline, the expansion of bike paths along east-west and north-south corridors, especially Charleston/Arastradero corridor, the huge suocess of the Magic Playground and Mitchell Park library In my nearby Mltchell Park, the wonderful usage of the present Cubberley fields and track, the under used open space behind Greendell School, the management of Mitchen park to deal with single corporate events versus the public use of the park on a busy atternoon. a new public pool, biker and hiker relations at Arastradero preserve, dog leash enforcement In open space, and more use of open space by school groups for nature and conservation studies. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Parks and Recreation Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? I am interested in all of the above issues as an extension of or threat to current open space and connectivity to them from all parts of the city, in order to make them more accessible to more people and build community. I would accomplish this goal by sponsoring more community events like the wildly successful music-in-the-park and the July 4th Chili Cookoff. But don't stop there ... have more lectures, community hikes, community picnics, night hikes, star parties, music in Arastradero Preserve, movie nights in Foothills Park, more use of open space for camping nights, community weeding days, creek cleanups, and trash cleanup events, to mention a few. We want events that would expand interest in our open spaces and encourage people to want them. 4� Parks and Recreation Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan: Community Services and Facilities Element LINK Natural Environment Element .bl.t: Baylands Master Plan LINK Park Dedication Ordinance (Municipal Code) .!J.t: Bicycle -Pedestrian Transportation Plan Youth Master Plan .!. Foothill Park Fire Management Plan Cubberley Community Advisory Committee Report LINK I have read the bicycle-pedestrian transportation plan, and the Cubberley Community Center Committee report because they both affect my daily activities. I have been on the community rides and gone to the community events around the changes in arastradero/charleston rd configuration. I went to the opening of the Page Mill/Arastradero Rd trail, a joint project with Stanford. As for Cubberley, my nearest open space, I was very interested in keeping Cubberley Community Center intact and the redwood trees and track intact, and the fields intact. I love how it has turned out. Page2 Parks & Recreation Commission Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form wil not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: 0 I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Ferne Ave Cell Phone: ®Home I Office Phone: 650-494-7234 E-mail: ssow111@gmail.com Signature: ., Date: .£.hf/ J- Page 3 Parks & Recreation Commission __ __ __ __ __ __ Personal Information Name: Address: Cell Phone: Home / Office Phone: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes No Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? Yes No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1)engage in business with the City; 2)provide products or services for City projects; or 3)be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for?Yes No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Yes No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Planning and Transportation Commission? Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post City Website Flyer Other: _ _ List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Page 1 Planning & Transportation Commission Planning and Transportation Commission Employment Present or Last Employer: Occupation: Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Page 2 Planning & Transportation Commission 1. What is it about the Planning and Transportation Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. Page 3 Planning & Transportation Commission 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Planning and Transportation Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? 4. Planning and Transportation Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK City Charter LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK El Camino Real Design Guidelines LINK El Camino Real Master Plan Study LINK and Appendices LINK Area Plans such as the South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) I and II Plans LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK Page 4 Planning & Transportation Commission Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, “No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual.” The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City’s website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City’s website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City’s website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: Home / Office Phone: E-mail: Signature: _ _ _ Date: Page 5 Planning & Transportation Commission Planning and Transportation Commission Personal Information Name: John Hamilton Address: 322 College Ave, Apt D; Palo Alto, CA 94306 Cell Phone: 650-353-5771 (8] Home I Q:>ffice Phone650-353-5 771 E-mail:john.hamilton@stanford.edu Are you a Palo Alto Resident? 18)ves QNo Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of.J;,ijlo Al�ho are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? LJYes �No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? f8:J Yes 0 No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Q<es f8:I No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Oves 181) No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Planning and Transportation Commission? IXlcommunity Group 0Email from City Clerk D Palo Alto Weekly OoailyPost IXlcity Website OF Iyer Other: ________________________________ _ List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Education: Stanford University, JD/MBA, 2014-2018 Norwich University, MA (with honors), Diplomacy and lnt'I Conflict Management, 2012 Stanford University, BA (with honors), Public Policy, 2006 Experience: StartX, Stanford-StartX Fund, Associate, 2015 U.S. Air Force, Captain, 2006-2014 -Military intelligence officer with multiple operational deployments. Led teams of 75 people in demanding environments. Worked within governmental organizations to improve procedures and get results. Extensive experience in policy analysis, governance, civil liberties, and public organizational decision-making. Page 1 Planning & Transportation Commission Employment Present or Last Employer: StartX, Stanford-StartX Fund Occupation: Venture and Business Development Associate Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I currently provide pro bono legal services for disabled veterans at the Palo Alto VA Hospital. I also have provided pro bono legal support for low-income workers in Sonoma County through the OneJustice program (spring 2015). I received the 2015 Stanford Law Veterans Fellowship to expand legal services and research in support of veterans at Stanford Law School. I received a 2015 Stanford Public Interest Law Fellowship to provide policy consulting services to the American Jobs Project at UC Berkeley. Through this program I provided local government policy recommendations to enable workforce development projects for the clean energy industry in targeted states. I served active duty in the military, 2006-2014. While on active duty, I organized numerous community service events, including: -English language tutoring for South Korean elementary school students, -School supply drive for low-income students in Las Vegas, Nevada, and -School and base renovation projects in San Angelo, Texas and Al Udeid Airbase, Qatar. These activities contributed to my recognition as Company Grade Officer of the Year/Quarter at multiple bases. While an undergraduate at Stanford (2002-2006), I was very active in community and campus activities including: -Stanford in Government fellowship to Sacramento-based open-government advocacy group, -Air Force ROTC (Cadet commander of 75 person unit), -Stanford ACLU Chapter (Co-founder, president), and -Dorm government (Treasurer, two years). Page 2 Planning & Transportation Commission Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: f8J I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR 0 I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: 0Home I 0 Office Phone: E-mail: . ,,f !:1..t; � Signature: ----'-fKl=:---...__,,..__ __ � ___________________ Date: r/ Page 5 Planning & Transportation Commission JOHN W. HAMILTON 322 College Ave. Apt. D; Palo Alto, CA 94306 • (650) 353-‐5771 • john.hamilton@stanford.edu Education Stanford Graduate School of Business Stanford, CA Master of Business Administration Candidate 2015-‐2018 Stanford Law School Stanford, CA Juris Doctor Candidate 2014-‐2018 • Stanford Law Veterans Fellowship. American Jobs Project policy consultant. Pro bono legal services. Norwich University Northfield, VT Master of Arts with Honors, Diplomacy & International Conflict Management 2009-‐2012 Stanford University Stanford, CA Bachelor of Arts with Honors, Public Policy 2002-‐2006 Experience StartX, Stanford-‐StartX Fund Palo Alto, CA Stanford-‐affiliated startup accelerator program and university-‐backed venture fund. Venture Fund Associate; Business Development Associate Spring – Summer 2015 • Venture capital finance: Enabled $10 million of investments in 30 StartX companies in pre-‐Seed to Series B rounds. Sourced deals from StartX alumni companies, applied investment criteria, presented investments to lead Limited Partner, and analyzed portfolio performance. • Business development: Closed resource partnership deal with Microsoft valued at more than $10 million per year. Secured five sponsorships for flagship Demo Day event on short notice. Created marketing collateral and sourced partnership leads. • Legal: Drafted investment agreement contracts and advised startups on intellectual property, contract design, and fundraising strategy. U.S. Air Force Middle East, Europe, East Asia, United States Captain, Intelligence Officer, USAF Weapons School graduate 2006-‐2014 Airborne reconnaissance and targeting expert. Led teams of up-‐to 75 analysts performing worldwide intelligence operations. Awarded two Air Medals for leadership during Afghanistan combat missions. Leadership: • Afghanistan veteran with 1,100 flight hours. Recognized by commanders as top 1% of peer officers. • Led intelligence support to 1,496 “drone” missions in Afghanistan and Iraq; delivered real-‐time responsive leadership during ongoing combat operations. Hand-‐selected for elite assignments and leadership training programs. • Led high-‐visibility deployment to remote airfield in response to 2012 Gaza Crisis and Syria Civil War. Analysis: • Authored time-‐sensitive intelligence reports briefed to the U.S. President and Secretary of State. • Integrated diverse intelligence sources to locate terrorist fighters and roadside bombs before attack. • Led unit’s analysis cell during Korean war exercises and trained pilots on latest North Korean threats. • Wrote classified thesis that directly shaped implementation of a new imagery analysis program. Operations: • Developed, implemented new procedures to improve strike accuracy and prevent civilian casualties. • Coordinated 81,000 hours of drone ops, ensuring coverage of priority targets in Iraq, Afghanistan. • Fine-‐tuned flight schedules to generate 4,500 additional hours of collection per year using same aircraft and flight crews. Additional Lived in five countries on three continents; traveled to 48 U.S. states; loves airplanes, running, and ice cream; left-‐handed. Planning and Transportation Commission Personal Information Name: William Dale Ross Address: 2103 Amherst Street, Palo Alto, California 94306 Cell Phone: (415) 269-4569 0 Home I @:>ffice Phone: (650) 843-8080 E-mail: wross@lawross.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident? {8]ves QNo Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of �lo Al�ho are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? LJYes e9No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? [8] Yes 0 No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Des {8] No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Oves (8] No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Planning and Transportation Commission? Ocommunity Group D Email from City Clerk D Palo Alto Weekly Other: Other City residents OoailyPost Deity Website 0Flyer List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: Practicing attorney representing local governments and developers on issues of land use and environmental compliance. Have served as legal counsel to County Planning Commissions, City Planning Commissions. Have served as City Attorney for American Canyon since 1992 and advised and represented the cities of Gilroy, Los Altos, Soledad, San Gabriel, Monterey Park and Burbank on land use and CEQA matters as Special Counsel. I also served as a member of the City of Pasadena Planning Commission from 1991-1998 and its Chairman from 1986-1988. During that time several critical planning issues were formulated by the Commission and adopted by the City Council including a Master Development Plan for the California Institute of Technology. I have participated in numerous conferences by the California State Association of Counties, California Special Districts Association and various CLE extension courses concerning issues of land use and compliance with CEQA, the Brown Act and conflict of interest issues. Served on San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, 2000-2005. Page 1 Planning & Transportation Commission Employment Present or Last Employer: Occupation: Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I was a original and continuing member of the 2180 Task Force which made recommendations to the City Planning Director concerning the development of the JJ&F Parcel; I have continuously advised the College Terrace Residents Association on legal issues associated with land use, environmental review and have consulted with residents and business owners in the City with respect to issues of City governance and planning policies and decisions. I have supported the intercollegiate athletic program at Stanford through, among other things the formation and administration of non-profit public benefit corporations consistent with NCAA and Conference rules. Page2 Planning & Transportation Commission Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: 18] I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR 0 I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 2103 Amherst Street, Palo Alto, California 94306 Cell Phone: (415) 269-4569 0 Home I lg) Office Phone: ( 650) 843-8080 E-mail: wross@lawross.com a a a a I J .IJA' � ��� August31,2015 Signature: ___ f'V __ A�-----·-/_vv _'Z---____________ Date: ------ Page 5 Planning & Transportation Commission Planning and Transportation Commission Personal Information Name: Asher Waldfogel Address: 300 Santa Rita Ave Cell Phone: 650 224-2425 �Home I QJffice Phone:650 321-67 45 E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? �es QNo Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of�lo Al�ho are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members? UYes L!.JNo Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? �Yes D No California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest (Form 700). Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to: 1) engage in business with the City; 2) provide products or services for City projects; or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Q'es 00 No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Dves �No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Planning and Transportation Commission? Ocommunity Group l;><I Email from City Clerk D Palo Alto Weekly 0 Daily Post Deity Website 0Flyer Other: _______________________________ _ List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: 20 year tech innovator and entrepreneur. 6 years PA City commission experience and very familiar with City processes and budgets. Client for simple and complex residential development. Facilities and Finance committee member for multiple boards. Client and owner of most-published residential project in PA history. University of Minnesota, BA Philosophy Massachusetts Institute of Te chnology, SM Philosophy Page 1 Planning & Transportation Commission Employment Present or Last Employer: Self Employed Occupation: Technology Entrepreneur Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: PA Utilities Advisory Commission: 2008-2015 (2 x Vice Chair and Chair) PA Library Technology Advisory Commission: 2007-2015 California College of the Arts: 2009-present CCA Marketing Committee Chair 2012-2013 CCA Finance Committee Chair 2014-present CCA Adjunct Professor Business: 2008-2014 Zoolabs (music incubator): 2013-present Nexleaf (global health): 2013-present SFMoma Architecture & Design Acquisition Committee: 2010-present Castilleja School Board: 2012-2015 Page 2 Planning & Transportation Commission Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: {!) I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR D I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Cell Phone: QHome I 0 Office Phone: E-mail: f Signarure � tJ/!i� Date: 2G A-11q 2o/S- Page 5 Planning & Transportation Commission CITY OF PALO ALTO TO: FROM: CITY OF PALO ALTO MEMORANDUM HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Jonathan Reichental DEPARTMENT: IT Department AGENDA DATE: September 15, 2015 ID#: 6019/ AGENDA ITEM #4 SUBJECT: FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THE CITY COUNCIL REVIEW THE ASSESSMENT RESULTS OF THE ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING SYSTEM (ERP) NEEDS; REVIEW RECOMMENDATION TO PLAN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A NEW INTEGRATED GOVERNMENT-ORIENTED ERP SYSTEM AND SEPARATE PROVISIONING OF UTILITIES BILLING SYSTEMS Due to a scheduling error, City IT Director Jonathan Reichental, who will be presenting the report, is not available on Sept 15, 2015. Dr. Reichental sincerely apologizes for the scheduling error and will work with the City Clerk to reschedule as soon as possible. Since the report presentation was a study session, no decisions were required and. this rescheduling does not negatively impact the on-going work and timeline for the project discussed in the report. City of Palo Alto (ID # 5998) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 2755 El Camino Real (VTA Site) "Prescreening" Request Title: Prescreening of a Proposal to Re-zone the Former VTA Park and Ride lot at 2755 El Camino Real From Public Facility (PF) to Community Commercial (CC(2)) with a Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Amendment from Major Institution/Special Facilities to Regional Community Commercial, Allowing Development of a Four Story Mixed-use Building With Below Grade Parking From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council conduct a preliminary review (pre-screening) and provide comments on the proposal to rezone the subject property at the corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road from Public Facilities (PF) to Community Commercial (CC2) and to change the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of the site from Major Institution/Special Facilities to Regional Community Commercial. Executive Summary The subject site at 2275 El Camino Real was sold as surplus property by the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and the property owner is considering an application to re-zone the property from Public Facility (PF) to Community Commercial (CC2). A pending application to rezone the site to Planned Community (PC) has been on hold since the Council instituted a “time out” on such applications in early 2014. Via pre-screening, the applicant is requesting non-binding input from the City Council. Following the pre-screening, the applicant will decide whether they wish to continue with the original PC application or withdraw that application and file the application to re-zone to CC2. With the proposed re-zoning to CC2, the applicant is also proposing to construct a four-story mixed-use building with four dwelling units, 24,868 square feet of commercial space, and 109 at and below ground parking spaces. The project site is located at one of the busiest intersections in Palo Alto: the corner of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road. Consistent with City of Palo Alto Page 2 the pending PC re-zoning application, the applicant continues to offer as part of the project the granting of sufficient right of way to the City to improve the intersection. This pre-screening will allow City Council to review and discuss the proposed re-zoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment as well as issues associated with the development concept described in the applicant’s narrative and conceptual plans, essentially providing input as to whether the proposal warrants further consideration. The Council could also offer comments as to any aspect of the project, including the appropriateness of the contemplated zoning district and urban design considerations for this busy intersection in the heart of Palo Alto. No formal action may be taken at a pre-screening, and Council comments are not binding on the City or the applicant. Preliminary review or “pre-screening” is intended to begin the public discussion of the proposal and can also be used to focus public and environmental review on the issues of greatest importance to the community. Background The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) owned the site for many years, which served as a commuter Park and Ride lot. This use declined over the years; the VTA determined the lot was no longer needed and classified it as a surplus parcel. The VTA then distributed a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the sale of the property in 2012. The applicant (Pollack Financial Group, Inc.) purchased the property in 2013. Prior Project Preliminary Reviews On February 2013, Council had conducted a preliminary review of the project that was associated with the Planned Community PC project the applicant submitted in June 2013. The staff report is available at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/32991. The Council meeting minutes are found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/33725. They state that Council gave initial project feedback on components such as massing and architecture, public benefits, pedestrian and automobile improvements, parking and several other components of the project. On May 2, 2013, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) conducted a preliminary review of the PC project that the Council had reviewed in the February prescreening. The ARB staff report may be found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/34107. In June 2013, the City received the applicant’s Planned Community (PC) zoning application for a four-story, 31,776 square foot (sf) commercial building at a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 1.52:1 on this site. The Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC) conducted a public hearing on September 11, 2013 to “initiate” the PC rezoning process, and continued the public hearing to a date uncertain. PTC meeting excerpt minutes are provided for Council as Attachment D. The meeting minutes are found at City of Palo Alto Page 3 http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/36222. The PTC staff report is found at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/35767. The PC application cited nine offerings as public benefits “not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts” with value to the City estimated by the applicant as: 1. Widening of Page Mill Road, $281,350. 2. Land Dedication a portion of Page Mill Road, $121,820. 3. Upgrade Pedestrian Tunnel with panel doors locked/controlled by City staff, $100,000. 4. Installation of Pedestrian Light Poles on California Avenue, $850,000. 5. Installation of Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations on California Avenue, $259,320. 6. All Electric Building generating less carbon, $251,250 over 10 years. 7. Ten-Year Eco pass and CalTrain pass for the site’s employees for 10 years, $112,500. 8. VTA Lot for Public Use during California Avenue redevelopment, $38,880. 9. Urban Amenities, i.e. public art, trees and pedestrian design, $150,000. The Council temporarily halted the Planned Community (PC) process in February 2014, to re- examine the PC process as a whole. Given the hold on PC projects, the applicant is now exploring the possibility to re-zone the property to CC(2). Rezoning the site to a standard zone would not carry the “public benefits” requirement set forth in the Planned Community Chapter of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC), although the applicant’s team has indicated that they would agree to proposed public benefits as voluntary conditions of approval. Prescreening Request and Process On November 4, 2014, the applicant submitted an application for preliminary review of the concept to rezone the property from Public Facility (PF) to Community Commercial (CC(2)) and assign the Community Commercial land use designation. PAMC Section 18.79.030(c) states that City Council concurrence is necessary to conduct a preliminary review at Council level and on December 15, 2014, the City Council voted to approve the applicant’s request that the City Council conduct the prescreening hearing, and set the hearing for February 2, 2015. Prior to that hearing the applicant requested to continue the hearing to a date uncertain. The applicant has now requested that the prescreening move forward. Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.79.010 states that the purposes of a preliminary review are: a) To maximize opportunities for meaningful public discussion of development projects, at the earliest feasible time, for the guidance of the public, project proponents, and City decision makers. b) To focus public and environmental review of development projects on the issues of greatest significance to the community, including but not limited to: planning concerns; neighborhood compatibility; Comprehensive Plan consistency; economics; social costs City of Palo Alto Page 4 and benefits; fiscal costs and benefits; technological factors; and legal issues. These procedures are not intended to permit or foreclose debate on the merits of approval or disapproval of any given development project. c) To provide members of the public with the opportunity to obtain early information about development projects in which they may have an interest. d) To provide project proponents with the opportunity to obtain early, non-binding preliminary comments on development projects to encourage sound and efficient private decisions about how to proceed. e) To encourage early communication between elected and appointed public officials and staff with respect to the implementation of City policies, standards, and regulations on particular development projects. f) To facilitate orderly and consistent implementation of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. Comments provided during this prescreening are not binding on the City or the applicant. Following the prescreening, the applicant will determine whether to continue with their pending PC application, or withdraw the PC application and file a new application. Project Description The proposal is a request by Hayes Group Architects on behalf of Pollock Financial Group, Inc. for a “Pre-Screening” of the proposal to rezone the property from Public Facility (PF) to Community Commercial (CC(2)) and amend the Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Major Institution/Special Facilities to Regional Community Commercial. The rezoning is intended to allow for the future redevelopment of the site. The conceptual development plans include a 32,456 square foot (sf), four-story, mixed use building containing four residential units, 5,396 square feet of ground floor retail/office space, and 16,918 square feet of office space, with three levels of below grade parking and limited surface parking facilities, on a 19,563 sf site. The building would be 50 feet tall with a mechanical roof screen adding eight additional feet. The on-site parking facilities would be accessed from a driveway on El Camino Real. A total of 109 vehicle parking spaces would be provided both at grade under the building, and within a three-level, below-grade garage. The applicant’s project “Narrative” is provided in Attachment B. The applicant’s Narrative document is recently provided and staff has not yet had the opportunity to review this document. Discussion The property is currently zoned PF, which allows for a greater mix of uses when owned by the city, county or state. However, when owned by a private entity, PF zoning has a more limited list of conditionally permitted uses, including a park, a school, or a medical facility. For this reason, the applicant has proposed the rezoning of the parcel. City of Palo Alto Page 5 While the property is adjacent to existing multifamily uses, the property is located at the corner of Page Mill Road and El Camino Real. This is a busy intersection with multiple lanes of traffic flowing in each direction. As a result, the site appears better suited for commercial rather than residential uses, especially at the lower floors and facing the street. The 2002 South El Camino Design Guidelines call for “architecturally prominent” buildings at this intersection, “with a strong street presence so that they serve as anchors…” The CC zone district is intended to create and maintain major commercial centers accommodating a broad range of office, retail sales, and other commercial activities of community wide or regional significance. The (2) sub-district is intended to modify the site development regulations of the CC district. For this site, the (2) sub-district would allow 50% more lot coverage and requires 10% less landscape open space. The CC(2) zoning occurs along the El Camino Real in proximity to California Avenue, with Retail and Pedestrian combining districts. Other commercial zones typically found along El Camino Real are Service Commercial (CS) and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) (as reflected on the zone districts map, Attachment A), and could be other options to consider for the rezoning of the site. The CS zone district is intended to create and maintain areas accommodating citywide and regional services that may be inappropriate in neighborhood or pedestrian oriented shopping areas, which generally require automotive access. The CN zone district is intended to create and maintain neighborhood shopping areas primarily accommodating retail sales personal services, eating and drinking establishments, and office uses of moderate size serving the immediate neighborhood under regulations that will assure maximum compatibility with surrounding residential areas. While the property is surrounded by residential uses (the Sunrise assisted living facility to the northwest, and the Silverwood multifamily condominium complex to the north east), it lies at a busy intersection that is outside of the California Avenue commercial center as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. For this reason, the CS zone district would appear to be more appropriate than the CN district if the City Council wishes to consider an alternative to the CC(2) proposal. As Council adopted for the site at 441 Page Mill Road, Council could also consider imposing the “D” combining district, which would require the development proposal to go through the Site and Design Review process. Staff has provided a zoning comparison table (Attachment C) comparing the existing PF zoning, the proposed CC(2) zoning, the CS zoning, and the proposed project. The CN district was not included, however staff would be happy to provide this comparison if desired. The primary difference between the proposed CC(2) zoning and the CS zoning is the allowance for commercial floor area ratio or (FAR). The proposed CC(2) zoning allows a commercial FAR of 2:1 (which is 39,126 sf on this site), where the CS zoning is limited to a commercial FAR of 0.4:1 (which is only 7,825 sf on this site). Both zone districts allow a residential FAR of 0.6:1 (which is 11,737 sf on this site.) City of Palo Alto Page 6 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Amendment The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan indicates the site’s current land use designation is Major Institution/Special Facilities. This designation was appropriate for the former VTA parking lot use, but would need to be amended if the zoning is changed. With the proposed zone change to CC(2), the applicant requests that the land use designation be amended to Regional Community Commercial. This would be the appropriate designation for the requested CC(2) zone district. This land use designation is intended for larger shopping centers and districts that have a wider variety of goods and services than the neighborhood shopping areas. They rely on larger trade areas and include such uses as department stores, bookstores, furniture stores, toy stores, apparel shops, restaurants, theaters, ad non-retail services such as offices and banks. Examples of areas with this land use designation are Stanford Shopping Center, Town and Country Village and the University Avenue and California Avenue downtown areas. The property lies within the Cal-Ventura Mixed Use Area, which is cited in the Comprehensive Plan as a mixed-use area adjacent to the California Avenue Business District that is served by a multimodal transit station. The Comprehensive plan talks about opportunities for transit oriented development and new housing. The CS zoning option discussed above would typically have a land use designation of Service Commercial, which includes facilities providing citywide and regional services and relying on customers arriving by car. The Draft California Avenue Concept Plan, which is currently under review and has not yet finalized does not anticipate a change to the subject property’s zoning or land use designation, although the applicant’s current proposal does not appear to be in conflict with the elements of the draft plan. Zoning Compliance The attached zoning comparison table (Attachment C) shows the CC(2) development standards in comparison to the proposed project, as well as those of the existing PF zoning and the CS zone district. While the pre-screening will effectively determine whether staff time should be spent analyzing the applicant’s proposal, a preliminary review suggests there are some areas where the proposed project would appear to conflict with the proposed CC(2) zoning. The first conflict with CC(2) zone development standards is the “Build to Line” requirement. The code requires that 50% of the building be built up to the “build to line” along El Camino Real, or two feet behind the property line. However the new building would be approximately 10 feet from the property line, creating a distance of 20 feet from the curb to the building face. While the greater setback would seem more desirable at this significant street corner, an exception to the code would be required. (Note that Council has also requested staff to bring forward changes to the “build to line” requirement on El Camino that would make this exception unnecessary.) Absent changes to the zoning ordinance, a Design Enhancement City of Palo Alto Page 7 Exception (DEE) would be needed in addition to the other requests to address this design component. Another potential conflict with CC(2) standards involves the interior and rear yard 10-foot setback requirement. It appears that the exhaust vent and stair tower leading up from the below grade garage would encroach into these setbacks and a DEE would be required to allow this encroachment. In addition, there is a 20-foot Page Mill Road “special setback” affecting approximately half of the Page Mill Road frontage of the property which would potentially conflict with the current development proposal, which is proposed 10 feet from the property line, apparently because of the desire to accommodate plans to modify the right turn lane and provide an access easement to enable a wider public sidewalk along the Page Mill Frontage. These are items that would need to be evaluated more closely and addressed through the review process, as would the proposed stair tower at the top of the building, which appears to extend above 50 feet. The plans indicate a total of 109 on-site parking spaces, six of which would be provided at grade. A parking ratio of one space per each 250 sf of gross floor area is required by the PAMC for office uses; therefore, 99 parking spaces would be required for the proposed 24,868 square feet of office space. Nine additional parking spaces would be required for the four dwellings. The commercial and residential spaces combined results in a total parking requirement of 108 parking spaces. At 109 spaces, the project would provide one extra space. Next Steps After Council and community comments on the preliminary screening, the applicant could consider withdrawing their pending (on hold) PC application and submitting a formal application to CC(2) or another zone district. The application would be subject to applicable environmental review and hearings before the PTC, ARB and Council. Resource Impact The applicant submitted a preliminary review fee deposit, against which staff time to process the application is charged, as a part of the City’s cost recovery program. As part of the formal PC process, an applicant is required to submit a fiscal impact analysis to provide information on cost of benefits of the project to the City. This is not a required item for the prescreening; however, the applicant had previously provided a fiscal analysis of the proposed project benefits to the City. This is provided in their Narrative document (Attachment B). The proposed development would also result in a one-time development impact fee payment to the City. Environmental Assessment Environmental review is not required for a prescreening, as no formal action will be taken on the proposal. The prescreening is not considered to be a project under CEQA. If a formal City of Palo Alto Page 8 rezoning application is filed, a complete environmental assessment (Initial Study) will be prepared in compliance with CEQA guidelines, prior to any formal hearing of the rezoning. Attachments: Attachment A: Site Location Map (PDF) Attachment B: Applicant's Narrative and Exhibits (DOCX) Attachment C: Zoning Compliance Table (PDF) Attachment D: Excerpt Verbatim Minutes of the Planning and Transportation Commission Meeting of Sept. 11, 2013 (PDF) Attachment E: Santa Clara County Letter dated August 28, 2015 (PDF) Attachment F: Project Plans (DOCX) Attachment A ATTACHMENT B Applicant’s Narrative and Exhibits for 2755 El Camino Real (Hardcopies provided to Councilmembers and Libraries only) These documents can be viewed at this link below: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2923&TargetID=319 2755 El Camino Real Mixed Use Project Zoning Compliance Table Attachment C CC(2) Zone District Standards (for mixed use) CS Zone District Standards (for mixed use) PF Zone District Standards Proposed Project Minimum Setbacks Front yard 0’-10’ to create an effective 8’-12’ effective sidewalk width 0’-10’ to create an effective 8’-12’ effective sidewalk width 20 feet 10’-3” feet 30 foot sidewalk Rear Yard (abutting a residential zone district) 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet plus Interior side yard 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet plus Street side yard setback 5 feet (20 foot special setback for ½ the Page Mill frontage) 5 feet (20 foot special setback for ½ the Page Mill frontage) 20 feet (20 foot special setback for ½ the Page Mill frontage) 9’-6” Build-To-Lines 50% of frontage built to setback and 33% of side street 50% of frontage built to setback and 33% of side street N/A 0% at front and 82% at side Maximum Site Coverage allowed 100% or 19,563 sq. ft. 50% or 9,781.5 s.f. 30% or 5,869 sq. ft. 53% or 10,368 sq. ft. Landscape/open space coverage 20% 30% N/A Usable Open Space 20 sq. ft. per unit 20 sq. ft. per unit N/A 200+ per unit Maximum Height (When located within 150 feet of a residential zone) 50 feet due to adjacency to RM-40 or residential PC 50 feet due to adjacency to RM-40 or residential PC 35 feet when adjacent to a residentially zoned property 50 feet (Stair tower exceeds height allowance) Daylight Plane 10’ up 45 degree angle none beyond 10’ 10’ up 45 degree angle none beyond 10’ 10’ up 1:2 slope 10’ up 45 degree angle Maximum Density 30 units per acre or 13 units 30 units per acre or 13 units 4 units Maximum Allowable Floor Attachment C Area (FAR) Residential floor area 0.6:1 = 11,738 s.f. 0.6:1 = 11,738 s.f. N/A 0.39:1 = 7,600 sq. ft. Commercial floor area 2.0:1 = 39,126 0.4:1 = 7,825 s.f. N/A 1.27:1=24,868 Total Mixed Use floor area 2.0:1 = 39,126 1.0:1 = 19,563 s.f. 1.0:1 = 19,563 s.f. 1.66:1 = 32,456 Minimum ground floor Commercial FAR 0.15:1 or 2,934 sq. ft. 0.15:1 or 2,934 sq. ft. N/A 0.35:1 = 7,040 sq. ft. Parking Requirements Total parking spaces required Office/bank 24,868 sf at 1 per 250 = 99 spaces. 1 bedroom DU 1.5 spaces per unit = 3 spaces and 2 bedroom DU = 2 spaces per unit= 4 spaces plus 2 guest spaces 108 spaces required 108 spaces required 108 spaces required 109 spaces 1 Planning and Transportation Commission 1 Verbatim Minutes 2 September 11, 2013 3 4 EXCERPT 5 6 2755 El Camino Real [13PLN-00239]: Request by the Hayes Group on behalf of the Pollack7 Financial Group, Inc., for initiation of a new Planned Community zone district and Comprehensive Plan8 land use designation to allow a new four-story, mixed-use building with three stories of below grade9 parking on a 19,563 square foot lot (formerly a ‘park-and-ride’ parking lot). Zone District: PF. The10 applicant proposes to have the Commission and Council consider nine offerings as public benefits “not11 otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts” with12 value to the City estimated by the applicant as:13 14 1.Widening of Page Mill Road, $281,350.15 2.Land Dedication a portion of Page Mill Road, $121,820.16 3.Upgrade Pedestrian Tunnel with panel doors locked/controlled by City staff, $100,000.17 4.Installation of Pedestrian Light Poles on California Avenue, $850,000.18 5.Installation of Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations on California Avenue, $259,320.19 6.All Electric Building generating less carbon, $251,250 over 10 years.20 7.Ten-Year Eco pass and CalTrain pass for the site’s employees for 10 years, $112,500.21 8.VTA Lot for Public Use during California Avenue redevelopment, $38,880.22 9.Urban Amenities, i.e. public art, trees and pedestrian design, $150,000.23 *Quasi-Judicial24 25 Chair Michael: Which is 2755 El Camino Real. A request by the Hayes Group on behalf of Pollack26 Financial Group, Inc. for initiation of a new Planned Community (PC) zone district and Comprehensive27 Plan land use designation to allow a new four story, mixed-use building with three stories of below grade28 parking on a 19,563 square foot lot. Can we begin with the staff report?29 30 Amy French, Chief Planning Official: Yes, Chair Michael. Amy French, Chief Planning Official. I have with31 me here today Margaret Netto who is the Planner and was around for the prescreening and preliminary32 architectural review meetings on this proposed concept. I wanted to call your attention just first of all we33 are trying an experiment with our staff reports leading with the Commission purview. There was a bit of34 a discussion on how do staff reports flow and what comes first. So you’ll find a recommendation further35 down in the staff report. So we want to make it clear that the purview of the Commission tonight is the36 initiation of the Planned Community. There is also a request for Comprehensive Plan land use37 designation or redesignation. Currently the site is Public Facilities (PF) and was the Santa Clara Valley38 Transportation Authority (VTA) Park and Ride lot. So the project is a rezoning through the Planned39 Community process. First step in the formal process is a visit with the Planning and Transportation40 Commission (PTC). So we realize there are a number of items that you’ll have questions on and want to41 discuss. I’m going to turn it over to Margaret to present the project, but their applicant is also here to42 describe the development plans. And Margaret.43 44 Margaret Netto, Contract Planner: Good evening Commissioners. The Planning and Transportation45 Commission is requested to consider the initiation of a new Planned Community zone district and46 Comprehensive Plan land use plan designation amendment for the property at 2755 El Camino Real, the47 former VTA Park and Ride lot. The project is a new four story office building of 31,776 square feet of a48 floor area of 1.62. Please note that this is an update from the staff report. Three levels of underground49 parking facilities are also proposed. The parcel has a zoning designation of Public Facilities with50 associated comprehensive land use plan designation Major Special Facilities.51 52 On February 11th the Council conducted a preliminary review or a prescreening of the concept for the53 four story commercial development and on May 2nd the Architectural Review Board (ARB) conducted a54 preliminary review of the concept plans for the four story commercial project. The design was revised55 Attachment D 2 following Council and ARB discussions. Council and ARB reviewed a 33,000 square foot commercial 1 building with a 1.71 Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The project is now proposed as 31,776. As proposed the 2 project features three levels of underground parking and vehicular access via right turn in and out of El 3 Camino Real. The Council gave initial feedback on components such as massing, architecture, public 4 benefits, pedestrian and automobile improvements, parking, and several other components of the 5 project. 6 7 The proposed community benefits include land dedicationing and widening of Page Mill Road, upgrade 8 pedestrian tunnel, instillation of light poles on California Avenue, and installation of electric vehicle 9 charging stations, an all electric building, ten year Eco Pass and Caltrain Pass, VTA lot use for public use, 10 and urban amenities. The project concept proposes a maximum height of 50 feet above grade, generally 11 consistent with the PF, Service Commercial (CS), and PC zoning. The proposed roof screen would extend 12 an additional 7 feet above the roof. There are however special height and daylight plane requirements 13 for PC zone sites that abut residential PC property. Given this the proposed building is over 35 feet in 14 height and within 40 feet of a residential zone a height daylight plane exception would be required. 15 16 The subject property is also subject to special setbacks. The VTA site shows the easterly half of the site 17 along Page Mill Road subject to the 20 foot special setback. The adjacent property, the Silverwood 18 Apartments, meets that 20 foot setback. The proposed project would encroach into the setback. 19 Correspondence was received on September 5th from the adjacent property owner to the west, the 20 Sunrise Assisted Living Planned Community project. The property owner states that he is not in favor of 21 this project being upzoned for office given the adjacency of the Sunrise Assisted Living facility and 22 residential property next door. He said that he had made a proposal for the office project on the Sunrise 23 site before the Sunrise PC was submitted and was turned down by the City of Palo Alto as he was told 24 office was not, more office space was not a use that they wanted to see here. The site was considered 25 at the time, well it is, the site was considered a Housing Inventory Site in the Housing Element. The 26 applicant has met with Jeff Morris at Sunrise Assistant Living and also the Board of Directors of 27 Silverwood. 28 29 If the Commission recommends initiation this project would be subject to CEQA and that’s the California 30 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Environmental document would be prepared in accordance with 31 CEQA following initiation of the PC. Staff recommends that the Commission provide comments on the 32 proposal and initiate the Planned Community request. Also staff recommends that the Commission 33 provide direction and identify key issues for the applicant and staff to consider prior to the preparation of 34 the environmental document and staff report for the design, for the Architectural Review Board. And that 35 concludes my staff report. Thank you. 36 37 Chair Michael: Ok, so thank you very much. So before we ask the applicant for, to make a presentation 38 just for the record noting this is a quasi-judicial matter. Are there any disclosures to be made by any of 39 our Commissioners? So hearing none at this point and so I’m new in this role. I want to make sure that 40 we’ve opened the public hearing and I wanted to give the applicant time to make his presentation. And I 41 think for this purpose you have up to 15 minutes. 42 43 Ken Hayes, Hayes Group Architects: Good evening Commissioners. My name is Ken Hayes with Hayes 44 Group Architects and I’m joined tonight by Jim Baer with Palo Alto Land Use and together we’ll be 45 presenting the project on behalf of our client, Pollack Financial Group. I’d like to introduce the principals 46 of Pollack Financial quickly to you, we have Jim Pollack, we have Jeff Pollack, and we have Lincoln 47 Westcott here in the audience tonight and so they’re excited about the project. 48 49 Pollack Financial is an experienced developer having completed many projects on the peninsula including 50 some projects in Palo Alto. And Hayes Group Architects has been around and done many projects in Palo 51 Alto including at least 12 on El Camino Real. We are very familiar with the El Camino Real Guidelines and 52 South El Camino Real Guidelines, the Grand Boulevard concept. We’ve been engaged on this project for 53 about a year and a half and we’re looking forward to presenting it to you tonight. So thank you for 54 allowing us. 55 56 3 So the goals that we have for tonight’s hearing are on the screen and those are the same goals that we 1 had when we went to the City Council. We had a prescreening with them because the complexities with 2 the project and because of all the issues surrounding what, what are our opportunities for public benefit. 3 And so we had a prescreening with them. They commented on the architecture and the public benefit, 4 but the goals for tonight as then were, are to comment on the building design and tonight we’ll show you 5 the changes sort of since we went to the City Council and the ARB. We’ll show you that evolution. 6 Review the parking requirement and the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) with the TDM 7 reduction that we’re requesting and then review the public benefits. I’ll cover the first two and then Jim 8 will briefly cover the public benefits, but there’s a lot to elaborate on there so I would encourage you to 9 ask lots of questions. I know you will, but Jim would be able to then elaborate on those at that time. 10 11 We all know the site here on the corner of Oregon Expressway/El Camino Real. It’s about 19,553 square 12 feet. The surrounding zoning we have the PC zone to the north, the Sunrise Senior Living. We have 13 reached out to Jeff Morris. We have the PC Silverwood Condominium project next door to the east. 14 We’ve met with their homeowner’s association and their building manager. And then the soccer facility 15 across the street, Palo Alto Square, and then some smaller Commercial Neighborhood (CN) and CS 16 development projects across the street on, across Oregon Expressway where we have the AT&T store 17 and some other, we in fact did the AT&T store. 18 19 Current architectural evolution, so this was at the City Council prescreening we had this proposed project 20 and what we’re responding to here was, were the El Camino Real Guidelines which really focused 21 attention to this corner specifically and asked for buildings of higher, of taller height, building mass, 22 buildings with lots of glass, signature type architecture on this critical corner. The comments that we got 23 back from City Council we listened and what we heard was the building was too massive, it’s too close to 24 the corner, the corner massing needs to be setback, is, are we able to reduce the height of the building, 25 there’s a public plaza that we were proposing on the north side of the building away from the traveled 26 intersection. They didn’t think that it was large enough and really not maybe usable. And then they 27 asked us to soften the building more with warmer materials and so on. 28 29 So then we went to the ARB. We had this version, which is radically different from what you just saw. 30 We pushed the fourth floor back. It’s still a 50 foot building to there, but out here, it’s about 40 feet, 41 31 feet maybe. Comments that the ARB had were the recessed fourth floor is a good move. They were 32 supportive of that, fit better with the district. They thought that the tenant entrance, which we show on 33 the ground floor over here, should face the corner more and maybe address El Camino Real like the El 34 Camino Guidelines suggest. We had a saw tooth pattern for solar mitigation along this sort of southeast 35 side, southwest side, southeast side of the building and they thought that we could still do that to 36 mitigate solar and I agree, but they thought maybe it made more sense to face the view. So we’ve 37 actually flipped that to face the view, but we do have the serrated saw tooth edge that wraps the 38 building now and they thought it might be more interesting if it actually wrapped the corner. So we’ve 39 studied that and you’ll see the proposal tonight. They too thought the building entrance should be 40 strengthened. They thought the planters although they liked the planter as a buffer they thought it was 41 a little bit too tall, maybe it should be more seat wall height. And then the Chamfered corner should 42 relate to the saw tooth form as I just explained. The materials on this building are not unlike the 43 materials that we’re proposing today, but the building looks much more developed I think, much more 44 elegant given the comments that we got from them. 45 46 The modifications are the saw tooth windows. We’ve actually reversed them so now it flows around the 47 corner. The geometry of that corner is more elegant and it picks up the geometry of those saw tooth 48 windows. The fourth floor is still stepped back. We have a terrace up there that will be usable by a 49 fourth floor cafeteria for the tenant. And the building is pushed back to create a larger sidewalk, 20 feet 50 on El Camino, 11 feet on Oregon Expressway. We have this warm stone and metal cladding materials as 51 well as high performance glass. The urban design features include an enhanced plaza and I can show 52 you that in a second. And then at the front entrance we pulled a canopy around, we’ve moved the 53 entrance doors, and we have an address on the building there. 54 55 4 This is the site plan. Oregon Expressway is here on the bottom. Page Mill Road, I’m sorry, El Camino 1 Real here to the north. The main entrance comes off of El Camino Real. All circulation comes in here. 2 Nothing along Oregon Expressway. You enter here, park under the building here or go down into the 3 three levels of parking structure below. This is the public or the open space plaza if you will that we have 4 as a forecourt. We have 20 feet of sidewalk in front of the building to where the building mass is that 5 you saw and then another 13 feet to the front door. So we effectively have about 33 feet from the curb 6 to the building wall on the first floor. The planters are enhanced as they wrap around the corner. We 7 have a 4 foot planter here with a seat wall, 11 foot sidewalk on Oregon Expressway, and then trees that 8 would kind of complete the urban design linkage along Oregon Expressway. We’re proposing a water 9 feature that we’re still working on; want your feedback on that. We think it would be a nice idea and 10 down here at this end the ARB wanted us to find a way to screen this transformer and so we’re proposing 11 a vine wall around the transformer at the edge of the property. 12 13 This is the building when viewed from across the street. You see the Silverwood Condominium project 14 here, our building with the fourth floor setback, very elegant, very exposed. I think ground floor to 15 engage the street and also provide some protection. The planter provides protection from feeling like the 16 inhabitants are right on top of the street. So we like that feature. 17 18 This is just a summary of the floor areas from the City Council study session or prescreening we were at 19 33,500. Margaret Netto mentions that in her report. The preliminary ARB we took almost 2,000 square 20 feet out of the building. For you tonight we’ve taken another 2,000 square feet out of the building from 21 a parking standpoint. We’d have a 29,776 square foot building and a 2,000 square foot employee 22 amenity that I mentioned on the fourth floor, which would be the cafeteria. So we’re looking at a 23 building from a zoning parking standpoint is 29,776 square feet, which requires 119 parking stalls, which 24 is indicated right here by this calculation. And we are proving 113 parking stalls vis-à-vis our TDM plan 25 that we can get into detail on as you ask questions, but essentially the TDM plan is really asking for a five 26 percent TDM reduction of 6 stalls where 119 would otherwise be required. So we kept inching that down 27 to this point today. 28 29 I think the next part here is for Jim and he will comment on easement, property dedication, and public 30 benefits. Ok, I am actually, I am done with it now. So. 31 32 James Baer, Palo Alto Land Use Consulting: Public benefit, I’ll try to be quick and allow you to ask 33 questions of those that were too quick. The first constitutes three land dedications that we value and 34 these are on all these values because this is an initiation only we’ve got to be really rigorous with the 35 level of backup and detail we provide when we come to you for a recommendation in a first or second 36 hearing after tonight’s hearing, and we want to assure you that we will do that. We will be the first 37 project that has done something that the staff and policy makers have asked but not been done before. 38 The City is hiring an urban economist, applied development economics, who’ve worked for the City a 39 number of times to help look at the value of, that is being created for us through the PC zone so that 40 that’s well understood and the City is best able to analyze the value of what we’re providing, but they 41 want to look at how those work. It’s always a question. Did we get enough? Did we give away too 42 much? How does this work? And so we will be working with applied development economics. That will 43 not refine what we present as values per public benefit. Those will be by much greater rigor and detail 44 as we move through this process and get your comments and staff comments and all of that. 45 46 In the three land dedications, do you want to go to the? There are three components. One of them is 47 the widening of Page Mill. And that allows several alternatives that Jaime Rodriguez of Transportation 48 Division has worked with the County on and that is to either initially it started as creating a dedicated 49 right turn lane. The County in its interactions has said it might be more valuable to create deeper left 50 turn pockets. You may recall that heading west the left turn pocket, the first pocket’s shallow, the 51 second pocket is so shallow that two cars can’t get in there. Either of those will be studied by the City 52 and County and come up with the best transportation reduction and success through that corner, which 53 is the worst corner in its performance in Palo Alto and the most heavily trafficked. The County will be 54 doing work unrelated to our giving land on the southern side of the median. It’s a terrible right turn lane 55 at the AT&T building that Ken and I were involved with, but was not an issue that was asked at the time 56 5 and there are some ways in which the right turn lane works with the parking and all that that is not 1 successful. The County is doing that not because of our land dedication, but because of their control of 2 the land in Page Mill, which is County managed. 3 4 No, I’m doing public benefits right now. Let’s go to the second one. The second is one that Cara and I 5 have talked about without yet being persuasive. In the supplement that we’ve provided there was a 6 description of these three land dedications and this item was that it is unclear in the way that we all wish 7 as City Council Members and Planning Commissioners and staff members that there’s no dedication that 8 says and this specifically allows you the right to do all the subsurface work you ever want to do and you 9 have the utility, it’s not worth showing the utility. There’s several million dollars’ worth of underground 10 utilities. Well you would hate to have is us transfer the property to a bad guy who either said “Grant me 11 another project and this right is part of our public benefit or don’t dig your utilities.” And that conflict can 12 just be avoided. We’re going to make it a perpetual easement for whatever purpose the City wants to 13 whatever depth. The City does not want easements because of hazardous materials and liabilities that 14 don’t happen with easements that do happen with fee ams. I’m sorry that I misspoke. 15 16 And the last one is we are dedicating on our land and this is not ever normally required a five foot wide 17 sidewalk in perpetuity on our land. Now why that isn’t required is because rights of ways are granted 18 outside of a person’s property. They become owned or easements by the City or County for every 19 property, so that this is the first time because of our widening Page Mill that the sidewalk needs to be on 20 our fee. There’s also five feet on the City land that we’re giving them, but they want five feet on our 21 property because there’s an underground garage and all those complexities, but those are the three land 22 dedications. 23 24 We’ve put in $100,000 of allowance over what we identify as real costs right now and that is Jaime 25 Rodriguez has mentioned to me in more than just passing, but not in detail, that there will be some 26 intersection changes and some street work that will not be provided by VTA, County, or Stanford 27 Research Park impact fees and we had not understood that before. We don’t know what the details of 28 that are, the number, but its allowance and we will be rigorous when we return to you. Thank you. 29 30 Upgrade the underground pedestrian tunnel is a partial VTA feature. When Hoover Elementary School 31 used to be where the soccer fields are and so for the elementary school the City had dug a tunnel under 32 El Camino to allow from roughly Sherman to cross through to the elementary school. It is a pedophile’s 33 daydream. It is steep stairs that are not to standards that any of us would like. It is really a dark, 34 unlighted, dank, nasty 150 foot tunnel. We will panelize those with doors that the City can open when it 35 wants in the future, but it needs to be made safe now and it’s not safe now. 36 37 Real quickly the next is we were asked by Jaime to provide $750,000 to the California Avenue 38 improvements because there were no pedestrian lights. There are intersection lights, but these are long 39 intersections, much wider the street separations than is true in the downtown. Meaning you can have 40 250 feet between Birch Street and the next street. So without pedestrian lights you don’t get a comfort 41 and a walkability. 42 43 Electric vehicle charging stations along California Avenue we are going to give the two parking garages 44 and one behind Federal Express (FedEx), the two charging stations as engineered by the City at our cost. 45 46 Chair Michael: So I see you’re close to the end, so why don’t you go ahead and finish? 47 48 Mr. Baer: Thank you very much. This is a significant one that requires only hooray as my explanation. 49 This will be the first and a role model for Palo Alto of the first 100 percent electric building. There will be 50 no gas. And this is because of the Palo Alto utilities now having 100 percent of its energy non-carbon 51 emitting. Some of its hydropower so it doesn’t count as renewable for water policy, but no carbon 52 emitted. And this goes along with the approval by the City Council of a 20 percent target for reduced 53 carbon emissions. Well you do that by getting your buildings electric as well as by changing your driving. 54 So this is an all-electric building. A largest portion of the value that is an allowance only right now is it 55 will be more for operating costs and we can’t pass that on to a tenant in full. So we will have a very 56 6 smart, persuasive number when we come back. This is a plug number that may be somewhat less than 1 that. It will not be greater. 2 3 The next is half of the, 10 year Eco Pass and Caltrain Pass, 112,500 and those are very valuable in this 4 corridor for trains and for the VTA buses along El Camino along Page Mill. Urban design features that we 5 will provide greater detail on when we return are trees, benches, things like that that cannot be 6 compelled because they aren’t on our property. And there’s State law that says the City cannot impose 7 improvement of City land in conjunction of approval of a project. So those would count as a public 8 benefit, but we can’t yet be persuasive about what they all mean. 9 10 The VTA parking lot while California Avenue is under construction it will not have adequate parking. And 11 so we will make our parking available and the value was set by Jaime as much as by me, which is what 12 do we pay per day for parking permits? We’ll give you that, but we want you to give us the parking lot in 13 September/October until April when we need to start our underground work. 14 15 And the final one is that I leave as an open issue for you. There are excess impact fees because we have 16 a larger building. And so the question is what were you being given a larger building and the impact fees 17 are based on per foot basis is that kind of overly aggressive to ask for any of that impact fee as part of 18 public benefit. And the answer is if not we come back with adjusted numbers that do or do not make use 19 of an impact fee. 20 21 That’s it, if there are any questions I’ll certainly be glad… oh, I did want to make one comment on Jeff 22 Morris’ letter. I was in contracted by the property. I brought Jeff Morris in as my partner. I ran the PC 23 zone. We were well received by the City with one office application, got to be complex PC zone as the 24 Sunrise and Sunrise Assisted Living offered 35 or 50 year triple net lease so there would be no building to 25 building or so it was a wonderful economic return for Jeff. I’m no longer the partner there, but I ran the 26 PC zone for, I was in contract and the controller of the land and did the PC zone for Sunrise Assisted 27 Living, but it’s incorrect to say that the City said go pound sand for any office use there. Thank you very 28 much. 29 30 Chair Michael: So what, I’d like invite any members of the public who would like to speak on this matter 31 to submit a speaker card to Secretary Ellner. Do we have any cards? Ok. So the process that we like to 32 follow on this matter is maybe coming back to the Commission before having members of the public 33 comment. Any clarifying questions that Commissioners may have of the applicant or of staff just take up 34 to five minutes each in terms of asking any clarifying questions that you might have about this proposal. 35 So Commissioner Panelli. 36 37 Commissioner Panelli: This is going to be directed to staff and to applicant. I’m a little confused by the 38 FAR calculation. It says that the FAR for this project is 1.52, but that appears to be a FAR based on 39 subtraction (interrupted) 40 41 Ms. Netto: Subtraction of the 2,000 square feet of amenities. 42 43 Commissioner Panelli: Yeah. Now I can understand doing that for parking considerations, but why are 44 we using (interrupted) 45 46 Ms. Netto: So the current FAR should be the 1.62 instead of (interrupted) 47 48 Commissioner Panelli: Wasn’t it 1.71 or? 49 50 Ms. Netto: That’s when it was 33,500. So as part of the request it says 33,500 at 1.71, but the request is 51 actually for 31,776. 52 53 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. 54 55 Ms. Netto: So that would put the FAR at 1.62. 56 7 1 Commissioner Panelli: Ok, so that was just a mistake in the document? 2 3 Ms. Netto: Yeah. 4 5 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. 6 7 Mr. Baer: I’m going to be technical; 180403065b defines those features that are excluded from gross 8 floor area. So when an employee amenity area such as the cafeteria outside of the downtown because it 9 is a trip reducer is excluded from FAR it’s not made up by the applicant. By code for both parking and 10 calculation of FAR, but your analysis is correct and so is Margaret’s. It’s a bigger building than we’re 11 claiming because the 2,000 feet are exempted from being treated as FAR so the size of the building 12 without the exclusion of the 2,000 feet is 31,776 feet. When you exclude as FAR under the, under PAMC 13 the code it’s 29,776 and we’re indifferent to your recognizing the level of FAR for policy making. We do 14 hope that and the code provides for not requiring parking for those amenities. Is that clear? Too much? 15 16 Commissioner Panelli: Too much. If I ask you what time it is, just tell me what time it is not how the 17 watch was made. 18 19 Mr. Baer: Thank you. I’m sorry for my advocacy. Thank you. 20 21 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. And then the Caltrain and Eco Passes I thought those were being used for 22 mitigation, for TDM. 23 24 Ms. French: We haven’t prepared the environmental document. This is part of their proposal rather than 25 in mitigation at this point. 26 27 Commissioner Panelli: Ok, well I guess for the applicant then I’m a little confused. Are you proposing 28 these to mitigate the need for parking or are you proposing it as a public benefit above and beyond what 29 you would need to do to get this project done? 30 31 Mr. Baer: The, we do not have a substantial traffic impact as our Traffic Engineer Robert Eckols from 32 Fehr and Peers can demonstrate partly because of the dedication of land in the Page Mill that greatly 33 reduces trip generation over existing and future conforming uses. So we are not required for a CEQA 34 mitigation and we are not required a TDM plan with these passes even for the parking reduction. The 35 TDM plan is sophisticated and it asks for park, these shuttles, VTA and Eco Passes and we are doing 36 those though that is not what the five percent parking reduction is based on, it’s other factors. 37 38 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. 39 40 Mr. Baer: Again I yammered too much. 41 42 Commissioner Panelli: It’s other factors, ok. Those are the only questions I have for the moment. I’ll let 43 my other fellow Commissioners ask some questions. 44 45 Chair Michael: Commissioner King. 46 47 Commissioner King: Let’s see, so I’ll ask of applicant first a couple questions. So regarding that 48 pedestrian tunnel proposal so are you saying that you’re going to do things to make it safe for nonuse? 49 This is not making the tunnel safe for use? 50 51 Mr. Baer: That’s correct. The, it is, it’s a sad little chain link fence that’s drawn across the top of the 52 stairs rails. So you aren’t supposed to enter down into that, but it is not, with doors that shutter the 53 tunnel, which is really a nasty, dark, dank tunnel. One alternative when we look at what more would you 54 want in public benefit that the Council wasn’t wild about and I’m not saying the Planning Commission 55 shouldn’t be, was do you want us to fill the stairs and bring it up to grade and make a little tap dance 56 8 plaza that could be very attractive and prevent people from walking down the stairs? Not that it couldn’t 1 be opened up in the future if that were the need, but it did not get high gravity and I hope staff will 2 agree that Council didn’t say that’s a great idea. It was more like if you’ve got limited value that you’re 3 going to put in the public benefits I’m not sure making that plaza level is significant. We look forward to 4 your comments. 5 6 Commissioner King: Ok. The other question regarding the all electric, was that… this is addressed to 7 applicant as well. Was that a request on behalf of the City staff or Council that that amenity be proposed 8 or was that on the part of the applicant to propose that? 9 10 Mr. Baer: An experienced and wanted to be successful applicant listens to staff, listens to the newspaper, 11 it listens to policy makers. This was not a direct ask by anyone. The applicant is offering this and it’s 12 mildly complex because how do you value it? It’s not, an electric dishwasher is not a lot more expensive 13 than a gas dishwasher and neighbor is the conduit rather than the gas line. The operating costs are 14 more, but we were not asked to do this we looked at it and said, I’ll take pride in saying if you’re in this 15 business of PC zones you’re in the leadership business as best you can and so this was offered by us. 16 Thank you. 17 18 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. And then I would just make a sort of a general comment that unless 19 I’m mistaken we were received at places tonight this flyer 2755 El Camino Real that had some updates 20 and some fairly important information updates to your proposed benefit calculations. And one, it doesn’t 21 really say who it’s from, there’s no cover letter and most importantly for me it’s frustrating to me when 22 things come from the applicant, I understand people, citizens write letters all the time last minute so 23 those things I believe are appropriate to come here, but there are, if people are either watching at home 24 and are getting their information from the website or in the future if someone I go back and see oh, what 25 was the information available at that meeting, that’s not available to those people. So I get frustrated 26 when these things are presented the night of the meeting. 27 28 Mr. Baer: If that’s the PowerPoint presentation I’ll let Ken answer. If it’s this document, which is called 29 Supplement Number One, to Version Number One and is dated (interrupted) 30 31 Commissioner King: It’s not, just to sort of cut you off, but it’s this one. 32 33 Mr. Baer: Because this was delivered 10 days ago. 34 35 Commissioner King: Yes, and that was available I believe on the website. The, there is, I have some 36 frustration on my part that this is very hard to track. It’s a complex project; it’s very hard to track. 37 There are updates, not all of them dated and so it took a lot of work trying to sort together what was 38 happening, the dedications were complex. 39 40 Mr. Hayes: Regarding the document you have in your hand, I apologize for the confusion. This is only a 41 copy of the presentation we showed you tonight. 42 43 Commissioner King: I understand and it’s important enough that in general I would believe that this is 44 something that the public would have access to there, if they’re watching on television or in the, they 45 would have a hard time seeing detail and if they’re looking on the web in the future this won’t be there 46 as far as I know unless it gets (interrupted) 47 48 Ms. French: We, I’ll interject that we can go ahead and upload that in relationship to this project on our 49 website. 50 51 Commissioner King: Ok. Please do. And let’s see if I, I would like to ask if staff, let’s see… so I was 52 confused by the, your report refers to daylight plane height exceptions and I think you addressed it 53 verbally in your presentation, but I don’t see in here anything graphical or that would help us understand 54 exactly what those limits are. Am I missing something? 55 56 9 Ms. French: So the image on the screen is indicating daylight plane requirements for a PC zone adjacent 1 to residential PC. And do you want to describe that Ken? 2 3 Mr. Hayes: Yeah. This is actually a 45 1:1 daylight plane starting at ten feet at the property line because 4 of the Silverwood Condominium PC zone, residential PC multi-family next door, the actual daylight plan is 5 1:2. So it’s a shallower daylight plane. We’re complying with the daylight plane that is generally 6 accepted when we’re dealing with RM-40 properties and so on. So this is an exception to the PC 7 ordinance that staff has indicated can be evaluated by the Planning Commission, City Council, and part of 8 the PC zoning approval. 9 10 Commissioner King: Ok, so that graphic shows compliance based on an, so really it’s noncompliance. 11 You’re showing what the daylight plane is (interrupted) 12 13 Mr. Hayes: We’re showing what it is, correct. 14 15 Commissioner King: And that is not compliant with the PC zoning? 16 17 Mr. Hayes: Correct. 18 19 Commissioner King: Ok, and (interrupted) 20 21 Mr. Hayes: Adjunct to PC with a residential. 22 23 Commissioner King: Got it. And is there some reason why we don’t have a graphic showing what it 24 should be? Normally I would see, you’re showing where it is and then (interrupted) 25 26 Mr. Hayes: We don’t have that graphic. 27 28 Commissioner King: Ok. That would be helpful to see how far out of compliance you are. And that’s, so 29 the daylight plane there is no setback, the setback is part of that same graphic. 30 31 Mr. Hayes: There is a setback of 10 feet and we are complaint with the setback. 32 33 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. 34 35 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 36 37 Commissioner Alcheck: My questions are for staff. So first is it appropriate tonight to be discussing and 38 evaluating the proposed public benefits? 39 40 Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: Yes, Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney. That is one of 41 the factors that the Commission looks at when deciding on initiation, so it is appropriate. 42 43 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. Maybe staff can help me understand the second to last paragraph on page 44 eight because it sort of snuck in there and the City Manager has directed that for a significant PC project 45 such as this the City should commission an independent third party analysis of the potential scale and 46 adequacy of the public benefits being proposed for the project with a consideration for the public benefit 47 and the provision for the full value to the City in exchange for the land use changes being requested. 48 Such analysis would be required if the project moves forward. Is the City Manager suggesting something 49 different than what I thought or understood our role was in this process? 50 51 Ms. Silver: Well, in the past the Commission and Council has not had a true economic pro forma study 52 analyzing the value of the community benefits so the City Manager’s direction to staff is to start to 53 require those types of pro formas for all PC projects. The first pro forma that you will be seeing is in 54 connection with the 395 Page Mill project and we will also be preforming one for this project. 55 56 10 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok now if like, is this direction that was given also in the City Council review when 1 they reviewed this project or? 2 3 Ms. Silver: Yes, the City Council will also have access to that. 4 5 Commissioner Alcheck: No, I mean was the City Manager’s direction something suggested by the City, 6 the reason why I’m asking is because there’s on page 15 we have community comments where an 7 adjacent owner sort of suggests… before I get into that, Sunrise PC what year was that? 8 9 Ms. French: I want to say 2001, 2003 perhaps? 10 11 Commissioner Alcheck: Does the City have any recollection that there was sort of some negative 12 suggestion that office space was not welcome there? 13 14 Ms. French: I do not have that recollection. 15 16 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. I just, the reason why I mention this is because sort of the one comment we 17 have suggests inequity if you will, but I think almost every property surrounding this property is a PC if 18 I’m not mistaken: across the street, behind it, to the left, across the next street. And so it sort of strikes 19 me as sort of an opportune environment to be looking at what all of those property owners were asked 20 or what they proposed as public benefits in relationship to the public… you get what I’m saying? We 21 have a number of properties there that exceed a lot of our limitations. What were those properties asked 22 to provide as, by the way of public benefits in terms of the analysis of the public benefits suggested 23 here? I think to some extent we’ve been grappling the public benefits question. I think I’m a little 24 concerned with this idea that we would initiate a, this process. At what point and time would we get a 25 third party to evaluate public, the public benefit question? Who sets the criteria for that? In light of the 26 fact that we’ve sort of discussed how that criteria is actually very difficult to agree on. So this really 27 threw me for a loop because it makes it difficult to actually discuss this in this context because it suggests 28 that we need ask somebody else. 29 30 Ms. Silver: Yes Commissioner Alcheck. Those are very good comments. This is a rather new policy as I 31 mentioned. We have not yet rolled it out completely on a project. We did do a very in depth economic 32 analysis in connection with the Stanford University Medical Center that was a development agreement, 33 not a PC. So it’s slightly different, but the same concept. And when that project went through there was 34 an overall recognition that that economic analysis was very helpful to decision makers. And I think that 35 the Council has indicated that an economic analysis in connection with PC projects is a worthwhile task. 36 The parameters of that economic analysis I think are still under review and so it would be very 37 appropriate at this time for the Commission to weigh in on what factors should be looked at. 38 39 Commissioner Alcheck: is there, I guess I’d like to know what staff thinks about the notion of that 40 analysis happening before this decision is made. What I mean to say is before we initiate and discuss 41 whether the threshold has been met or what can, what needs to happen in order for the threshold to 42 meet for us to review an analysis done by a third party so that that informs the decision that we’re 43 making. I don’t like the idea of holding up a project, but this sort of suggests that we’re… what if we 44 come back and the analysis is so different than the discussion we have? And it, those, that’s my concern. 45 I’m not sure how we’re going to address that tonight. But ok, we’ll come back to it. 46 47 Chair Michael: Vice-Chair Keller. 48 49 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. So one of the things we’ve talked about is the idea that the benefits, public 50 benefits are in some sense should be in some way commensurate, but not equal, but commensurate with 51 the benefit to the developer of the increased development. So is that the kind of analysis that we would 52 get input on from an expert figuring out that, so that we could evaluate the value of the public benefits in 53 comparison to the value to developer? Is that the intent here? 54 55 11 Ms. Silver: So again this is an evolving process and I think at this stage it would be most helpful to get 1 input from you on what issues you think are the most important, but that type of analysis I think is 2 certainly what the City Manager is looking at. 3 4 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. And a question for Jim Baer. I’m not going to go into too much detail 5 about the electric vehicle chargers. People expect me to talk about them anyway, but one of the things 6 interesting is I think there’s a mention in there about a level three charger. And one of the things is 7 because of the large power requirements for a level three charger one of the reasons that one, it make 8 sense to put one in when 101 Lytton was being built is because since all the electrical work was being 9 done doing it the same time and similar for the Edgewood Plaza. So I’m wondering whether it makes 10 sense to put the level three charger that, the DC quick charger, on California Avenue where they would 11 have to be bringing power and all that infrastructure or whether it makes sense to put it on site where 12 you’re already doing a big infrastructure for the power. And I’m wondering if you’ve thought about that? 13 14 Mr. Baer: The request to put it on site, please go ahead with that with any specific you choose. The 15 issue that you raised on doing it for public garages on California Avenue, level threes are two hour 16 charges not 12 hour. 17 18 Vice-Chair Keller: Correct. 19 20 Mr. Baer: So they have a high attraction and they are not fungible in their plugging with other chargers. 21 But so the issue that Arthur raises is a good one, when we walked with the electric utilities guys and 22 looked at the transformers serving those light poles on parking garages and its not intense amount of 23 energy being generated out of those transformers and not intense use. So the question does become do 24 you want two level twos and we can’t quite get a level three without putting in a whole new power 25 system. Those are the issues that we hope that you will direct your staff to work with us on before we 26 return. I just don’t know enough and impromptu saying would just be we want to do it right and well 27 and successfully with filling an important need, and we need more guidance from policy makers and from 28 electric utility staff. 29 30 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. 31 32 Chair Michael: So I just have two questions at this point in our process. One actually relates to the 33 information that the applicant has submitted about the traffic impact and the building as currently 34 proposed has 113 parking spaces. And there’s an estimate of the number of peak hour trips being 35 approximately 50, I believe? And as Mr. Baer stated this intersection is probably the most heavily 36 trafficked and the most heavily congested in the City. And I believe that there’s a number of other 37 potential projects in the pipeline that might have cumulative impact on this intersection. So I wonder if 38 you could explain for us how the calculation works in terms of the traffic impact and the peak hour trips, 39 number of people who will be parking there. 40 41 Robert Eckols, Senior Associate, Fehr and Peers: So in terms of the peak hour trips… oh, Robert Eckols 42 from Fehr and Peers, Senior Associate. So the number of trips that would be generated by the project is 43 actually around 39 and 35 now. And that was partly because City staff directed us to take a look at how 44 many trips were actually coming in and out of the parking lots. So we actually went out and did counts 45 to find out how many trips were coming in and out. But basically its well, it’s under 50. So that’s the 46 trips and they come from all directions so they’re in multiple lanes and we assume about 50 percent of 47 them would come down Oregon Expressway so that that’s loaded up a little higher than the other 48 directions. 49 50 So in terms of the level of service and we looked at three different scenarios now, we looked at existing, 51 existing with the project, we looked at a near term, which actually included the trips from the 395 Page 52 Mill and from the Equinox development. So we added those into the roadway so we looked at that 53 condition and then when we looked at a cumulative where we actually got the 2035 forecast from the 54 company that’s actually doing the new model update. So we did do three different scenarios with and 55 without the project. And what we found in that analysis was that again the addition of the project kind 56 12 of bumped up the average delay, which is how we determine level of service by roughly a couple of 1 seconds. And then what we saw when we looked at the right turn lane is that it actually pushed it back 2 down to where there’s actually a net benefit. So in the existing conditions you actually reduce the delay 3 at the intersection. This is for every vehicle there by about two seconds on average trip. And so then 4 when you go out to the future conditions like a cumulative where by then the traffic is built up and the 5 intersection is like level of service F then what happens is actually by adding this right turn lane you get a 6 larger benefit because as you reach worse levels of service, delay goes up exponentially so if you do any 7 improvement to reduce the traffic movement or improve traffic flow then it actually brings down the 8 delay quite a bit. 9 10 And I know there’s some interest in how this right turn lane, does it just help the right turn people or 11 does it help the intersection overall? It does help the intersection overall because today, I live here in 12 Palo Alto so I drive through that intersection, you often will see people stopped in the right lane because 13 someone is walking in the crosswalk or there’s a bus there. So as soon as that vehicle stops it typically 14 blocks the through movement there. So what happens with a right turn lane is that it, the right turners 15 get out of the way through movements so now more through traffic can go through so, so again that 16 reduces the amount of time we have to give to that approach and so other approaches can benefit. So 17 the delay savings kind of is on several of the movements, not just the right turn. 18 19 Chair Michael: Ok. 20 21 Mr. Eckols: So do you need any others or another, get all the questions. 22 23 Chair Michael: I think that’s good for now, but don’t go anywhere. I just had one more question and this 24 relates to the analysis of public benefits that the Planning Commission is required to make and maybe Mr. 25 Baer would be the person who would respond to this and that is that as you may know earlier this year 26 the Commission made some effort to understand what level of analysis should be applied to public 27 benefit in relationship to our recommendations regarding a PC zone application. And one of the things 28 that comes up is a distinction in terms of benefits that might be intrinsic to the project and benefits 29 conferred by the developer, which are extrinsic to the project. And we had the question of what exactly 30 this meant and what difference it might make to the City, but I wonder if you could maybe just go over 31 your list of public benefits or just help clarify to what extent are the benefits that are proposed here 32 intrinsic and/or which ones may be extrinsic? 33 34 Mr. Baer: I appreciate the question and want to point out that one Council Member in the study session, 35 Council Member Klein, raised the same question. Is some of this improvement of the intersection a 36 private benefit and Fehr and Peers evaluate that to say you can get to the site from any direction at the 37 level of traffic burden that it now has, that the right turn lane doesn’t improve access or improve 38 efficiency other than for the intersection, not for the project. I’m going to use that as the question of is it 39 intrinsic or extrinsic and I’m sorry I’m going to use my long pass lawyering, but update it with land use. 40 There were some seminal California cases some to do with beach access that said you can’t impose as a 41 condition of a project improvements to public land or that are unrelated to the project’s use of the site. 42 And I will say that for the benefits we’re proposing other than perhaps the urban amenities that would be 43 off site, but that may not be imposed, but if there’s a nice park bench and better trees and all that that of 44 course benefits the project and has an intrinsic value. 45 46 But pretty much all the others I think it’s fair to say are extrinsic in their value: the tunnel, the I’m sorry, 47 I don’t have them in front of me… I mean the California Avenue improvements, the improvement of Page 48 Mill is a substantial improvement for the benefit of the public with a very minor intrinsic aspect, which is 49 if you’re one of the drivers through that intersection it improves it for you just as it does for the guy who 50 works at Hewlett Packard or Wilson Sonsini, but not uniquely. I hope that’s, I will respond more if you 51 have a follow on question. 52 53 Chair Michael: I think that’s fine for now. So before coming back to Commission at this point we’d like to 54 hear from the speakers from the public who’ve submitted cards and if anyone else is here who’d like to 55 speak hasn’t submitted a card please, please feel free to do so. 56 13 1 Vice-Chair Keller: The first speaker is Robert Moss to be followed by Chris Donlay. 2 3 Robert Moss: Thank you Chairman Michael and Commissioners. Well what you have before you tonight 4 is another typical PC scam. I’m not surprised that Jim Baer dropped a late minute, last minute changes 5 so that the public couldn’t see them. That’s his OP for GM and PC’s. 6 7 Let me tell you what you should be doing tonight. You should be rezoning the site so that it’s consistent 8 with the El Camino Design Guidelines, which by the way I helped to create. This project violates almost 9 every aspect of that. So the site should be developed as CN because one of the aspects of the El Camino 10 Design Guidelines is you have CN zones adjacent to housing and there’s housing on both sides of this 11 project. 12 13 Second, you want to talk about public versus private benefits. Two of the public benefits which are listed 14 are not public benefits. $400,000 for an all-electric benefit, building isn’t a public benefit. And $112,500 15 for passes is something the developer’s required to do to give transit passes in order to justify reducing 16 the number of parking spaces. 17 18 I found it also very strange that in the staff report the title says there’s a 33,500 square foot building, 19 partial building. The first paragraph says it’s 31,766 and the document that was just passed out tonight 20 it says it’s 29,766. I suppose if we got two more submissions we’d be down to about 25,000 square feet. 21 So how big is this sucker? I’m going to assume it’s 31,700 and I’ll tell you what the public benefits and 22 the private benefits are. The additional office space will bring in at a modest rent of only $6 per square 23 foot per month, $1.5 million more than would be allowed under CS zoning. So in two and a half years 24 they’ve gotten back all the money they’ve identified for public benefits and from there on its just gravy. 25 26 So this project is classic, it’s not giving us a real public benefit. It’s going to have… oh, and parking. The 27 parking spaces that you require it’s not four per 100,000 square feet it’s closer to seven. So even if 20 28 percent of the people take transit this project needs 180 parking spaces. It’s grossly under parked. 29 30 Finally as you know this is in the Coe contaminated area and a three level underground garage is 31 absolutely unprecedented. When I told the Water Board about this they were shocked and I got a letter 32 back from Marger Papler listing the many different mitigations that are required to keep people from 33 occupying the building and literally being poisoned. Let me assure you if a project like this was proposed 34 in Mountain View no underground parking would be allowed. So rezone it CN and bring it in under 35 current zoning and kill the PC. 36 37 Vice-Chair Keller: The next speaker is Chris Donlay to be followed by Deborah Italiano. 38 39 Chris Donlay: Good evening, my name is Chris Donlay. I live on Pepper Avenue, which is just a block 40 away from the proposed site. You may recall my presentation on the July 31st meeting about the in-41 horribly congested traffic and spillover parking problem we have in this neighborhood. Bringing such a 42 huge project and cramming it in such a small space will only make this worse. I won’t go into the 43 numbers as the previous speaker did, but I concur it’s under parked and it’s over occupied. And while we 44 as a neighborhood feel that rezoning may be a good idea we do not believe that cramming such a huge 45 project into this site is a good idea. 46 47 And really occupancy and traffic and parking should all be looked at. In fact, I suggest that the project 48 should be delayed until the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the parking projects being done for 49 the Jay Paul project are complete so we can see how this really affects the entire neighborhood as well 50 as taking into account all the cumulative projects that are going on since I understand that typically that’s 51 not done. So we have grave concerns from a block away. We ask you to consider those. Thank you. 52 53 Chair Michael: Thank you. 54 55 Vice-Chair Keller: The next speaker is Deborah Italiano. 56 14 1 Deborah Italiano: Thank you gentlemen. I’m a resident or an owner at Silverwood just so you know so 2 that’s from whence my comments come. There’s a few issues that I see for proximity. When we’re 3 looking at the east facing of the building relative to Silverwood it’s not just the proximity relative to 4 sunlight and that of course has to be verified, but if you look it’s also the issue about cars and vehicles 5 coming in and out past that building. It’s going to basically be traffic by people’s bedrooms and living 6 rooms. So at minimum they should be reconsidering where the traffic, where the driveway is. 7 8 The other issue is regarding sunlight as well. The building faces much more south than I would have 9 imagined, more south than Silverwood. And so it’s not just how it hits the building, it’s also how it blocks 10 sunlight onto the courtyards at the front. So that also should be looked at in the investigation. 11 12 The transformer is the third issue. I heard a little bit about it the last time there was discussion of 13 covering it or making it look better, but if there could be consideration also for where that is. I 14 understand it’s right next to Silverwood. So that also is not wonderful to have that as your neighbor. 15 16 And then there was discussion of Silverwood and Sunrise being consulted. If, I don’t recall, I don’t know 17 if it’s listed here what the results of those discussions were. If there’s content descriptions about that. 18 Thank you. 19 20 Chair Michael: Thank you. So at this point let’s bring this back to the Commission for any further 21 comments you have or actually this is your first opportunity to make your comments known about the 22 proposal. And when appropriate we can entertain a Motion. Five minutes each. 23 24 Commissioner King: I have more questions before comment if I may? 25 26 Chair Michael: Commissioner King. 27 28 Commissioner King: Yeah. So question of, this could be sort of this of staff. So the urban amenities 29 proposed, are those on site or are those off site to the project? The public benefits of $150,000 of urban 30 amenities? And if staff is uncertain, applicant can feel free. 31 32 Ms. French: I think the applicant would know what they’re putting into that tally of numbers. I mean 33 they said earlier in their presentation that the street trees they were considering as part of the public 34 benefit, so I don’t know if those are being added in as, in that number. You might see if the applicant 35 can answer. 36 37 Commissioner King: Would the applicant care to address that? So my question is the $150,000 of urban 38 amenities addressed. Are those on site, off site, a combination? And in the absence of the PC, how 39 much would you have to spend in any event on those amenities including landscaping? 40 41 Mr. Hayes: Well, I think the amount that we spend needs to be confirmed. If it’s a direction that we, that 42 we have support in we will come back and have real specific detail on what that could be. On typical 43 projects it’s very easy to spend $150,000, which is why we put that in as a placeholder at this point, but 44 it would include enhancements to the public sidewalk, the additional trees, benches along the sidewalk, 45 as well as public art. 46 47 Commissioner King: So I guess my question is we’re being asked to consider this as part of the initiation, 48 how much of the, I’m looking for incremental. So how much of that even with an 8,000 square foot 49 building that you, the current entitlement or the likely non PC entitlements would allow, how much are 50 you spending incrementally more than that or that’s would happen anyhow? 51 52 Mr. Hayes: I would think that we would be spending; we’re spending incrementally more than that 53 because under a CN zone or CS if that was a CS we would probably just have minimal walkways, the 54 building, and some on site landscaping. So I think we would go above and beyond what would typically 55 be considered part of a CN project. 56 15 1 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. We’ll consider that a work in progress at this point then. And I do 2 have a question for the traffic consultant if I may. So I’m, it appears that for instance I’m looking at the 3 peak morning trips and I’m seeing 43 on one of the reports we were given. Can you confirm, is that 4 incrementally above the current use or that’s? 5 6 Mr. Eckols: Those are the, well actually the 43 was before we took out the discount for the parking 7 spaces. So the 43 would be the net new trips of the project and then there’s a small discount because 8 there’s like 7 or 8 trips coming (interrupted) 9 10 Commissioner King: Ok, got it. In general. And so the part I was unable to find was the total trips. 11 What does that show then as the total trips associated with the project in that morning peak hour? 12 13 Mr. Eckols: Well under the 43 that was basically the total trips minus two percent transit discount that we 14 got because it’s on El Camino, which is 1 trip and then there’s also the TDM reduction, which is 2 trips in 15 the peak hour. And so basically the 43 is really in this case because we’ve treated it as an empty lot that 16 was the total trips. 17 18 Commissioner King: Ok. And so I guess the two questions I have are one, if I think 110 employees in 19 that building how can there only be and I, it would be shocking if there are, they all carpooled and all fit 20 in 3 people into one car, but I don’t understand how you could possibly get 43 trips for 110 employees. 21 22 Mr. Eckols: Because typically and certainly in the Bay Area people arrive over at least a two hour period. 23 So remember that we’re only studying one peak hour. So the trips are distributed over the, all the 24 employee trips are distributed over the at least two hours and in the Bay Area it can be over three. 25 26 Commissioner King: Ok. I understand. So I did not understand that. So 43 times the two peak hours is 27 at least… and then my other question is so then we call 7:00 to 9:00 peak at least in Palo Alto anyone 28 who’s ever tried to take Oregon Expressway west to El Camino would see peak that continues on through 29 10:00, 10:30. 30 31 Mr. Eckols: In this case the, we used the probably 8:00 to 9:00 time period because that would be high 32 volume and because the intersection is right at capacity you don’t get a whole lot more additional trips 33 through there. So it’s going to be, it may be level of service D let’s say in the morning or E and that may 34 extend over a couple periods, but we’re always analyzing just the peak hour is what we report. 35 36 Commissioner King: Ok, got it, thank you. And then another question for staff, which is so a member of 37 the public stated that under TDM that there is a requirement to get the parking discount to provide 38 passes and that was in contrast to the applicant and I thought maybe staff supported that, that a TDM 39 plan to meet the parking discount does not require passes, transit passes to be paid for employees, that 40 it merely requires a plan as evidenced in the 30 pages of documents we’re showing here that basically is 41 informational. It provides encouragement and information to employees, but not actual cost sharing of 42 transportation. 43 44 Ms. French: Yes. Just to weigh in on that when somebody asks for a parking adjustment there are a 45 variety of methods to get there, one is onsite employee amenities, their cafeteria is one such. Then one 46 of them is transportation and parking alternatives, TDM with some options is listed in there and for that 47 they can ask for up to 20 percent reduction with TDM measures, but they’re not defining which ones they 48 must do. For instance Eco Pass is not even listed in our table there. 49 50 Commissioner King: Thank you. 51 52 Ms. Silver: If I could also chime in on that one. The community benefit of the Eco Pass and the Go Pass 53 is proposed for only a period of 10 years. The TDM programs that the applicant can apply for would be 54 subject for, to the life of the project. 55 56 16 Commissioner King: Ok, and well the following would be how can we enforce that? So for the life of the 1 project and if that, if they said “Hey, we’re closing down the TDM, we’re done, we don’t like this,” then 2 what happens? 3 4 Ms. Silver: Well they’d be in violation of the parking requirement. 5 6 Commissioner King: Ok. Ok, thank you. 7 8 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 9 10 Commissioner Alcheck: So every once in a while someone asks me what I think of the 50 foot height 11 limit. They want to know my opinion on it and my response is its effective. I am not opposed to 12 exceeding 50 feet. I believe that this process is not set up to deter 50 feet, it’s my impression that the 13 process is designed that when you want to exceed certain limitations the City wants to be heavily 14 involved, which is different than the City is blatantly discouraging 50 feet. I think it’s a matter of 15 perspective. We can’t keep making exceptions to 50 feet and pretend like we don’t permit 50 feet. We 16 permit 50 feet in the context of some sort of coordinated I guess negotiation of public benefits. 17 18 So I want to sort of suggest to my fellow members that I don’t think Neighborhood Commercial is a 19 suitable designation here. I don’t think that this is a suitable site for retail space, personal services, 20 restaurants. I don’t think it’s appropriate. I don’t think that entertaining the notion of a Planned 21 Community at this site is objectionable considering that every adjacent property is a PC. So the notion 22 that we can’t articulate a very specific solution for this site seems contrary to what this Commission and 23 the City has been involved in doing with all the adjacent sites. So simply on the basis of not liking a PC 24 or not liking the PC process I don’t think justifies not entertaining this project. And I don’t think that an 25 alternative of, I don’t think the alternative zoning designations are suitable. 26 27 You have the very unfortunate luck of proposing a PC after the last PC, which is essentially building a 28 police station in exchange for building something. And you can imagine how that skews our effort to 29 evaluate what it is as a public benefit. The last guy that came in here asking for to do whatever he 30 wanted got had to build, he’s proposing to build a police station on our behalf. You’re suggesting that 31 you’re going to give us five feet of sidewalk. You understand, it’s like… 32 33 I don’t know if we need a third party to analyze how many square feet they’re getting down the street 34 and how, what the cost is for the police station and then give me the cost per square foot. I don’t need 35 a third party to tell me they’re building this many square feet so they should pay X. I don’t know if I 36 need that, but I definitely need more direction with this public benefit situation. I think that’s what really 37 bothers me about this process because I don’t know if I need more safety in what you described as a 38 pedophile friendly area because I would assume that if there was a pedophile prone area that the Palo 39 Alto Police Department is all over it. And so when we had the police station discussion we had the Police 40 tell us and inform us whether or not they felt this was the type of thing they needed. I think that it’s 41 important to appreciate that when we review this process and so I don’t scare easy, but it is an 42 uncomfortable position to be in to suggest that I know what will benefit the public better than the public. 43 And so without more direction from City Council as to what really we need, it’s difficult to evaluate some 44 of your suggested public benefits. 45 46 Again I don’t believe that it is a valuable component here to determine how profitable a building will be in 47 an effort to determine how much they should contribute. There is no developer who is not overly 48 optimistic about the potential of his building to be successful. If they weren’t insanely optimistic they 49 wouldn’t be in the game because it’s a dangerous game. And I, it’s just we don’t know what’s going to 50 happen in eight years or five years and they may be sitting on an empty property and the suggestions 51 that they’re going to be rolling in it will be irrelevant. 52 53 I just want to mention one other thing that I’d like us to consider, which is that I think the 1979 El 54 Camino Guidelines are outdated. We’ve, there’s been discussion about change. There’s drafts that the 55 ARB has put forward if I’m not mistaken, there’s discussion about what the guidelines should now look 56 17 like. I don’t know if we should just assume that those apply here simply because they exist. And 1 particularly because the PC gives you the flexibility to do what you want. I’m not sure that the other PC 2 projects that are adjacent to this one comply with the El Camino Real Design Guidelines so to what 3 extent should our analysis focus on how this site should be developed in a way that is compatible with 4 the sites adjacent to it. 5 6 So the last thing I want us to kind of keep in mind and I know I’m over. There’s a discussion here about 7 height and daylight planes. There are already special height and daylight plane requirements for PC 8 zones when they are adjacent to residential properties. I think that it would be valuable to us if we 9 understood what this option of, let’s see, it’s for example I believe it says here “shall be subject to a 10 maximum height established by a daylight plane beginning at a height of 10 feet at the applicable side or 11 rear side line increasing at a slope of 3 feet,” etcetera, etcetera. It would be interesting to see what 12 would this look like if it conformed to the existing PC requirements when they’re adjacent to a residential 13 PC zone and what these, this, these applicants are asking, how are those different? So that because to 14 some extent we’re talking about ok we can talk about a PC and then now we’re also talking about an idea 15 of making exceptions to the already existing PC guidelines. So it’s like further and I think it would help to 16 understand those, to visualize those differences, especially with respect to the concept of public benefits 17 because you would assume that if we were going to go even further than we normally do on a PC then 18 we’d want to be able to compare that. 19 20 And finally I made this point earlier. I really think that I would be informed by I guess a table that 21 showed what all the PC zones that surround this, all the PC sites that surround this site maybe you 22 choose a 500 feet radius because there’s a ton of them, what their public benefits were because until we 23 have in my opinion to my fellow Commissioners until we have sort of a more tangible criteria to evaluate 24 this, I think our evaluation should follow the evaluation we’ve applied in the past. So we should to some 25 extent use the precedent of the neighbors and the other PC sites to evaluate what sort of contributions 26 we would expect until I guess we can give him more direction as to how they want to evaluate it. That’s 27 it, I’m sorry for going over. 28 29 Chair Michael: Commissioner Panelli. 30 31 Commissioner Panelli: Thank you Mr. Chair. The, I first want to start out by saying that I think the PC 32 process is meant to be a deliberate process. So my first suggestion right away is that we continue this 33 item until, well, I would suggest not the next meeting, but the meeting after that at the earliest to give 34 enough time for the public to react or comment on what they’ve heard or read after the minutes are 35 transcribed tonight. 36 37 Chair Michael: So is this a Motion or just are you? 38 39 Commissioner Panelli: No, I’m not ready to make a Motion yet, but I’m throwing that out there for my 40 fellow Commissioners to just think about in the back of their minds as I talk about some of the other 41 comments, as I share some of my other comments. 42 43 I don’t feel like I have enough information yet. And let me pick up on where Commissioner Alcheck was 44 talking about. One of the things I’ve seen the City of Austin, their Planning Commission or Planning staff 45 do really well is they’ve got this really nice idea of the building envelope. So what they do is they require 46 their applicants to say given all setbacks, daylight planes, height restrictions, etcetera what is that 47 envelope look like? And then take your project an overlay it with that and let’s see where the overlap or 48 underlap is because there might be a good reason to say well we’ll give you a little bit extra here if you 49 take away, if you go in on the envelope over here. I think that would be very helpful in this case. I think 50 it would help us understand what the real tradeoffs are. So I’d like to see that when it comes back to us. 51 52 When I think of public benefit I don’t think of it as a mitigation of the problems that your project is 53 creating. And I think when I look at that list some of them feel like they are intrinsic. Can’t say that for 54 certain, but that’s my first instinct. I’d rather say that the public benefits are either something that 55 enhances for the benefit of all or helps to solve problems that already exist. And to me the biggest 56 18 problem with that intersection, you, your corner is part of it, but the real problem is pedestrian traffic 1 trying to get across Page Mill going north or south on El Camino or west or east, however you want to 2 describe it. That intersection is creating a heck of a lot of problems. 3 4 Mr. Donlay talked about living on Pepper Avenue and they have a lot, I know they have a lot of cut 5 through traffic because I’m one of them. And the reason that there’s so much cut through traffic is that 6 that right turn lane on northbound El Camino to try to get onto eastbound Page Mill/Oregon Expressway 7 even when it’s a green light for through traffic on El Camino the right turn lanes cannot turn because 8 they are waiting for pedestrians who come off the curb going north and then by the time those 9 pedestrians clear you’ve got the pedestrians coming south who cross from the other side. And that’s a 10 similar problem that those people are going to have taking a right turn off of Page Mill onto El Camino. 11 And what I’m concerned about is even with that dedicated right turn lane there are going to be so many 12 cars backed up that it’s actually going to back up, fill up the right turn only lane and backup into the right 13 hand westbound Page Mill lane unless we have a real solution for getting people across that stretch of El 14 Camino. 15 16 So we talk about a public benefit to address a, the nonuse of a tunnel that exists. I’d rather see some 17 creative solution from the applicant to figure out how to get people from one side to the other without 18 blocking traffic going right from El Camino onto Page Mill or right from Page Mill onto El Camino. And 19 that’s what I’d like to see when this comes back. 20 21 One thing that we haven’t talked about a whole bunch yet and there’s an implication that this would be 22 CS or CN and I’d like to understand from staff what would the, if we were not going to do a PC, if we 23 were going to say let’s first figure out what this should be and then determine what, let’s determine that 24 first and then determine what the difference between that and a PC is, why are we saying it’s a CS? Can 25 I get some color there? 26 27 Ms. French: Sure. Much of the El Camino Real is zoned either CS or CN, Commercial Service, Commercial 28 Neighborhood. There are some areas, Cal Ave. in particular and as we get up to Town and Country that 29 are CC, Community Commercial (CC). So there’s another commercial zone. There are some instances of 30 noncommercial zones that are residential and this site at one time was on our Housing Element for 31 housing so at that time it’s no longer on our new certified Housing Element. So we wouldn’t suggest a 32 residential zone, so it’s really those three now with zoning we try to be similar to what’s nearby so across 33 the street it’s CS. We just rezoned the 441 Page Mill site not long ago to CS from Single Family 34 Residential (R1), so that’s a recent action so staff would suggest CS as the more appropriate. One of the 35 speakers brought up CN as appropriate next to residential. Again we can look at these are not residential 36 zones. Technically they are PC zones that have residential use so we can certainly look at that. What is 37 the density of the residential zones? They are not Multi-family Residential (RM-15), that’s for sure. The 38 Sunrise and the Silverwood group they’re much denser than that. So usually the CN is a RM-15 39 residential density. 40 41 Commissioner Panelli: Ok, thank you. So when, going back to this concept of public benefit, what I think 42 we have to weigh as a Commission is if this were CS or CN, which would the maximum, this project is 43 exceeding that maximum FAR by how much? Can you just? 44 45 Ms. Netto: Yes, it’s a 0.4 for the CS district. 46 47 Ms. French: Compared to the 1.5. 48 49 Commissioner Panelli: So it’s effectively about 21, 22,000 square feet of additional FAR beyond what 50 would normally be provide, allowed, provisioned for? Yeah, about 22,000 square feet. So the question 51 is, that we I think have to ask ourselves is the problems or headaches associated with an additional 52 22,000 square feet or three point whatever times the intensity commensurate with the public benefit? 53 And I’ve talked about this in the past before where what I’m really worried about is where we get one 54 time benefits for perpetual problems. And perpetual benefits to the developer, let’s face it. So I don’t 55 19 know how we reason through this, I am not ready to make a decision tonight and that’s why I wanted us 1 to think about continuing this to a date uncertain. 2 3 Chair Michael: Commissioner Keller, Vice-Chair Keller. 4 5 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. So firstly there seems to be two operative questions. The first operative 6 question is does this general use make sense at this location? We’ve talked a little bit about the, and I 7 think that what I’ve heard from my fellow Commissioners is that this isn’t necessarily a good site for 8 retail. It’s probably not a good site for housing. And that not, there’s a question as to what promises 9 were made when the Sunrise facility was put in whether commercial would be allowed near here and I’m 10 going to defer that to be answered the next time, but forgetting about that question the issue is what 11 makes sense here and this is a use that is potentially a reasonable use. I’m not sure if its intensity is 12 appropriate at this location, but the use makes some sense. The intensity is the question that also needs 13 to be addressed. So that’s the first thing. 14 15 The second thing is that if we agree that the use is appropriate at this location and the intensity is 16 appropriate at this location then the question is are the public benefits appropriate for the PC project. 17 Now I understand Commissioner Alcheck’s comment by analogy to saying, I was driving 75 miles an hour 18 down 101 and all those people speeding ahead of me, you didn’t catch them, but you caught me. Why 19 are you giving me a ticket when you didn’t give those people a ticket? And that’s my interpretation of 20 Commissioner Alcheck’s question. Basically all those people sped down the road and gave minimum 21 public benefits, why do I have to give them? And I think the issue is because there’s been significant 22 complaint in the community about public benefits that turned out to be non-benefiting the public or 23 turned out to not really maybe or for their private benefits or they didn’t materialize as real benefits. So 24 there’s a consensus that I think comes from Council direction, I don’t think it’s merely from the City 25 Manager, I think it’s Council direction that we should evaluate the nature of the public benefits and 26 consider that comparison with the value to the developer. 27 28 Now the question is how do you compute the value to the developer? And I don’t know anything as 29 much about the nature of real estate economics as Commissioner Alcheck. After all I’m a computer 30 scientist. I don’t buy and sell real estate, I don’t develop, I’m an analyst. And so in that regard what 31 seems to me makes sense is from first principles what you do is you figure out what the net present 32 value is of the development under the approved, under the allowable zoning. So if the allowable zoning 33 if we consider that as the CS zone or the CN zone, what could be built under that zone and what’s the 34 net present value of that benefit, of that to the developer. Then you take the net present value of the 35 development to the developer of the proposed development and there’s a delta there. There’s some 36 benefit to the developer of that. Now the question is you don’t expect the City to get 100 percent of that 37 otherwise there’s no incentive to build and there’s also risk factor. You don’t expect the City to get zero 38 percent of it or to get a fixed amount. It should be some sort of, there should be some calculation there 39 and I don’t feel qualified to make the calculation of what this difference is. 40 41 And therefore it seems to me that this is a situation in which a third party expert reviewer as a consultant 42 to the City reviewing the project can come up with what this net present value is to the developer and 43 whether it’s paid out, when the benefit is paid up front or whether it’s paid over a period of time as the 44 calculation can do and I’m happy with some of it paid up front and some of it over time, however you do 45 it is reasonable to consider and remember that if it were CS or CN there would be ground floor retail and 46 that’s also taken into account because it’s 100 percent office I understand and therefore the rent you get 47 for the ground floor retailer are less than the rent you would get from office being on ground floor. So 48 that also needs to be taken into account with respect to net public benefit. So that’s the basic 49 calculation. 50 51 If I may go into specific issues about public benefit comments. So I also consider myself an amateur 52 traffic engineer, just like Commissioner Panelli sometimes, and what seems to me is that I like the idea of 53 the improvements done to the right turn lane on westbound Page Mill road onto northbound El Camino. 54 Probably also a big problem with this intersection is the thing that we missed, and I actually asked the 55 City to do something about it, but there was nothing happening and that was where the AT&T building is, 56 20 that right turn was not fixed when it could have been. There could have been an opportunity for 1 dedicating that land to the City, but the City wasn’t interested and Caltrans didn’t know what to do, so I 2 think it was a missed opportunity. But I think there’s an opportunity here to fix that. 3 4 And the issue is that because of the scoop turn on the kitty-corner from the proposed development with 5 a pork chop island. There’s actually land there and what can happen is we can take the, this is kind of 6 hard to describe, but we can realign the northbound median on El Camino Real and move it westward so 7 that there are two left turn lanes, I think there’s two over there, two left turn lanes, plus three through 8 lanes plus a dedicated right turn lane. By realigning the intersection in that way we can improve it so 9 that the right turners are not blocking the through people and the through people are not blocking right 10 on red turners. 11 12 Now I understand that there’s an issue about pedestrians, but when traffic is flowing left in one direction 13 you can have a dedicated green arrow for the right turners in the other direction and I would recommend 14 that in both of these places. So there’s the potential for that and I think that would also significantly 15 improve traffic over a period of time. It would also have the benefit of reducing the cut through traffic 16 on Pepper Avenue and Olive Avenue. 17 18 Chair Michael: So I have a question on that. Is that something that would be within the discussion of this 19 applicant or is that just sort of a general thought? 20 21 Vice-Chair Keller: Well I think that to the extent that this applicant wished to propose providing funding 22 for the City working with Caltrans to realign that intersection that could be a public benefit just as is 23 being done here. That can be considered and I think it’s not necessarily, it’s proximate, but it’s actually it 24 is a public benefit for to which funding can be provided to do that because there would be a cost involved 25 in the realignment. So I want that to be considered. 26 27 Another thing to be considered is as I mentioned the issue is, it’s going to be a lot cheaper and more cost 28 effective to put the DC quick charger or something that’s called level three charger onsite with no cost for 29 install or use as comparison to putting it on California Avenue. It’s easier to put level two chargers on 30 California Avenue because the infrastructure requirements are a lot lower. So that makes sense. 31 32 In terms of electric, all electric building it sort of reminds me of the old all electric kitchen idea people 33 had, but the issue is that you get Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) points and 34 LEED benefits presumably for having an all-electric building I presume. So in some sense that is, to 35 some extent the project benefit is also the consideration that there may be a cache for renters to rent in 36 a space that is all electric and if you do the appropriate insulation and whatever the cost may not be that 37 much greater than that in terms of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) and such. I don’t 38 know if there’s photovoltaic panels you’re putting on the roof that can also mitigate the cost of the 39 electricity. 40 41 In terms of the Eco Pass and Caltrain I think that that does to some extent fit in the TDM measure. The 42 question is the extent to which the TDM for that is already covered by other things, the extent to which 43 you actually exceed the TDM requirements because of our 4 per 1,000 parking requirement. On the 44 other hand we understand that occupancy especially for a lot of buildings is increasing below four, I 45 mean more than 4 per 1,000 and therefore there would be an increased need for parking so to the extent 46 that we have, that Eco Pass and Caltrain that would mitigate in an informal sense the increased parking 47 demand that will realize from increased occupancy. And unfortunately we don’t have a way of capturing 48 that in our zoning ordinance yet. 49 50 And the final thing is PC zone excess impact fees, well the impact fees by law are mitigations for impacts 51 and therefore they are not public benefits. Those are impact fees. Thank you. 52 53 Chair Michael: So thank you for that. So in my brand new role as Commission Chair I’m discovering one 54 of the first of the benefits is getting to speak last at which point many of the thoughts that I might have 55 expressed have been masterfully covered by colleagues. Just to clarify terminology I think one of the 56 21 questions that’s coming up is whether something is beneficial to the public or to the project or whether 1 it’s intrinsic or extrinsic. And I think what I believe is meant by an intrinsic benefit is something which 2 meets a need or a desire of the public. This might be for affordable housing, it might be for open space 3 or landscaping, it might be for neighborhood serving retail, it might be public art, but it might be 4 something inherent in the building itself which fulfills one of these needs which has been expressed 5 perhaps in the Comprehensive Plan or otherwise as an objective that should be met by the public. An 6 extrinsic benefit as opposed to a developer creating a building that has affordable housing might be 7 something which is beneficial but it takes a form outside of the project. It might be payment into a 8 parking fund, it might be funding for needed infrastructure, it might be something sort of outside the, 9 sort of the four corners of the project. And you do have I think a mixture of those two things. But then 10 there are things which are benefits to the project. And we’re not thinking that that’s intrinsic, intrinsic is 11 something which meets this public need. So just terminology there. 12 13 A concern that I think has been expressed by the Commission and picked up by the public is that there 14 are some significant long range planning efforts underway with the City. In this area it is the California 15 Avenue Fry’s Area Concept Plan. There’s the update of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. And I think both 16 of these long term planning efforts have been, involved substantial effort and are actually in their final 17 stages. And it raises for me the question of whether as we have this surge of economic recovery and 18 development activity and proposals which are coming forward, some of which are quite interesting and 19 maybe very exciting should they be approved on a project basis ad hoc if you will or is it something 20 which is best done in relationship to clear principles and division of the City, the specific context that 21 might be provided by the neighborhood plan or by the applicable parts of the Comprehensive Plan. So 22 almost a question of we’re in this home stretch relative to some of these significant planning efforts. 23 Should we maybe be cautious about jumping the gun on things that might not otherwise be consistent in 24 fulfilling those principles and those visions? 25 26 And I think in particular the, this one location, this one intersection highlights the dangers of cumulative 27 impact. At one point, at some point there’s going to be like the one building too many. It’s just all traffic 28 will sort of come to a screeching halt and life as we know it will sort of be altered. And I don’t think this 29 project is that project, but I think the City Council, everybody needs to be highly cognizant of that as we 30 move forward and when if this project is approved it comprises part of that cumulative development 31 impact. 32 33 So I think our process and the piece that is held by the Planning Commission should be consistent and 34 predictable. I think we should be objective and we should be analytical and we should make our decision 35 based not only on the rules as they apply to us, but also on the relevant data. And as I’ve heard from 36 my colleagues I’m not sure we have enough data to initiate this project this evening although we may 37 have that in short order. In particular I guess over and above the request for additional information 38 made by my colleagues I believe this new process which Council and the City Manager have undertaken 39 to begin could be and maybe should be applied to this project relative to getting an independent 40 objective report on the economics of the public benefit as applied to our initiating the PC. I would 41 imagine that that’s not terribly time consuming, but we haven’t done it before. Maybe a question for 42 staff, do we have a sense of what would be involved if we continue this matter to either a date certain or 43 a date uncertain with a request that we come back with that report? 44 45 Ms. Silver: I think it would probably take four to six weeks to get that report to you. 46 47 Chair Michael: Ok. Well, I think those were my main concerns. I think that the Commission often is very 48 interested in any comments from neighbors. We did get a written letter from Mr. Morris. Unfortunately 49 he was not here this evening. If the matter is continued to a subsequent date perhaps he would have 50 the opportunity to make his comments known above and beyond what he submitted in writing. But 51 those were my main questions. Maybe at this point from the Commission if someone would like to make 52 a Motion? Commissioner King. 53 54 Commissioner King: Yeah, I’m sorry to interrupt, but I have a question for staff regarding process. So 55 my understanding now from the staff report is that if we were to take a vote and choose to not initiate 56 22 the PC that the applicant has a path that they can go appeal that to the City Council. Can you one, 1 confirm that and two, confirm the timing on that? My goal would be, I fully respect for the applicant that 2 their clock is ticking. They have money out. They are spending a lot of money waiting. And so they 3 might choose to say, to have us vote even if we vote no maybe a better answer to them and then have 4 them appeal it to Council so I, I would like to throw that out for discussion and ask the staff of the 5 process. 6 7 Ms. French: So technically it would not be an appeal. It’s a legislative request. The continuance is not 8 unheard of of an initiation. You’ve done it several times, most recently for the 395 Page Mill project. You 9 did continue your consideration of an initiation. And having said that yes, if you did continue it the 10 applicant could request consideration by Council. I think the better choice would be to come back with 11 data and information for your continued consideration of initiation because you may want to initiate the 12 project after you’ve received additional information. 13 14 Chair Michael: So it’s my understanding that the Council very much appreciates the diligence of the 15 Planning Commission in raising various questions and working with the applicant and the community, 16 providing a forum to bring out all the relevant information, and I believe that the comments made by my 17 colleagues on the Commission are all directed at information that would be relevant either for us or for 18 Council. And we would hope that if we do have a Motion and a vote that results in continuing the matter 19 that it be continued to a matter that’s very, a date that’s very soon and that we fulfill our job of building a 20 complete record of development information that would facilitate prompt action by Council based on 21 whatever recommendation that we would make. 22 23 Commissioner Panelli: So I’d like to ask this both of staff and the Commission. I almost wonder if we 24 should make a Motion to initiate this process while at the same time suggesting that the applicant hasn’t 25 overwhelmed us with or demonstrated that the project proposed meets the criteria that would result in a 26 decision by this Commission to approve that initiation. And if we do, if we come back at the next 27 meeting and we still feel that way we can at that point continue it and give them a third opportunity or 28 we can suggest we don’t think you’ve met the criteria and the reason why I sort of feel like that’s the 29 better approach is because it’s ultimately the same approach. And frankly I think there’s a lot of work 30 that still needs to be done and there’s a lot of discussion that still needs to be done, but I think the 31 community will show up potentially more sincerely if they think that this is, we’re really evaluating it. I’m 32 really just concerned with the notion that it’s sort of surprising we don’t have anybody here from Sunrise. 33 You know it’s surprising we don’t have any, we have two speakers here that are neighbors. So I don’t 34 think any of us would be comfortable approving this project as is. I don’t think that we can’t, it’s just I 35 don’t see really the difference to be honest. 36 37 Chair Michael: Vice-Chair Keller. 38 39 MOTION 40 41 Vice-Chair Keller: So quickly there’s a big difference between initiating tonight and continuing and 42 rejecting the project. If we reject it then the process is for the applicant to go to Council and that 43 basically is automatic in some sense. Because if the applicant wants to build a project they go, the only 44 way to do that is to get the Council to initiate the PC zone. That’s number one. 45 46 Number two is that if we initiate tonight this project in general will not come back to us until we are 47 actually dealing with a completely fleshed out, completely designed project with a complete set of public 48 benefits which we can then accept or reject some months or years from now. It is only an extraordinary 49 project do we get a point in time to get a midpoint analysis of it between when we initiate and when we 50 deal with the completed PC ordinance, complete design, and everything done. 51 52 So my sense, the third thing is that if we continue it, we get the opportunity to gather more information 53 and we have the opportunity to give clearer direction to the applicant, which I don’t think we’ve done 54 that much now. So that when we initiate the PC zone, excuse me, if and when we initiate the PC zone we 55 have given clear direction to the applicant so the applicant can then go off and do the design work and 56 23 when it comes back to us it’s hopefully in consonance with what we recommended. But we have not 1 given clear recommendations now and I think that the record is incomplete in terms of what is needed. 2 3 So I’m going to basically make the Motion that we continue this item to a date uncertain with the request 4 that staff expeditiously obtain the information needed so that this can come back to us as soon as 5 possible without undue delay. 6 7 SECOND 8 9 Commissioner Panelli: I’m going to second that. 10 11 Chair Michael: There is a Motion by Vice-Chair Keller seconded by Commissioner Panelli. Vice-Chair Keller 12 do you have anything further you’d like to say about your Motion? 13 14 Vice-Chair Keller: Just very quickly I’d like to expand slightly on what Commissioner Panelli said. So if 15 you think about this the building envelope that you’re allowed to build under existing zoning, there’s the 16 building envelope that you’re allowed to build under standard PC zoning and then there’s the building 17 envelope that’s being created in terms of the exceptions to the PC zoning and I think we need to 18 understand how this project relates to all three. Thank you. 19 20 Chair Michael: Commissioner Panelli. 21 22 Commissioner Panelli: Like I mentioned before, I think a continuance is warranted and I think I’ve 23 mentioned this before that I think in every case where an applicant brings a request to initiate a PC that 24 we should almost automatically continue it because I think that we need, first of all we need to give a 25 little bit of time for the applicant to address our questions and concerns, but also time for the public to 26 comment and react to what’s been discussed here today. I agree with my fellow Commissioners though 27 and I think we’ve all said it that we’d like to see this done as expeditiously as possible so we’re saying a 28 date uncertain, but hopefully that date uncertain will be sometime in the next six weeks let’s say. That’s 29 all I have. 30 31 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck? 32 33 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 34 35 Commissioner Alcheck: So I’d like to propose a Friendly Amendment. First, if it’s going to be a three 36 meeting process then we might as well just call it a three meeting process. That’s sort of what I’m 37 getting at. If we’re going to automatically continue every PC thing then let’s just call it what it is. That’s 38 all I’m suggesting. 39 40 But I appreciate your comments, I actually agree with, you’ve convinced me. I think we should continue 41 it. I’m not suggesting we don’t continue it and initiate, but what I would like to suggest is a Friendly 42 Amendment that we don’t see this again until we have the “City Manager directed financial analysis.” I 43 don’t think based on what you’ve just argued, it doesn’t make sense for us to set a, have a discussion 44 about public benefits that will ultimately lead to a final package presented without having a review of the 45 pro forma, which I don’t want to suggest I love that idea at all, but if that’s going to be the way we do it 46 I would, it seems contrary to the position you just stated that we would get that financial analysis at the 47 third and final time we review this at which point changes would be very difficult to make. 48 49 Chair Michael: So is that Friendly Amendment acceptable to the maker of the Motion? 50 51 Vice-Chair Keller: So I’m wondering what staff feels about the idea of at least getting a preliminary 52 analysis of the nature of the financial comparison of the public benefit with the benefit to the developer? 53 And what the time frame for that would be? 54 55 Ms. Silver: Yes. I stated that I thought it would be four to six weeks. 56 24 1 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED 2 3 Vice-Chair Keller: Ok, so then in that case I’m happy to accept the amendment. 4 5 Commissioner Panelli: As I. 6 7 Chair Michael: Commissioner King. 8 9 Commissioner King: Oh sorry. Thank you. So I’m going, I’m maybe bending things a bit here, but I 10 wanted since I haven’t really, I think it’s positive to give information to the applicant about where we are 11 and I haven’t really done that. So I’m going to use, I’m going to in supporting the continuance just 12 address a bit. 13 14 So let’s see, so the crux of this is really the public benefit. Without public benefits it’s an 8,000 square 15 foot entitlement is the way I see it. And you’ve got the list of numeric public benefits and some might 16 argue I think at the Council study session there was a discussion of it’s a gateway building and so maybe 17 in my mind I don’t consider that intrinsic benefit significant enough to create a PC so for me it’s really 18 about these costs. And as far as the other thing I’d like to do some form of rough analysis and I know 19 we’ve had a developer that said “Oh, we don’t like back of the envelope,” but I’ve done my back of the 20 envelope calculations and so if we’re saying there’s roughly an 8,000 square foot entitlement now and 21 that we’re going to have 32,0000 because that 2,000 of amenity is leasable space even if it’s not 22 countable towards FARs. We’re looking at about 24,000 square feet of upgraded entitlement and I’m just 23 using a number, I’m happy for someone to correct me, disabuse me of this being a reasonable number of 24 profit of maybe $500 a square foot. Maybe it’s $300, maybe it’s $700, but I would guess it’s somewhere 25 in that range and so that’s roughly $12 million; maybe $8 to $15 is what I would see as a potential 26 benefit to the applicants. And so if in fact that the public benefits don’t seem to be commensurate to me 27 with the potential profit. And again I’m really anxious and excited to see a third party analysis to see 28 how far those numbers are off. 29 30 And then regarding the amenities; so regarding the impact fees, trying to count those I consider that, I 31 personally believe that to be insincere and whether it’s PC, not PC putting that on there just doesn’t to 32 me engender trust about the process and counting the numbers. The use of the VTA that will benefit 33 somebody I assume, that’s great. That’s fairly de minimus. The urban design features, again we’re 34 unclear as to whether that’s really double counting what might be required for the project anyhow. That 35 passes further discussion. The all electric I’m, I would hesitate to count that. We don’t, I don’t think we 36 have a policy or even a discussion as a City as to the benefits of all electric and where that should be 37 appropriately applied so I discount that one. And then the electric vehicle charging, the lights instillation, 38 and the upgrade I personally consider those zoning, that’s zoning for sale. It’s really not related to the 39 project it’s you giving, the applicant giving the City money to purchase things that the City should well be 40 able to do on their own in my mind. 41 42 And then the real public, to me the key public benefit if we look at the downstream cumulative effects of 43 the traffic, if you look at those numbers if the 2035 numbers are accurate the changes to the intersection 44 are a material benefit and I think Vice-Chair Keller addressed the fact that we missed a potential 45 opportunity, although I don’t think it was PC for the parcel across the street to improve that right turn 46 lane there, which would have been a significant public benefit. So I think we have this opportunity now, 47 so this is the real to me this is the real benefit. How we value that I think is challenging. For the 48 applicant other than some hard costs and they haven’t addressed how much of this is hard cost versus 49 the land value. If the entitlements don’t change with them giving the, transferring these, doing the land 50 dedication and the widening then there’s really zero cost to them. They’ve paid for the parcel, they’re 51 getting their same entitlements and so there really isn’t a cost to them other than hard costs and any 52 legal costs. 53 54 So in my mind if I were, if someone were to come to me and say “Oh, how, what would we do in this, for 55 this parcel?” I look at the existing entitlements and then I would look at the, what are the costs to the 56 25 applicant. Let’s use our $600,000 that they’re proposing on Item One and then I use $500 a square foot 1 profit so really it would upgrade 1,200 square feet. And maybe that should be larger for the 2 entrepreneurial risk that they’re taking, but I come up with a project more in the 10,000 square feet 3 range than 30,000 square feet based on what I perceive as the current public benefits. So thank you. 4 5 Chair Michael: So I want to give the applicant time to respond to some of the things that you’ve heard 6 the comments and the questions from the Commission before we take a vote on the Motion. And I 7 believe if you’d like to respond in any way let’s give you three minutes. 8 9 Mr. Baer: Thank you for your comments and I hope I’ll leave a minute for Ken if he would like to speak. 10 It’s hard not to say one thing and have it come off as arrogant and perhaps it is. I’ve done 25 planned 11 community zones in my long career, which is nearing an end and they’ve not been disapproved. I’m 12 saying that to say we really try, it’s not backslapping or anything. We really try to be in touch with policy 13 and we were giving by previous Director Curtis Williams a dollar value as the goal based on 101 Lytton, 14 which is a project I was involved with, saying you’ve got to be at least this many dollars per square foot 15 of public benefit. I’m not going to give you that number tonight although we’ve exceeded it substantially 16 in this. 17 18 But I do understand and appreciate that the most significant partially intrinsic, partially extrinsic benefit is 19 to really fix up that intersection. And if that includes figuring out and being able to have a conversation 20 how to better understand the pedestrian movements that hold up traffic, to better understand the pork 21 chop, to better understand all those features we get that that has the opportunity to be the most 22 valuable. Now Mr. King I would like to caution the strength of your thought that it’s what it costs you to 23 give land away that you’ve already purchased. It’s not the value of that to the public is benefit. And I 24 hope we can discuss that openly later. And of course your notion of, I appreciate you’re saying there’s 25 some X value of increased gross value and we do need to look at what the costs of creating that value 26 are so that we look at a net value and we will do that vigorously when we return. 27 28 It’s an expensive site and it’s very expensive to mitigate the California-Olive-Emerson (COE) plume for 29 the underground parking. It’s an expensive building, but we will do that. Your approach to even start by 30 saying it’s really the net value after your cost to do the building you want to look at I appreciate that very 31 much. 32 33 Thank you all for your diligence. These are never easy. Often times the public hearings are not happy 34 with or without extensive public comment and we learned a lot. We learned more than you may have 35 thought by experience in listening and I hope you will allow without seeming as if it’s advocacy some 36 opportunity to meet with your before our next hearing just to hear and understand what is the issue of 37 pedestrian movement? What are some of the other features? And you’ll discount those things that are 38 harsh advocacy by me and the applicant or Ken Hayes and you’ll find some value in the questions we 39 ask. So thank you very much tonight. I think we learned much more than you may have grasped even 40 without there being precision and emotion saying “X, Y, and Z.” I think we got a lot of very valuable 41 information. We appreciate your time. We will return with a project that you will be proud to initiate. 42 Thank you very much. 43 44 Mr. Hayes: You don’t have to reset it, but I would like to say thank you for your time tonight. And to 45 point out that I do think that this corner is a critical gateway corner. I mean it’s the most probably 46 traveled intersection in Silicon Valley. It’s the gateway to Stanford Research Park. It’s the gateway to 47 Palo Alto. It’s a very recognizable site and I think and opportunity to do something great for that 48 property and to kind of anchor it. 49 50 I want to point out that this building is not a large building at 31,700 square feet for that corridor. And if 51 the building had housing in it, and that’s not what we’re proposing, it’s not what staff is recommending or 52 anything, but under the PC ordinance that we’re talking about we would be allowed 50 foot height limit 53 and if it had 60 percent residential and we would be allowed to have the daylight plane that we’re 54 showing today at that 45 degree. For some reason the ordinance is written in such a way that if you 55 don’t have housing you have a more restrictive daylight plan and building height, which is rather 56 26 confusing. So if the building had 60 percent housing we could have 50 feet in height and a 45 degree 1 daylight plane, which is what we’re showing tonight because we think the site does deserve a taller 2 building, larger mass and be more consistent with the outdated El Camino Real Guidelines. So that’s I 3 just want you to kind of put that in your framework. Thank you very much tonight. Appreciate your 4 comments. 5 6 Chair Michael: So thank you very much. Just before we vote I just want to note that I think we may be 7 breaking new ground here in terms of trying to introduce an additional step in our analysis of the PC 8 zone. I believe this is something that is consistent with the policy set by the Council and the expectations 9 of the community. It will probably take some additional time as we get into our learning of how to do 10 this process expeditiously, but hopefully it won’t impose undue delay. 11 12 And there has been a lot of public comment and coverage in the media even about whether or not new 13 buildings in Palo Alto are attractive or not. And I would just like to comment that my review of the 14 material submitted by the applicant suggests that there’s a pretty good faith effort to make a very 15 attractive project at this site. And other than the fact that I think that there’s insufficient information for 16 us to do our job this evening, but with the expectation that we will have that information quite promptly I 17 think that the level of thought and design and attention to good land use is something that is evident in 18 what we’ve seen tonight. 19 20 Mr. Hayes: This is not, this has been lost tonight. We do have a model over here if you have a chance to 21 look at it. 22 23 Chair Michael: Ok, thank you very much. And with that (interrupted) 24 25 Commissioner Panelli: Mr. Chair? 26 27 Chair Michael: Commissioner Panelli. 28 29 Commissioner Panelli: I just want to quickly expound on my acceptance of the Friendly Amendment from 30 Commissioner Alcheck. And I want to make sure that this is heard loud and clear by the applicant. Even 31 though a dollar is a dollar it, a million dollars spent for a public benefit say on a piece of art for the City 32 versus a million dollars spent to solve a major problem that Mr. Donlay and his neighbors and Ms. 33 Italiano and her neighbors, are suffering or might suffer, I would say that a million… you can’t just take 34 the face value of $3 million. It depends how that money is spent. And so we shouldn’t just consider the 35 cost when we do this analysis, but actually the value of the expenditure or investment. 36 37 VOTE 38 39 Chair Michael: So with that let’s have a vote on the Motion. All in favor please signify by saying aye 40 (Aye). So the vote is five in favor with Commissioners Martinez and Tanaka absent. Thank you very 41 much. You’re welcome and we’ll close the public hearing and take a 10 minute break. 42 43 MOTION PASSED (5-0-2, Commissioners Martinez and Tanaka absent) 44 45 Commission Action: Vice-chair Keller motioned to move to date uncertain, second by Commissioner 46 Panelli for staff to expeditiously obtain the information needed to bring back to Commission without 47 undue delay. Directed staff to bring the item back before the Commission within the next six weeks. 48 Friendly Amendment by Commissioner Alcheck, Call three meeting process for what it is on PC initiations, 49 does not want to see the item coming back before them until the City Manager directed financial analysis 50 is done. Approved 5-0-2 (Commissioners Martinez and Tanaka absent) 51 52 Attachment E ATTACHMENT F Project Plans for 2755 El Camino Real (Hardcopies provided to Councilmembers and Libraries only) Project Plans can be viewed at this link below: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2923&TargetID=319 City of Palo Alto (ID # 6028) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Placeworks Contract Amendment 4 Title: Approval of Amendment Number 4 to Contract C08125506 With the Planning Center ¦ DCE, now Known as Placeworks, to Increase the Contract by $482,612 to an Amount Not to Exceed $2,377,343 and Adoption of a Related Budget Amendment Ordinance From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 4 (Attachment A) to Contract C08125506 with The Planning Center │DCE (now known as Placeworks) to increase the contract limit by $482,612 to an amount not to exceed $2,377,343 to provide additional services associated with the Comprehensive Plan Update, including support for the ongoing Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) meetings, and approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $482,612 in the General Fund offset with a reduction in the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve (Attachment B). Executive Summary The 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) guides land use and development decisions in Palo Alto and contains the City’s official policies on land use and community design, transportation, housing, natural environment, business and economics, and community services. Many sections of the plan are required by State law and the State recommends that local jurisdictions update their plan every ten years. Palo Alto embarked on an update of its Comprehensive Plan and contracted with the firm DCE (now known as Placeworks) in 2008. A contract amendment is needed to allow for the following: 1. Supporting the activities of the newly-created Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) which will provide suggestions to the City Council during the Comprehensive Plan update, including drafting staff reports, producing “Online City Hall” documents used by residents to provide feedback, drafting preliminary elements to be re- reviewed by the CAC, and staffing all CAC and CAC planning meetings City of Palo Alto Page 2 2. Drafting of a revised Comprehensive Plan and providing all needed support thru adoption of the plan, including preparation for and attending public and City Council meetings as needed. Background The 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan’s policies apply to both public and private properties and its focus is on the physical form of the City. The Plan is used by the City Council and the Planning and Transportation Commission to evaluate land use changes and to make funding and budgeting decisions. It is used by City staff to evaluate building and development and to make recommendations on projects. It is used by citizens and neighborhood groups to understand the City’s long-range plans and proposals for geographic areas. The Comprehensive Plan provides the basis for the City’s development regulations and the foundation for its capital improvements. The City has been working with Placeworks to update the Comprehensive Plan since 2008. Under the initial contract, DCE conducted a preliminary review of each existing Comprehensive Plan element, provided suggestions for revisions to modernize and improve elements based on current General Plan/Comprehensive Plan standards, and recommended the addition of sustainability policies and program concepts that would be appropriate for each element. Amendment Number 1 added work on the California Avenue Concept Plan, preparation of the Citywide Travel Demand Forecasting Model, creation of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Implementation Matrix, and additional website administration. In March 2014, Staff identified a revised approach for the Comprehensive Update process (Staff Report 4554) that included community discussion of alternative development scenarios, along with baseline data, potential impacts and mitigation. Amendment Number 2 included preparation of “Our Plan so Far” along with initiation of the environmental review process with a “Notice of Preparation,” scoping, alternatives development. (Preparation of the Draft EIR is currently underway.) With this modification, the contract was intended to fund all activities that were then anticipated up to and including plan adoption. Amendment Number 3 provided a fiscal analysis to better inform the community and decision makers about the opportunities and challenges inherent in the issues that are being considered as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. The fiscal analysis is currently underway. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Since 2014, the City Council has emphasized the need to bring together a diverse range of voices from throughout the community to discuss the myriad choices that will define Palo Alto in the years to come. As part of this effort, “The Summit” was held on May 30th and was attended by hundreds of Palo Alto residents. Feedback from the event will inform the Comprehensive Plan Update and preface a new phase of “open sourcing” comments that will be used in the planning process. The City Council also decided in March to form a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) to inform the ongoing update process and provide a vehicle for community input to the City Council. The CAC has begun meeting and discussing elements of the existing Comprehensive Plan. These City Council decisions altered the then-timeframe for completion of the Comprehensive Plan update work, and required a reallocation of funds to support the Summit and the CAC, which were not part of the previous contract or subsequent amendments. Resources reallocated included those originally identified for completion of the update work. Contract Amendment 4 restores resources to complete these tasks. Staff is requesting an amendment to the DCE contract to include funding for the final phase of the Comprehensive Plan update process. Support for the CAC meetings is critical, as their work will be a primary source of public input to the ongoing process, as well as a clear need to support the drafting and production of the final work products, including a draft Comprehensive Plan. Staff requests Council’s authorization to amend the contract accordingly. (Note: the City Council’s August 17, 2015 request for a somewhat longer schedule and for the use of subcommittees in the CAC process occurred after this staff report and contract amendment were prepared. As a result, an additional amendment may be required in the future.) Resource Impact Amendment Number 4 (Attachment A) requests an addition of $482,612 to the contract titled “Comprehensive Plan Amendment Services, Contract C08125506. The Planning and Community Environment Department’s Adopted Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2016 does not contain sufficient resources to support the increased contract amount. Staff requests approval of the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) to increase the departments Fiscal Year 2016 Operating Budget by this amount offset with a reduction to the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve. Upon approval of the contract amendment and BAO, the Department will encumber the funds required for the contract amendment. The total cost of the project, including Amendment Number 4, is summarized in the following table. Staff will analyze the contract impact of Council recommendations made at the August 17, 2015 meeting and may need to request additional contract resources to support that work. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Comprehensive Plan updates are by definition, costly endeavors and many jurisdictions spend substantial sums on these types of projects. The time involved in the planning process is directly related to the cost and Palo Alto’s protracted planning process, with an emphasis on community input, contributes to a higher cost than is typical. A small fraction of these costs are offset by the Comprehensive Plan maintenance fee charged on all building permits. Summary Breakdown Total Cost Original Contract total w/Contingency (CMR:193:08) $849,981 Amendment #1 w/Contingency (Staff Report 3756) which included additional work: Completion of the Cal Ave Concept Area Plan Preparation of the Citywide Travel Demand Forecasting Model Creation of the Comp Plan Amendment Implementation Matrix Additional website administration $290,019 Amendment #2 (Staff Report 4554) Preparation of “Our Plan so Far” and “Notice of Preparation” Scoping and Alternatives Development Alternatives Evaluation and Selection Comp Plan Amendment and Finalization $597,206 Amendment #3 (Staff Report 5562) Fiscal Analysis study $157,525 Exhibit A (Amendment #4 total) Citizen Advisory Committee support Comp Plan Preparation and Adoption Open Sourcing the Comp Plan Earth Day Report Consultation Council meeting support Contract management support, labor and reimbursable expenses $482,612 $182,060 $161,553 $30,510 $25,130 $32,740 $50,619 Revised Contract Grand Total $2,377,343 City of Palo Alto Page 5 Policy Implications Updating the City’s Comprehensive Plan has been identified as a key priority by this Council Contract Amendment Number 4 does not represent a change to existing policies. It is worth noting that costs associated with the adoption of a revised Comprehensive Plan will continue to rise, the longer it takes to complete. Contract Amendment 4, along with all project timelines have been designed to allow for the completion of work in 2016, per the City Council’s direction. Environmental Review Work related to the CAC is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. A Draft Environmental Impact Report is being prepared in tandem with the work detailed above as required by CEQA and is already funded. Attachments: Attachment A: Placeworks Contract Amendment 4 to Contract Number C08125506 (PDF) Attachment B: Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOCX) ATTACHMENT A “SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibits “A”, “A1”, “A2”, A3 & “A4”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Two Million Three Hundred Seventy Seven Thousand Three Hundred Forty Three Dollars ($ 2,377,343.00) The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C5”, entitled “RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibits “A”, “A1”, “A2” & “A3”.” SECTION 2. The following exhibits to the Contract are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Third Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. Exhibit “A4” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES” b. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION” c. Exhibit “C5” entitled “RATE SCHEDULE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 4” SECTION 3. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this First Amendment on the Amendment Effective Date. CITY OF PALO ALTO PLACEWORKS, INC APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit “A4” “SCOPE OF SERVICES” Exhibit “C” “COMPENSATION” Exhibit “C5” “RATE SCHEDULE DocuSign Envelope ID: D5981F9B-3082-497E-ABAD-BD1018416B06 David Early EXHIBIT A4 ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK I. CITIZENS’ ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING SUPPORT CONSULTANT shall support City staff in preparing materials for and facilitating 9 meetings of the Citizens’ Advisory Committee. Specifically, CONSULTANT shall: a. Prepare Comp Plan policies and programs for CAC review and discussion by: i. Working with City staff to identify major policy issues in each Element. ii. Compiling past input on each Element from the City Council vision and goals discussions, Planning and Transportation Committee reviews, previous stakeholder meetings, The Summit, and staff and consultant review. iii. Annotating each Element with questions to focus CAC discussion on the key policy topics and background context summarizing prior input. iv. Formatting each Element for clarity and readability. v. Providing content for 1- to 2-page cover memos guiding CAC members on how to prepare for each upcoming meeting. vi. Preparing a PowerPoint presentation orienting the CAC to each Element and the major policy topics to be discussed at the meeting. b. Attend 9 meetings of the CAC. This scope and budget assume meetings will be up to 4 hours long. CONSULTANT role shall primarily be to present background information and an overview of the material to be discussed, and to be available to answer technical questions. CONSULTANT’s Project Manager will attend all CAC meetings; CONSULTANT’s Principal-in-Charge will attend up to 6 meetings. c. Revise Comp Plan policies and programs to reflect CAC input; add narratives, graphics, and data to the policies and programs; and format the documents to create a draft Element for subsequent CAC review. This scope and budget anticipates that the Comp Plan will consist of the six Elements currently identified: Land Use and Community Design, Transportation, Natural Environment, Community Services and Facilities, Safety and Noise, and Business and Economics. II. OPEN SOURCING THE COMP PLAN CONSULTANT shall provide technical support and content to enable the City to “open source” community input on the Comp Plan as it is drafted and reviewed. Specifically, CONSULTANT shall: a. Have primary responsibility for coordinating with Peak Democracy, provider of the City’s Open City Hall tool, to develop and maintain a new Digital Commenter tool that will allow the public to comment on Comp Plan content at the level of individual policies or programs. b. Create and format policy and program documents for each Element to post on the Digital Commenter tool no less than 3 weeks in advance of each CAC meeting. III. CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUPPORT CONSULTANT shall support staff in preparing for City Council meetings to discuss Comp Plan and EIR contents, including, for example, the overall structure and goals of the Comp Plan, retail preservation strategies, approaches to a development cap, analysis of the fiscal impacts of the Comp Plan scenarios, and the conclusions of the Draft EIR. Specifically, CONSULTANT shall: a. Attend up to 7 Council meetings b. Prepare relevant sections of staff reports and presentations DocuSign Envelope ID: D5981F9B-3082-497E-ABAD-BD1018416B06 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL AND POLICY ANALYSIS CONSULTANT shall: a. Provide a summary of 2014 GHG emissions for the City’s annual Earth Day report. b. Coordinate closely with the City’s Sustainability/Climate Action Plan team to ensure the highest possible level of data sharing and congruency between the two processes and documents. c. Include an analysis of the S/CAP document in the Comp Plan EIR to fulfill the CEQA review requirements for the S/CAP. d. Revise buildout estimates for the Comp Plan scenarios to reflect City Council direction regarding approaches to growth management received at the March 24, 2015 Council meeting. V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PREPARATION AND ADOPTION CONSULTANT shall support the City through the preparation, public review, and adoption of the Comp Plan. Specifically, CONSULTANT shall: a. Prepare an Administrative Draft Plan, including an Introduction and an Implementation Plan. The Administrative Draft Plan will incorporate the material prepared during the CAC and Open Source process to create full elements with narratives, photos, and graphs for City review. In addition, the Administrative Draft Plan will reflect the Preferred Land Use Alternative identified by the City Council. Upon completion of City review, the Consultant shall prepare a screen check Draft Plan, followed by the completion and release of a Public Review Draft Comprehensive Plan. b. Have primary responsibility for coordinating with Peak Democracy, provider of the City’s Open City Hall tool, for online review and input on the Public Review Draft Comprehensive Plan, using existing Open City Hall tools. c. Track all comments on the Draft Plan received during the public review phase, and summarize all changes made to the Plan in response to public comments. d. Support staff in preparing for, and attend, up to 6 hearings with the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council to consider the Public Review Draft Comprehensive Plan. e. Incorporate revisions received during the public review phase into the Public Review Draft Comprehensive Plan to prepare a Revised Draft Comprehensive Plan. f. Support staff in preparing for, and attend, up to 6 hearings with the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council to consider adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. g. Prepare a Final Comprehensive Plan document reflecting any additional Council direction received during the adoption hearings. Coordinate printing and delivery of the Final Comprehensive Plan. VI. ONGOING PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT shall participate in regular weekly calls with the City Comp Plan team to report on progress and resolve any outstanding issues. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for providing agendas and materials for each meeting in advance. In addition, CONSULTANT shall attend periodic on-site check-in meetings with City staff throughout the remainder of the Comp Plan and EIR process. This scope and budget assumes 8 staff-level check-in meetings between August 2015 and June 2016. DocuSign Envelope ID: D5981F9B-3082-497E-ABAD-BD1018416B06 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement based on the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit “C5”. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibits “A”, “A1”, “A2”, “A3” & “A4” (“Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $2,377,343.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: A. Travel (including within the San Francisco Bay Area – at actual cost B. Report printing and reproduction – at actual cost C. Deliveries – at actual cost D. Data purchase – at actual cost All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $500.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expenses, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: D5981F9B-3082-497E-ABAD-BD1018416B06 EXHIBIT C5 RATE SCHEDULE STAFF LEVEL HOURLY BILL RATE Principal $190–$250 Associate Principal $175–$200 Senior Associate/Senior Scientist $145–$180 Associate/Scientist $110–$150 Project Planner/Project Scientist $90–$115 Planner/Assistant Scientist $75–$95 Graphics Specialist $60–$100 Clerical/Word Processing $40–$110 Intern $50–$70 Subconsultants are billed at cost plus 10%. Mileage reimbursement rate is the standard IRS-approved rate. DocuSign Envelope ID: D5981F9B-3082-497E-ABAD-BD1018416B06 EXHIBIT “C5” RATE SCHEDULE AMENDMENT NO. 4 Hourly Rate: PlaceWorks Hours Total Task Budget Jansen Associate Principal $175 Knox Principal $210 Hill Senior Associate $160 Mena Associate $135 Project Senior Planner Scientist $105 $180 CEQA Associate/ Scientist $145 GRAPHICS $100 WP/ $75 TASK I. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUPPORT a. Prepping Elements for CAC review and discussion 189 0 320 0 180 0 0 108 0 797 $113,895 b. CAC Meeting Attendance (x9) 35 63 98 $16,205 c. Revise Elements based on CAC input (x 6) 72 120 192 384 $51,960 Task I. Subtotal 296 0 503 0 372 0 0 108 0 1,279 $182,060 TASK II. OPEN SOURCING THE COMP PLAN a. Ongoing coordination with Peak Democracy 20 40 60 $9,900 b. Prepping online input for CAC review and discussion Task II. Subtotal 18 36 90 9 18 38 0 76 0 90 0 0 9 18 231 $20,610 291 $30,510 TASK III. CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUPPORT a. Council Meeting Attendance, 7 meetings b. Council meeting prep: staff report components, PPTs 42 24 28 8 56 42 16 66 $11,190 150 $21,550 Task III. Subtotal 70 8 80 0 42 0 0 16 0 216 $32,740 TASK IV. POLICY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS b. 2015 Earth Day report d. Sustainability/Climate Action Plan coordination e. Sustainability/Climate Action Plan analysis in EIR f. Buildout revisions 5 13 2 8 12 9 11 6 8 8 20 8 16 2 18 20 20 $3,415 40 $6,515 66 $9,270 40 $5,930 Task IV. Subtotal 21 0 38 37 20 32 16 2 0 166 $25,130 TASK V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PREPARATION AND ADOPTION a. Administrative Draft Comp Plan b. Online Consultation on Public Review Draft Comp Plan c. Comment tracking d. Public review hearings (x6) e. Revised Draft Comprehensive Plan f. Adoption hearings (x6) g. Final Comprehensive Plan 44 8 104 164 56 15 4 36 54 24 4 24 60 60 84 24 20 4 47 0 74 25 60 84 24 12 8 24 12 8 376 $48,840 133 $17,295 88 $10,840 168 $26,460 169 $21,978 168 $26,460 64 $9,680 Task V. Subtotal 215 24 403 0 412 0 0 113 0 1,166 $161,553 TASK VI. ONGOING PROJECT MANAGEMENT Ongoing project management 32 64 60 156 $23,940 Task VI. Subtotal 32 0 64 60 0 0 0 0 0 156 $23,940 Labor Hours Total 672 32 1,163 97 936 32 16 248 18 3,274 Labor Dollars Total $117,56 $6,636 $186,128 $13,095 $98,259 $5,760 $2,320 $24,820 $1,350 $455,933 EXPENSES Reimbursable Expenses $17,560 2% of Labor for Office Expenses (Copies, Faxes, Phone, Misc. Printing) $9,118.66 10% Subconsultant Markup $0.00 EXPENSES TOTAL $26,679 GRAND TOTAGRAND TOTAL $482,612 NOTES Subconsultant costs are billed at cost plus 10% DocuSign Envelope ID: D5981F9B-3082-497E-ABAD-BD1018416B06 1 Revised July 23, 2015 6028/mb Ordinance No. xxxx ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF $482,612 FROM THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET STABILIZATION RESERVE TO THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 15, 2015 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2016; and B. The 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) guides land use and development decisions in Palo Alto and contains the City’s official policies on land use and community design, transportation, housing, natural environment, business and economics, and community services. Many sections of the plan are required by State law and the State recommends that local jurisdictions update their plan every ten years; and C. Palo Alto embarked on an update of its Comprehensive Plan and contracted with the firm DCE (now known as Placeworks) in 2008; and D. The City Council decided in March 2015 to form a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) to inform the ongoing update process and provide a vehicle for community input to the City Council. The CAC has begun meeting and discussing elements of the existing Comprehensive Plan; and E. This action will support an amendment to the DCE contract to include funding for the final phase of the Comprehensive Plan update process. An additional appropriation of $482,612 is requested to support the completion of the Comprehensive Plan Update. SECTION 2. Therefore, Four Hundred Eighty-Two Thousand Six Hundred Twelve ($482,612) is hereby appropriated to the Planning and Community Environment Department and the ending fund balance in the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve is hereby reduced by Four Hundred Eighty-Two Thousand Six Hundred Twelve ($482,612). SECTION 3. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 4. The actions taken in this ordinance do not constitute a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ATTACHMENT B 2 Revised July 23, 2015 6028/mb INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment City of Palo Alto (ID # 5977) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Palo Alto Community Child Care 5 year Contract Title: Approval of a Five-Year Contract No. C16159540 With Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. (PACCC) for Management of the City's Child Care Subsidy Program in the Amount of $459,841 Per Fiscal Year From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract (Attachment A – PACCC contract) in the amount of $459,841 annually with Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. (PACCC) for a five-year term (July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2020) for the management of the City’s Child Care Subsidy Program for low income children. Executive Summary The scope of services in this contract covers the administration and management of a child care subsidy program for approximately 35 low income children annually enrolled in Palo Alto based child care and afterschool programs. Services to include all paperwork and processes related to eligibility certification, maintenance of an eligibility list, data tracking and compilation, program revenue and expenditure tracking as well as other subsidy administration services as requested by the City. PACCC is the only child care provider in the community with sufficient agency capacity and experience to perform the services requested, justifying the award as a sole source contract and exempt from solicitation. A solicitation would be impractical at this time as a resulting award to other than the incumbent (PACCC) would risk substantial disruption to the children served in the child care subsidy program and any new vendor may provide potentially inferior results to delivering a public service. Ref. PAMC 2.30.360(b)(2). Background The City of Palo Alto has had a long commitment to child care in the community starting in 1974 when it established a Task Force to consider and implement Council set City of Palo Alto Page 2 priorities on child care. The Task Force recommended that the City take an active and supportive role in the provision of child care and related services and that a nonprofit corporation be established to implement and coordinate the Task Force’s recommendations. During the next two years, PACCC was created and incorporated as a 501c3 organization and on March 25, 1974, Council approved a contract with PACCC which allocated funds for administrative support of PACCC and for the various components of the Task Force Plan. Starting in 1984, the City pulled back all administrative funding provided except the contract with PACCC to serve as the administrator of the City’s child care subsidy program. PACCC funding has been allocated by means of the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (contract #S12143391A; 2013-2017.) In 2014, PACCC, along Avenidas, requested that they be removed from the HSRAP process of contract application review and become direct contractors with the City. Their allocation requests were being reviewed and funding recommendations made to Council based on the recommendations of the Human Relations Commission (HRC.) The agencies felt that the HRC did not factor in their long term and “special relationships” with the City (both agencies were essentially started by the City) when making funding recommendations. As their allocations were substantially higher than that of other HSRAP funded agencies, PACCC and Avenidas reported that on several occasions the HRC had recommended cuts to their allocations to “free” up a portion of the finite HSRAP budget to allocate to new or smaller agencies; with the recommendations only being reversed when they protested at Council. They reasoned that without PACCC and Avenidas, the HRC would no longer have to factor in “special relationships” when making its HSRAP funding recommendations all that all future increases of the HSRAP budget could be allocated to existing and new agencies. Council concurred with this request at their meeting on May 12, 2014 (Attachment B – Excerpt from Council Minutes 5-12-14) and directed Staff to separate the funding contracts with Avenidas and PACCC from HSRAP and contract directly with them. Discussion The justification for an exemption from solicitation request is recommended because PACCC is the only provider in Palo Alto that has experience administering a large scale child care subsidy program. PACCC is also the only local provider of financial aid support for families and children who qualify through the State of California, Child Development Division. The reimbursement rate by the State for the care provided is significantly lower than the cost of the care. The size and administrative capacity of PACCC allows them to absorb the difference in this cost. PACCC “subsidizes’ the State subsidy program by approximately $500,000 annually. Smaller providers cannot make up that difference. This financial support, partnered with the City of Palo Alto funding, allows PACCC to serve a diverse group of families in the same programs as full-service fee families. With the management of both funding sources, PACCC can ensure that eligible children receive continuity of care. For parents, it provides one agency to work with, City of Palo Alto Page 3 regardless of the funding stream. For example, if a family who is receiving a subsidy from the State of California program receives a salary increase, this can easily cause them to exceed the State income qualifications. In these cases, the family can be moved to the City funded program (which uses Housing and Urban Development income guidelines for Santa Clara County which are adjusted to be higher than elsewhere in the state to account for higher local cost of living) seamlessly while their children experience no change in care. Currently, 35 children are served utilizing City funding. In the State of California program, 81 children are being served. In total, PACCC supports 117 children in its financial aid program. The following tasks currently performed by PACCC in the management of the City’s Child Care Subsidy Program will continue for the next five years 2015 – 2020 if Council approves the staff recommendation (Attachment A – PACCC contract). The work plan includes but is not limited to the following tasks: 1. Administer and manage child care subsidy program for approximately 35 low income children annually enrolled in Palo Alto based child care and afterschool programs. 2. Maximize the number of children and families served by City of Palo Alto Subsidy program. 3. Collaborate with other service agencies to serve the unique needs of low-income families. 4. Establish and maintain a Parent Advisory Committee (PAC). 5. Create and maintain a program family handbook. 6. Comply with state Program Specifications and PACCC Operating Procedures with regard to the administration and management of subsidy funding, including verification of family and child eligibility, need, residency, and attendance; completion of annual re-certifications for enrolled families; and maintenance of Contracts for Services that appropriately reflect changes in the above. 7. Collect, track, and compile data sufficient to provide annual financial reports, including all agency revenue and expenditures as required under City of Palo Alto contract. 8. Coordinate with the Office of Human Services to conduct an annual program evaluation. 9. Maintains a ranked Eligibility List for participation in the program, with enrollment priority based upon income level, initially using established priorities as detailed in the Program specifications of the contract. Eligibility list will be reviewed and ranked each time a new family is added. 10. Conduct detailed Eligibility List analysis to identify trends in community need and groups of applicants with the longest waiting periods. 11. Regularly survey local child care professionals to ascertain topics of interest for workshops and hire trainers to present workshops that meet those interests in collaboration with PACCC’s ongoing in-service training. City of Palo Alto Page 4 12. Maintain updated City of Palo Alto Family Resources Kiosks; acquire and use new Kiosks where appropriate as provided by the City. 13. Provide referrals to local community service agencies and programs that offer resources that PACCC cannot for low income families. For the full scope of services see Attachment A: PACCC Contract. Resource Impact The contract amount for FY 2016 is $459,841 and was budgeted within the Community Services Department as part of the approved Fiscal Year 2016 Operating Budget. For Fiscal Years 2017 - 2020, the cost for the contract will be subject to the City Council annual appropriation of funds. Policy Implications The Comprehensive Plan addresses the needs of seniors and children in Goal C-3: Improved Quality, Quantity, and Affordability of Social Services, Particularly for Children, Youth, Seniors, and People with Disabilities. Attachments: Attachment A - Contract C16159540 PACCC (PDF) Attachment B – Excerpt from Council Minutes 5-12-14 (PDF) 150807 dm 0073617 1 CONTRACT NO. C16159540 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE, INC. FOR CHILD CARE SUBSIDY PROGRAM This Contract No. C16159540 is entered into _________________, 2015 by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city and a municipal corporation of the State of California ("CITY"), and PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE, INC., a corporation duly organized and existing under the Nonprofit Corporation Law of the State of California, located at 3990 Ventura Court, Palo Alto, CA 94306 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS: The CITY recognizes the continuing needs for child care services for all those persons who live in the City of Palo Alto; and In response to the need for subsidized child care services, CITY desires to support the coordination and operation of a child care subsidy program; and CONSULTANT’s services hereunder shall include the administration of a child care subsidy program (hereinafter the “Program”) and the provision of subsidized child care services under the program at PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE CENTERS and CONSULTANT’S affiliate centers (“Affiliate Centers”). The Program shall be provided in accordance with the specifications set forth in the document entitled “FY 2016-2020 SUBSIDY PROGRAM SPECIFICATIONS,” which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B” (with its Attachments B1 and B-2) and made a part hereof by this reference. The CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT, including its employees, if any, in providing the Services by reason of its qualifications and experience in performing the Services, and CONSULTANT has offered to complete the Program on the terms and in the manner set forth herein; Therefore, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Contract, the parties agree: SECTION 1. TERM 1.1 This Contract will commence on July 1, 2015 and will terminate on June 30, 2020, unless this Contract is earlier terminated by CITY. Upon the receipt of CITY’s notice to proceed, CONSULTANT will commence work on the initial and subsequent Program tasks in accordance with the time schedule set forth in Exhibit “A”. Time is of the essence of this Contract. In the event that the Program is not completed within the time required through any fault of CONSULTANT, CITY’s City Manager will have the option of extending the time schedule for any period of time. This provision will not preclude the recovery of damages for delay caused by CONSULTANT. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 2 SECTION 2. SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES; CHANGES & CORRECTIONS 2.1 The Scope of Services constituting the Program will be performed, delivered or executed by CONSULTANT under the phases of the Basic Services as described below. 2.2 CITY may order substantial changes in the scope or character of the Basic Services, or the Program, either decreasing or increasing the amount of work required of CONSULTANT. In the event that such changes are ordered, subject to the approval of CITY’s City Council, as may be required, CONSULTANT will be entitled to full compensation for all work performed prior to CONSULTANT’s receipt of the notice of change and further will be entitled to an extension of the time schedule. Any increase in compensation for substantial changes will be determined in accordance with the provisions of this Contract. CITY will not be liable for the cost or payment of any change in work, unless the amount of additional compensation attributable to the change in work is agreed to, in writing, by CITY before CONSULTANT commences the performance of any such change in work. SECTION 3. QUALIFICATIONS, STATUS, AND DUTIES OF CONSULTANT 3.1 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has the expertise and professional qualifications to furnish or cause to be furnished the Services. CONSULTANT further represents and warrants that the program director and every individual, including any CONSULTANT, charged with the performance of the Services are duly licensed or certified by the State of California, to the extent such licensing or certification is required by law to perform the Services, and that the Program will be executed by them or under their supervision. 3.2 CONSULTANT shall establish and enforce adequate guidelines for the conduct of its agents, employees, and any subcontractors (Affiliate Centers) and for the participants in the Program. Selection of paid personnel who directly provide child care services for the Program shall be based upon criteria established by the CONSULTANT in consultation with the program manager, using as a minimum the standards for child care personnel contained in the general licensing requirements of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, as promulgated by the Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division. 3.3 If any agent or employee, subcontractor of CONSULTANT, or any agent or employee of its Affiliate Centers materially interferes with or inhibits the full performance of the services to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Contract, the program manager shall notify CONSULTANT of such interference. CONSULTANT shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of notice to achieve compliance with the Agreement or a resolution satisfactory to the program manager. In the event the problem is not satisfactorily resolved within thirty (30) days after the service of such notice, CONSULTANT, upon receipt of demand from the program manager, shall discontinue its affiliation with the its Affiliate Centers in connection with the CITY-funded portions of the Program, and the program manager may suspend or terminate the funds to CONSULTANT for that particular segment of the Program; provided, however, due regard shall be given to the need for Program recipients to locate alternate forms of care for their children. CITY shall pay a reasonable amount of services rendered by CONSULTANT for that particular segment of the Program for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days from the date of suspension or termination. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 3 3.4 In the event of CONSULTANT’S termination of a subcontractor or termination of an affiliation with its Affiliate Centers, CONSULTANT shall notify the program manager of such termination. 3.5 In reliance on the representations and warranties set forth in this Contract, CITY hires CONSULTANT to execute, and CONSULTANT covenants and agrees that it will execute or cause to be executed, the Program. 3.6 CONSULTANT will assign a single program director to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Program. The program director will represent CONSULTANT during the Program. If circumstances or conditions subsequent to the execution of this Contract cause the substitution of the program director, the CONSULTANT shall notify the program manager of such a change. 3.7 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it will: 3.7.1 Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incident to the due and lawful prosecution of the Program; 3.7.2 Keep itself fully informed of all existing and future Federal, State of California, and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Contract and any materials used in CONSULTANT'S performance of the Services; 3.7.3 At all times observe and comply with, and cause its employees and CONSULTANTS, if any, who are assigned to the performance of this Contract to observe and comply with, the laws, ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees mentioned above; and 3.7.4 Employ those consultants, “Affiliate Centers,” that are accredited and licensed child care centers, eligible accredited and licensed family child care homes and accredited child care centers that are legally exempt from licensure, Affiliate Centers not accredited will follow alternative quality measures as described in Exhibit B which are affiliated with CONSULTANT, in CONSULTANT’S sole discretion, and which receive child care subsidy funds from CONSULTANT under the Program defined in Exhibit “A”; and 3.7.5 Report immediately to the program manager, in writing, any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in the laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to the deliverables. 3.8 Any deliverables given to, or prepared or assembled by, CONSULTANT or its CONSULTANTS, if any, under this Contract will become the property of CITY and will not be made available to any individual or organization by CONSULTANT or its CONSULTANTS, if any, without the prior written approval of the city manager. 3.9 CONSULTANT will provide CITY with two (2) copies of any documents which are a part of the deliverables upon their completion and acceptance by CITY. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 4 3.10 If CITY requests additional copies of any documents which are a part of the - deliverables, CONSULTANT will provide such additional copies and CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for its duplicating costs. 3.11 CONSULTANT will be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to execute the Program. All consultants of CONSULTANT will be deemed to be directly controlled and supervised by CONSULTANT, which will be responsible for their performance. 3.12 In the execution of the Program, CONSULTANT and its consultants, if any, will at all times be considered independent contractors and not agents or employees of CITY. 3.13 CONSULTANT will perform or obtain or cause to be performed or obtained any and all of the following Additional Services, not included under the Basic Services, if so authorized, in writing, by CITY: 3.13.1 Providing services as an expert witness in connection with any public hearing or meeting, arbitration proceeding, or proceeding of a court of record; 3.13.2 Incurring travel and subsistence expenses for CONSULTANT and its staff beyond those normally required under the Basic Services; 3.13.3 Performing any other Additional Services that may be agreed upon by the parties subsequent to the execution of this Contract; and 3.13.4 Other Additional Services now or hereafter described in Exhibit “A” to this Contract. 3.14 CONSULTANT will be responsible for employing all CONSULTANTS deemed necessary to assist CONSULTANT in the performance of the Services. The appointment of CONSULTANTS must be approved, in advance, by CITY, in writing, and must remain acceptable to CITY during the term of this Contract. 3.15 CONSULTANT shall provide the Program according to the policies and operating principals set forth below: 3.15.1 Parents or guardians of children in the PROGRAM shall have the opportunity and be actively encouraged to choose the child care services that best meet their needs. 3.15.2 Inclusion of children in the Program with differing social, cultural, ethnic and economic backgrounds shall be actively encouraged. 3.15.3 CONSULTANT shall use its best efforts to serve the maximum number of children in all age categories under the Program. 3.15.4 Client payment of fees for services in the Program will be related to ability to pay, using as a guide CONSULTANT’s Family Fee Schedule included in this Contract as Attachment B-2 to Exhibit “B” hereof. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 5 3.15.5 General and income eligibility for participation in the Program as a recipient of child care subsidy funding shall be as set forth in Exhibit “B” hereof. 3.15.6 Payment for the program’s child care subsidy payments shall specify actual expenditures directly related to this Contract in accordance with Exhibit “B”. 3.15.7 CONSULTANT shall ensure that all CONSULTANT child care centers and all Affiliate Centers that receive any subsidy funds under the Program use such funds for secular purposes only. CONSULTANT shall further ensure that all such child care centers refrain from offering religious instruction, worship or other religious activities while providing child care services, in accordance with the provisions of the California and United States Constitutions. 3.16 CONSULTANT shall coordinate its services with other existing organizations providing similar services in order to foster community cooperation and to avoid unnecessary duplication of services. 3.17 CONSULTANT shall seek out and apply for other sources of revenue in support of its operation or services from county, state, federal and private sources. Unless deemed inappropriate by the Program Manager, City shall support CONSULTANT in its search of grants, funding, or other income by serving as a sponsoring agency, by providing letters of support, or by rendering advice on applications for grants. The receipt of such funds shall be reported as provided in paragraph 7.4 3.18 CONSULTANT shall include an acknowledgment of CITY funding and support in all appropriate publicity or publications regarding its programs and services using words to the effect that “services are provided in cooperation with the City of Palo Alto” or “through City of Palo Alto funding” as approved by the program manager. 3.19 Said sites and facilities at which the services of the Program are offered shall conform to all federal, state and local laws and regulations regulating the use of said sites and facilities for child care services. 3.20 Throughout the term of this contract, CONSULTANT shall remain an independent, nonprofit corporation under the laws of California governed solely by a Board of Directors, with up-to-date Bylaws. CONSULTANT shall operate by its Bylaws. Any changes in CONSULTANT’s Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, or tax-exempt status shall be reported by CONSULTANT immediately to the program manager. No member of the Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall be paid employee, agent, servant, or subcontractor of CONSULTANT under this contract during all or any part of his or her tenure as a member of the Board of Directors of CONSULTANT. 3.21 The Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall include representation from the broadest possible cross section of the community including: those with expertise and interest in CONSULTANT’S services, representatives from community organizations, and user of CONSULTANT’s services. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 6 3.22 All meetings of the Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall be open to the public, except meetings, or portions thereof, dealing with personnel, real estate transactions, or litigation matters. 3.23 CONSULTANT shall keep minutes of all regular and special meetings of its Board of Directors. SECTION 4. DUTIES OF CITY 4.1 CITY will furnish or cause to be furnished the services listed in Exhibit “A” and such information regarding its requirements applicable to the Program as may be reasonably requested by CONSULTANT. 4.2 The city manager will represent CITY for all purposes under this Contract. The Office of Human Services is designated as the program manager for the city manager. The program manager will supervise the performance, progress, and execution of the Program, and will be assisted by the Program Assistant II for the Office of Human Services. 4.3 In the event CITY should determine from any identifiable source, including but not limited to reports submitted by CONSULTANT under this contract or any evaluation report from any identifiable source, that there is a condition which requires correction, CITY may forward to CONSULTANT requests for corrective action. Such requests shall indicate the nature of the issue or issues which are to be reviewed to determine the need for corrective action and may include a recommendation as to appropriate corrective action. Within thirty (30) days of CITY’S request, CONSULTANT shall submit its response, which shall include its views of the problem and proposed action, if any. Upon request of either party, the parties shall meet to discuss any such request and response within the thirty-day period specified. SECTION 5. COMPENSATION 5.1 In consideration of the full performance of the Basic Services, including any authorized reimbursable expense, CITY will pay CONSULTANT a fee not to exceed Four Hundred Fifty-nine Thousand Eight Hundred Forty-one Dollars ($459,841.00) for the first contract year (fiscal year 2016) subject to approval of Section 17.12. 5.2 In consideration of the full performance of the Basic Services for the second through the fifth contract years (fiscal years), including any authorized reimbursable expenses; CITY will pay CONSULTANT a fee not to exceed Four Hundred Fifty-nine Thousand Eight Hundred Forty-one Dollars ($459,841.00). The actual amount of compensation for the second through the fifth years of this contract shall be approved by the city manager and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 17.12 of this contract. 5.3 On the billing form provided by CITY, CONSULTANT shall submit a bill by the fifteenth (15th) working day of the following month for services provided under this Contract during the preceding three months. The bill shall specify actual expenditures directly related to this Contract, in accordance with Exhibit “B”. The fees of the consultants, who have direct contractual relationships with CONSULTANT, will be approved, in advance, by CITY. CITY DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 7 reserves the right to refuse payment of such fees, if such prior approval is not obtained by CONSULTANT. 5.1.4 Notwithstanding the foregoing limitations, the City Manager shall have the authority to approve payments by the CITY to CONSULTANT under this contract in advance of CONSULTANT’s incurred expenditures. Provided, however, that CONSULTANT’s need for such advance payment shall be supported to the satisfaction of the CITY’s director of administrative services and total maximum compensation shall not exceed the total compensation under this Contract as set forth in paragraphs 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 hereof. 5.1.5 CONSULTANT shall ensure that the total cost of services, including user fees, billed by Affiliate Centers to CONSULTANT for participants in the Program shall not exceed the cost of similar services paid by full fee parents or users of the Affiliate Centers. 5.1.6 CONSULTANT shall not charge Program recipients any child care fees in excess of those fees set forth in Attachments B-2 of Exhibit “B” hereof. CITY’S payment under this Contract to CONSULTANT for services under the Program rendered by Palo Alto Community Child Care Centers or Affiliate Centers shall also not exceed the fees set forth in Attachments B-1 of Exhibit “B”, less the amount of any parent contribution paid when required by the Family Fee Schedule set forth in Attachment B-2 to Exhibit “B”. 5.1.7 All property donated to CONSULTANT shall be presumed donated to CONSULTANT, unless specified otherwise. 5.1.8 Upon termination of the Program, all equipment and other property purchased with CITY funds not directly on loan from CITY may be disposed of with prior approval of the CITY, by CONSULTANT to community nonprofit organizations providing children’s services. If any property purchased with CITY funds is not disposed of within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed three months, the property, or reasonable value therefore, shall be turned over by CONSULTANT to CITY immediately, and the same shall become the permanent property of CITY. 5.1.9 The full payment of charges for extra work or changes, or both, in the execution of the Program will be made, provided such request for payment is initiated by CONSULTANT and authorized, in writing, by the program manager. Payment will be made within thirty (30) days of submission by CONSULTANT of a statement, in triplicate, of itemized costs covering such work or changes, or both. Prior to commencing such extra work or changes, or both, the parties will agree upon an estimated maximum cost for such extra work or changes. CONSULTANT will not be paid for extra work or changes, including, without limitation, any design work or change order preparation, which is made necessary on account of CONSULTANT'S errors, omissions, or oversights. 5.1.10 Direct personnel expense of employees assigned to the execution of the Program by CONSULTANT will include only the work and other documents pertaining to the Program, and in services rendered, to the extent such services are expressly contemplated under this Contract. Included in the cost of direct personnel expense of these employees are salaries and mandatory and customary benefits such as statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays and vacations, pensions and similar benefits. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 8 5.2 Payment for the Program’s childcare subsidy payments shall specify actual expenditures directly related to this Contract in accordance with Exhibit “B”. Final payment will be made by CITY after CONSULTANT has submitted all deliverables, including, without limitation, reports which have been approved by the program manager. SECTION 6. PROGRAM RECORDS Upon reasonable notice, CONSULTANT shall grant the program manager access to all CONSULTANT records, data, statements, and reports, which pertain to this Program. CONSULTANT shall grant access to any confidential or clinical records of personnel and clients which tend to identify specific individuals to the CITY, for the sole purpose of program auditing processes. CONSULTANT shall secure appropriate personnel and client authorization forms from the appropriate sources necessary to allow the audit to occur. SECTION 7. ACCOUNTING, AUDITS, OWNERSHIP OF RECORDS 7.1 CONSULTANT shall appoint a fiscal agent who shall be responsible for the financial and accounting activities of CONSULTANT, including the receipt and disbursement of CONSULTANT funds. 7.2. CONSULTANT shall appoint from its Board a treasurer who shall review the Financial Statements of CONSULTANT on a regular basis. 7.3 Records of the direct personnel expenses and expenses incurred in connection with the performance of Basic Services and Additional Services pertaining to the Program will be prepared, maintained, and retained by CONSULTANT in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and will be made available to CITY for auditing purposes at mutually convenient times during the term of this Contract and for three (3) years following the expiration or earlier termination of this Contract. 7.4 CONSULTANT shall provide for independent audit of its fiscal year transactions, records, and financial reports at least every two (2) years. The certified public accountant shall submit the report to both parties. The cost of this audit shall be borne by CONSULTANT. 7.5 The originals of the deliverables, if any, prepared by or under the direction of CONSULTANT in the performance of this Contract will become the property of CITY irrespective of whether the Program is completed upon CITY's payment of the amounts required to be paid to CONSULTANT. These originals will be delivered to CITY without additional compensation. CITY will have the right to utilize any final and incomplete drawings, estimates, specifications, and any other documents prepared hereunder by CONSULTANT, but CONSULTANT disclaims any responsibility or liability for any alterations or modifications of such documents. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 9 SECTION 8. INDEMNITY 8.1 CONSULTANT agrees to protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents, from any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, caused by or arising out of CONSULTANT's, its officers', agents', CONSULTANTS' or employees' negligent acts, errors, or omissions, or willful misconduct, or conduct for which applicable law may impose strict liability on CONSULTANT in the performance of or failure to perform its obligations under this Contract, and the provision of child care services by CONSULTANT, its employees, agents, or subcontractors, or by the CONSULTANT affiliate centers, whether or not such services are paid for with administration or subsidy funds under this contract. SECTION 9. WAIVERS 9.1 The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Contract or of the provisions of any ordinance or law will not be deemed to be a waiver of any such covenant, term, condition, provision, ordinance, or law or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other covenant, term, condition, provision, ordinance or law. The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee or other money which may become due hereunder will not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the other party of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Contract or of any applicable law or ordinance. 9.2 No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Contract. SECTION 10. INSURANCE 10.1 CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Contract, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "C", insuring not only CONSULTANT and its CONSULTANTS, if any, but also, with the exception of workers' compensation, employer's liability and professional liability insurance, naming CITY as an additional insured concerning CONSULTANT’s performance under this Contract. 10.2 All insurance coverage required hereunder will be provided through carriers with Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A:VII or higher which are admitted to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all CONSULTANTS of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Contract will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Contract, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above, whether or not such services are paid for with administration or subsidy funds under this Contract. CONSULTANT shall also be responsible to ensure that all CONSULTANT Affiliate Centers and any subcontractors obtain and maintain in full force and effect throughout the entire term of this contract. 10.3 Certificates of such insurance, preferably on the forms provided by CITY, will be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Contract. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s risk manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 10 primary coverage and will not be canceled or altered by the insurer except after filing with the CITY’s city clerk thirty (30) days prior written notice of such cancellation or alteration, and that the City of Palo Alto is named as an additional insured except in policies of workers' compensation, employer's liability, and professional liability insurance. Current certificates of such insurance will be kept on file at all times during the term of this Contract with the city clerk. 10.4 The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Contract. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Contract, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Contract is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 11. WORKERS' COMPENSATION 11.1 CONSULTANT, by executing this Contract, certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and certifies that it will comply with such provisions, as applicable, before commencing the performance of the Program. SECTION 12 - TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF CONTRACT OR PROGRAM 12.1 The city manager may suspend the execution of the Program, in whole or in part, or terminate this Contract, with or without cause, by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT, or immediately after submission to CITY by CONSULTANT of any completed item of Basic Services. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance under this Contract. 12.2 CONSULTANT may terminate this Contract or suspend its execution of the Program by giving thirty (30) days' prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY or in the event CITY indefinitely withholds or withdraws its request for the initiation or continuation of Basic Services or the execution of the Program. 12.3 Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be compensated for the Basic Services and Additional Services performed and deliverables received and approved prior to receipt of written notice from CITY of such suspension or abandonment, together with authorized additional and reimbursable expenses then due. If the Program is resumed after it has been suspended for more than 180 days, any change in CONSULTANT's compensation will be subject to renegotiation and, if necessary, approval of CITY’s City Council. If this Contract is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT's services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY, as such determination may be made by the city manager in the reasonable exercise of her discretion. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 11 12.4 In the event of termination of this Contract by the CITY, CONSULTANT shall forthwith close CITY-funded portions of the Program; provided, however, due regard shall be given to the need for Program recipients to locate alternate forms of care for their children. CITY shall pay a reasonable amount for services rendered by CONSULTANT while closing CITY-funded portions of the Program for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days from the date of any termination. 12.4.1 For approved items of services, CONSULTANT will be compensated for each item of service fully performed in the amounts authorized under this Contract. 12.4.2 For approved items of services on which a notice to proceed is issued by CITY, but which are not fully performed, CONSULTANT will be compensated for each item of service in an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fee otherwise payable for the performance of the service as the quantum of service actually rendered bears to the services necessary for the full performance of that item of service. 12.4.3 The total compensation payable under the preceding paragraphs of this Section will not exceed the payment specified under Section 5 for the respective items of service to be furnished by CONSULTANT. 12.5 Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will deliver to the city manager immediately any and all copies of the deliverables, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its CONSULTANTS, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its CONSULTANTS, if any, in connection with this Contract. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 12.6 The failure of CITY to agree with CONSULTANT's independent findings, conclusions, or recommendations, if the same are called for under this Contract, on the basis of differences in matters of judgment, will not be construed as a failure on the part of CONSULTANT to fulfill its obligations under this Contract. SECTION 13. ASSIGNMENT 13.1 This Contract is for the personal services of CONSULTANT, therefore, CONSULTANT will not assign, transfer, convey, or otherwise dispose of this Contract or any right, title or interest in or to the same or any part thereof without the prior written consent of CITY. A consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be a consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of CITY will be void and, at the option of the city manager, this Contract may be terminated. This Contract will not be assignable by operation of law. SECTION 14. NOTICES 14.1 All notices hereunder will be given, in writing, and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 12 To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: Office of Human Services Manager City of Palo Alto 4000 Middlefield Road, T-2 Palo Alto, CA 94303 To CONSULTANT: Attention of the program director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 15. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 15.1 In accepting this Contract, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 15.2 CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Contract, it will not employ contractors or persons who are officials, officers or employees of CITY having such an interest mentioned above without divulgence of such fact to CITY. CONSULTANT certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest under this Contract is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. SECTION 16. NONDISCRIMINATION 16.1 As set forth in the Palo Alto Municipal Code, no discrimination will be made in the employment of persons under this Contract because of the age, race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, disability, sexual preference or gender of such person. If the value of this Contract is, or may be, five thousand dollars ($5,000) or more, CONSULTANT agrees to meet all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. 16.2 CONSULTANT agrees that each contract for services from independent providers will contain a provision substantially as follows: PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE, INC. will provide CONSULTANT with a certificate stating that Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. is currently in compliance with all Federal and State of California laws covering nondiscrimination in employment; and that Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. will not discriminate in the employment of any person under this contract because of the age, race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, disability, sexual preference or gender of such person." DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 13 16.3 If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Act or similar provisions of Federal law or executive order in the performance of this Contract, it will be in default of this Contract. Thereupon, CITY will have the power to cancel or suspend this Contract, in whole or in part, or to deduct the sum of twenty-five dollars ($25) for each person for each calendar day during which such person was subjected to discrimination, as damages for breach of contract, or both. Only a finding of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Commission or the equivalent federal agency or officer will constitute evidence of a breach of this Contract. SECTION 17. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 17.1 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has knowledge of the require- ments of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Government Code and the Health and Safety Code of the State of California, relating to access to public buildings and accommodations for disabled persons, and relating to facilities for disabled persons. CONSULTANT will comply with or ensure by its advice that compliance with such provisions will be effected pursuant to the terms of this Contract. 17.2 Upon the agreement of the parties, any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Contract may be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrators may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 17.3 This Contract will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law. 17.4 In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 17.5 The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the terms of this Contract or arising out of this Contract may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees expended in connection with that action. 17.6 This document represents the entire and integrated Contract between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 17.7 All provisions of this Contract, whether covenants or conditions, will be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. 17.8 The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Contract will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and CONSULTANTS, as the case may be, of the parties. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 14 17.9 If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Contract or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Contract and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 17.10 All exhibits referred to in this Contract and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Contract and will be deemed to be a part of this Contract. 17.11 This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 17.12 This Contract is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Contract will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Contract are no longer available. This Section 17.12 will take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Contract. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Contract on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: __________________________ Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: _____________________________ Manager Office of Human Services CITY OF PALO ALTO _________________________ City Manager PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE, INC. By:___________________________ Name: Janice Shaul Title: Executive Director Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES & TIME SCHEDULE EXHIBIT "B": SUBSIDY PROGRAM SPECIFICATIONS ATTACHMENT “B-1” CONTRACT BUDGET ATTACHMENT “B-2” FAMILY FEE SCHEDULE EXHIBIT "C": INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 16 EXHIBIT “A” PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE (PACCC) Child Care Subsidy Program FY 2016 - 2020 SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES MISSION: To provide low-income families with subsidies to acquire quality child care services. These childcare services will enable parents to work or attend school and provide for their families, as well as to support their children’s developmental needs. I PROGRAM SERVICES CONSULTANT shall administer, in a cost-effective manner, a child care subsidy program (the “Program”) for low-income families as described in the Subsidy Program Specifications set forth in Exhibit B to this Agreement. Approximately thirty five (35) children of low- income families shall be provided subsidized childcare through the Program at PACCC childcare centers and at PACCC Affiliate Centers (as defined in this Agreement). Subsidized child care services shall be provided during those time periods when both parents or legal guardians are employed, seeking employment, students, incapable of providing care due to disability, or when the child is referred to the Program by the Child Protective Services (CPS) Division of the California Department of Social Services. School age childcare subsidy funds will only be made available to students enrolled in Kindergarten through the summer after completion of grade five. II SUBSIDY PROGRAM GOALS Goal #1: Maximize the number of children and families served by City of Palo Alto Subsidy program. OBJECTIVE: Leverage multiple funding sources to allow City of Palo Alto funding to serve the most children possible. METHODS: During annual family recertification and data collection, identify families who are eligible for combined City and State funding. Continue to seek and secure fund development opportunities that enhance the total available direct services funding for child care subsidies in order to augment and support City and State programs. Investigate alternative child care arrangements to refer eligible families on the eligibility list. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 17 Goal #2: Collaborate with other service agencies to serve the unique needs of low-income families OBJECTIVE: Increase the number of collaborations with agencies that provide services for the special needs of the population served by the City subsidy program. METHODS: Enhance collaborations with Palo Alto Housing Corporation, PAUSD Seek out other collaborative relationships with other agencies such as those that have food support. Goal #3: Establish and maintain a Parent Advisory Committee (PAC). OBJECTIVE: Create a Parent Advisory Committee (PAC) to provide funded families an opportunity to advise PACCC on issues related to the services they receive. METHODS: PAC will meet twice per year. All funded families will be invited to participate. PAC meeting content will include policy and program requirements; support offered by PACCC’s financial aid coordinator; communication avenues; program service feedback. Goal #4: Create and maintain a program family handbook. OBJECTIVE: Create a family handbook specific to the requirements of the City and State funded programs to allow complete transparency of program requirements, parent’s roles and responsibilities. METHODS: Using the requirements of the City and State funded programs, as well as PACCC’s policies, the family handbook will be finalized by December 2015. To ensure program policies and requirements are accurately reflected, review of the handbook will occur annually. GENERAL PROGRAM GOALS, OBJECTIVES, METHODS & PROCEDURES 1) Comply with state Program Specifications and PACCC Operating Procedures DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 18 with regard to the administration and management of subsidy funding, including verification of family and child eligibility, need, residency, and attendance; completion of annual re-certifications for enrolled families; and maintenance of Contracts for Services that appropriately reflect changes in the above. 2) Collect, track, and compile data sufficient to provide annual financial reports, including all agency revenue and expenditures as required under City of Palo Alto contract. 3) Coordinate with the Office of Human Services to conduct an annual program evaluation. 4) Maintains a ranked Eligibility List for participation in the program, with enrollment priority based upon income level, initially using established priorities as detailed in the Program specifications of the contract. 5) Eligibility list will be reviewed and ranked each time a new family is added. 6) Conduct detailed Eligibility List analysis to identify trends in community need and groups of applicants with the longest waiting periods. 7) Regularly survey local child care professionals to ascertain topics of interest for workshops and hire trainers to present workshops that meet those interests in collaboration with PACCC’s ongoing in-service training. 8) Maintain updated CPA Family Resources Kiosks; acquire and use new Kiosks where appropriate.as provided by the City 9) Provide referrals to local community service agencies and programs that offer resources that PACCC cannot for low income families. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF CITY FUNDING: PACCC shall include an acknowledgement of City funding and support in all appropriate publicity or publications regarding the PROGRAM, using words to the effect that “subsidized child care services are provided through City of Palo Alto funding,” or as otherwise approved by the Project Manager. REPORTS: Contractor shall provide activity reports relating to this Scope of Program Services for the periods ending September 30, 2015, December 31, 2015, March 31, 2016, June 30, 2016, September 30, 2016 December 31, 2016, March 31, 2017, June 30, 2017, September 30, 2017, December 31, 2017, March 31, 2018, June 30, 2018, September 30, 2018, December 31, 2018, March 31, 2019, and June 30, 2019, September 30, 2019, DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 19 December 31, 2019, March 31, 2020, and June 30, 2020 within fifteen days after these dates. Each report shall cover the preceding period and other such information as the Project Manager may request. The final report shall focus on the final four months, but also shall provide information on contract services for the entire term. Each report shall be prepared in the form agreed upon by the Project Manager and the Contractor AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: Contractor shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 20 EXHIBIT “B” PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE (PACCC) Child Care Subsidy Program FY 2016 - 2020 SUBSIDY PROGRAM SPECIFICATIONS SERVICES: PACCC shall centrally administer and manage City funds to provide child care subsidies for families with low income and very low incomes, who are eligible, based on and in accordance with the City-approved FY2016 Contract Budget attached hereto as "Attachment B-1" and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Program"). The approval of at least two (2) members of PACCC management for the granting of childcare subsidy under the Program must be obtained for each recipient. The PACCC Subsidy Coordinator shall maintain a centralized waiting list for the Program in the PACCC administrative office. Subsidized childcare under the Program may be provided at PACCC childcare centers and PACCC Affiliate centers. Fees charged at PACCC childcare centers shall be as set forth in the Family Fee Schedule, "Attachment B-2" to this Exhibit “B”, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Subsidized child care services shall be provided during those time periods when both parents or legal guardians are employed, seeking employment, students, incapable of providing care due to disability, or when the child is referred to the Program by the Child Protective Services (CPS) Division of the California Department of Social Services. General Eligibility for Use of Program Subsidy Funds: Only the following children are eligible for City subsidized childcare services: a) Children whose parent or legal guardian is a resident of the City of Palo Alto b) Children whose parent or legal guardian is employed by the City of Palo Alto c) Children attending the Palo Alto Unified School District ("PAUSD") through the Voluntary Transfer Program pursuant to the Tinsley Settlement Order in San Mateo County, Superior Court Case No. 206010 (the "Tinsley Agreement") d) Homeless children referred in writing by a local social service agency or shelter School age childcare subsidy funds will only be made available to students enrolled in Kindergarten through the summer after the completion of grade five. Documentation of Residency Requirement for City Subsidy Eligibility: Verification of general eligibility for child care subsidy under the Program must include one or more of the following as applicable: a) Utility bill from past month establishing Palo Alto residence b) City of Palo Alto pay stub establishing employment by the City DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 21 c) Documentation of Tinsley Agreement participation by establishing attendance at PAUSD under the program d) Documentation from a local emergency shelter or agency serving victims of domestic violence accompanied by verification of residency in Palo Alto within the past year e) Documentation of homeless status by a local social service agency or shelter. Verification of Income Eligibility for City Subsidy: Verification of income eligibility for childcare subsidy under the Program must include one or more of the following documents establishing gross monthly income level of recipient family: a) Copies of two (2) latest wage stubs b) Unemployment Insurance Benefit (UIB) award letter c) Federal tax filing information for last two (2) years if self-employed d) Notice of Action (NOA) letter from social service agency if receiving public assistance e) Registration verification from school or training program signed by appropriate school personnel Adjusted Gross Monthly Income for Families with Severe Disabilities: Families that have a member with a severe disability requiring non-reimbursable medical expenses are eligible for a subsidized rate that takes into account these expenses. A severe disability is defined as those conditions, which are catastrophic (violent or sudden in nature with extreme consequences), long-term (occurring or involving a long period of time of hardship and suffering), or terminal (leading ultimately to death). The following documentation is required: a) A written letter from a medical physician detailing the nature of and severity of the disability and; b) Formal documentation substantiating that the expenses are directly related to the disability (a verifiable statement of non-reimbursable medical expenses). For families that qualify under these guidelines, the medical expenses directly related to the stated disability will be deducted from the gross monthly income as calculated in accordance with the FY2016 Family Fee Schedule. Families will be given credit for their medical expenses and their hourly contribution will be reduced by ten stepson the FY2016 Family Fee Schedule. Families that qualify for an adjusted parent hourly contribution based on disability related expenses may earn up to 100% of the Santa Clara County median income but must meet all other requirements related to initial eligibility and continued eligibility based on semi-annual re-certifications. Parents in Training: Students must be attending school or working toward a recognized vocational goal as documented on forms signed by the Registrar. When appropriate, documentation of a passing grade will be DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 22 required during the recertification process in order to document satisfactory progress. Parents Seeking Employment: Parents are eligible for ninety (90) working days of childcare per fiscal year to seek employment if their employment or training period ends. Documentation and verification of job search and interviews will be required during recertification. Parents Employed by Temporary Work Agency: Parents employed by a temporary work agency (temp) are eligible for childcare subsidy. The parent will be required to submit the following documentation verifying that he or she is employed by the agency and accepting assignments as they are offered: a) An offer letter from the agency that states the hours the employee has requested work (e.g. part-time, 8:30am to 12:30pm) and the range of pay; b) A record of when the parent was offered an assignment, if it was accepted, the length of the assignment, the hours worked, and the rate of pay. The parent must submit the record to the Subsidy Coordinator at the end of each month, along with pay stubs of wages earned for the month; c) The parent must sign a Release of Information form to have on file with the temp agency and the Subsidy Coordinator. The Subsidy Coordinator will contact the temp agency at the end of each month to verify the record of assignments submitted by the parent. If the Subsidy Coordinator determines that the parent is not accepting assignments on a consistent basis, the parent’s need for childcare will be reassessed, and may result in termination of the childcare subsidy. Teenage Parents: Teenage parents are eligible to receive subsidized childcare services. The parent may be referred to the program by PAUSD as needing subsidized childcare in order to remain in school. During the summer months, the parent must be enrolled in summer school or employed in order to continue to receive subsidized childcare services. If the parent is not enrolled in school or employed during the summer months, he or she will be required to participate in the childcare program for a minimum of 15 hours per week. The goal of this requirement is to assist the parent with parenting skills in a supportive environment. Priority for City-Subsidized Child Care Services: Priority shall be granted to families with the lowest gross monthly income in relation to family size as determined by the FY2016 Family Fee Schedule. Eligible children who are referred to the City Subsidy Program though Child Protective Services (CPS). PACCC shall maintain written documentation of such referrals. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 23 When applications are received from families with the same income, the priority list is as follows: 1) Recipients of child protective services (CPS) for children who are neglected or abused, or at risk of being neglected or abused, upon written referral from a legal, medical, or social service agency; or children who are victims of domestic violence who are referred in writing by a local social service agency or shelter; 2) Children designated as At-Risk of failure in Kindergarten by the PAUSD; 3) Children residing in a single-parent household; 4) Families which are homeless or at risk of homelessness; residing in a transitional housing program or emergency shelter, upon written referral from a local social service agency; 5) Currently enrolled PACCC families transitioning from another subsidy program due to changes in income, family size, need for care, or residency and siblings of currently subsidized PACCC children. Certification and Re-Certification: Each family receiving City subsidy must be required to re-certify to PACCC once annually to verify continued compliance with all of the eligibility criteria for the Program (general and income eligibility). PACCC shall once annually review the City subsidy recipients' files to ensure that the required updates of information have been provided. Change of Status Notification: Subsidy recipients under the Program shall be advised that, should their eligibility circumstances change (e.g. change of income, employment, and residence) the clients must report that change within ten (10) days to the PACCC Subsidy Coordinator. Transitional Child Care: When parents no longer qualify for a child care subsidy because their income exceeds eligibility limits, parents will continue to receive approximately three (3) months of transitional child care at the subsidized rate. Use of City Funds With Regard to Attendance: Families enrolled in the Program agree to use specific hours of care on specific days. Children must be signed in and out each day on an attendance sheet, which is kept by the PACCC Center or the Affiliate Center to verify actual use. The City will not reimburse for hours used outside the agreed- upon contract hours. Consistent attendance is a condition of receiving subsidized childcare. If it is determined that a child is excessively absent, the Subsidy Coordinator will limit the child to twelve (12) best interest days per fiscal year and/or reassess the family’s need for subsidized child care. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 24 Absences considered best interest days include a parent’s day off, parent’s vacation, school vacation, or a child’s visit with family members. Parents are required to record the reason for an absence on the attendance sheet. Children are allowed a maximum of ten (10) consecutive days of excused absence per month. Excused absences include illness of the child, illness of the parent, or a family emergency. A child who has a long-term incapacitation may be exempt from this policy. In this instance, written verification from a physician as to the nature of the incapacitation will be required. Children who receive child care subsidies under the Program who are absent for more than one (1) week consecutively without prior notification and documentation (excused absence forms) will be dropped from the program and must reapply for admittance. Reinstatement of the childcare subsidy will be determined by the PACCC Executive Director and the Subsidy Coordinator. Excuse forms may include an excuse slip signed by the parent, guardian, or appropriate doctor. Attendance and City-Subsidy Administration Policies and Procedures: PACCC shall design and implement the use of standard forms to record and summarize the children's attendance at all PACCC facilities and PACCC affiliate childcare centers. PACCC administrative personnel shall periodically review the forms and record keeping of attendance for propriety and completeness. Program administration policies and procedures shall also periodically be updated and enforced, consistent with the requirements of this Agreement. Guidelines for Affiliate Agency Use of City Subsidy Funds: PACCC shall ensure that the requirements described herein shall apply to all affiliate agencies that receive City funds administered through PACCC. PACCC shall oversee and monitor all of its affiliate contracts to ensure that compliance with this contract is maintained. Accreditation Requirement for All Child Care Program Receiving City Subsidy Program Funds: All PACCC and PACCC affiliates participating in the Program must be nationally accredited or actively pursuing accreditation through the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), the National After School Association (NAA), or the National Association of Family Child Care (NAFCC). Programs that are not accredited must sign a Letter of Intent that indicates the childcare programs plan to complete the accreditation process within two (2) years or submit annually: An observation and action plan using the published Environment Rating Scales (ERS) appropriate for the age group and center type. The ERS must be done with the participation of a third party observer who has experience using the ERS and who works in the early childhood field; and Results of an annual family survey. Family Fee Schedule: The Family Fee Schedule may be adapted to reflect modifications in the low-income guidelines as defined by the federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Authority Community. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 25 Case Review: Each family receiving City Subsidy funds shall have a case review after eight years in the Program. The PACCC Executive Director, Site Director, and Subsidy Coordinator, together with the City's Child and Family Services Manager, will review the case to determine whether the subsidy funds should continue beyond the eighth year. PACCC’s Subsidy Coordinator may make exceptions to compliance with the Program’s written policies and procedures with written authorization from the City's Child and Family Services Manager. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 Attachment "B-1" PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD CARE, INC. Child Care Subsidy Program FY 2015-16 CONTRACT BUDGET Program (s) Expenses FY 15/16 Contract Budget Salaries 79,327.94$ Program Operating Expenses Insurance 353.76$ Audit 160.80$ Rent Utilities 214.40$ Phone 214.40$ Postage 107.20$ Office Supplies 107.20$ Travel Staff Development/Training Computer Hardware/Software Equipment Maintenance/Repair 107.20$ Books/Publications Printing/Publishing 214.40$ Capital Expenses Other - Direct Subsidies 379,033.70$ TOTAL 459,841.00$ DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 ATTACHMENT B-2 (Table for reference during review - updated table to be on the final for FY15-16) 2013-14 Family Fee Schedule City of Palo Alto Child Care Subsidy Program Hourly Percentage based on Hourly Fee at $4.86 for Median Income (MI) Income % MI 1-2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Fee Level 33% $2,321 $2,611 $2,901 $3,133 $3,366 $3,598 $3,830 0.30$ 6% 34% $2,391 $2,690 $2,989 $3,228 $3,468 $3,707 $3,946 0.34$ 7% 35% $2,462 $2,769 $3,077 $3,323 $3,570 $3,816 $4,062 0.38$ 8% 36% $2,532 $2,849 $3,165 $3,418 $3,672 $3,925 $4,178 0.44$ 9% 37% $2,602 $2,928 $3,253 $3,513 $3,774 $4,034 $4,294 0.49$ 10% 38% $2,673 $3,007 $3,341 $3,608 $3,876 $4,143 $4,410 0.54$ 11% 39% $2,743 $3,086 $3,429 $3,703 $3,978 $4,252 $4,526 0.56$ 12% 40% $2,813 $3,165 $3,517 $3,798 $4,079 $4,361 $4,642 0.62$ 13% 41% $2,884 $3,244 $3,605 $3,893 $4,181 $4,470 $4,758 0.64$ 13% 42% $2,954 $3,323 $3,693 $3,988 $4,283 $4,579 $4,874 0.68$ 14% 43% $3,024 $3,403 $3,781 $4,083 $4,385 $4,688 $4,990 0.74$ 15% 44% $3,095 $3,482 $3,868 $4,178 $4,487 $4,797 $5,106 0.80$ 16% 45% $3,165 $3,561 $3,956 $4,273 $4,589 $4,906 $5,222 0.83$ 17% 46% $3,235 $3,640 $4,044 $4,368 $4,691 $5,015 $5,339 0.86$ 18% 47% $3,306 $3,719 $4,132 $4,463 $4,793 $5,124 $5,455 0.92$ 19% 48% $3,376 $3,798 $4,220 $4,558 $4,895 $5,233 $5,571 1.01$ 21% 49% $3,446 $3,877 $4,308 $4,653 $4,997 $5,342 $5,687 1.19$ 24% 50% $3,517 $3,956 $4,396 $4,748 $5,099 $5,451 $5,803 1.24$ 26% 50%MI-EL 51% $3,587 $4,036 $4,484 $4,843 $5,201 $5,560 $5,919 1.28$ 26% 52% $3,657 $4,115 $4,572 $4,938 $5,303 $5,669 $6,035 1.37$ 28% 53% $3,728 $4,194 $4,660 $5,033 $5,405 $5,778 $6,151 1.46$ 30% 54% $3,798 $4,273 $4,748 $5,127 $5,507 $5,887 $6,267 1.51$ 31% 55% $3,868 $4,352 $4,836 $5,222 $5,609 $5,996 $6,383 1.55$ 32% 56% $3,939 $4,431 $4,924 $5,317 $5,711 $6,105 $6,499 1.64$ 34% 57% $4,009 $4,510 $5,011 $5,412 $5,813 $6,214 $6,615 1.73$ 36% 58% $4,079 $4,589 $5,099 $5,507 $5,915 $6,323 $6,731 1.78$ 37% 59% $4,150 $4,669 $5,187 $5,602 $6,017 $6,432 $6,847 1.82$ 37% 60% $4,220 $4,748 $5,275 $5,697 $6,119 $6,541 $7,427 1.91$ 39% 61% $4,290 $4,827 $5,363 $5,792 $6,221 $6,650 $7,079 2.00$ 41% 62% $4,361 $4,906 $5,451 $5,887 $6,323 $6,759 $7,195 2.09$ 43% 63% $4,431 $4,985 $5,539 $5,982 $6,425 $6,868 $7,311 2.14$ 44% 64% $4,502 $5,064 $5,627 $6,077 $6,527 $6,977 $7,427 2.18$ 45% 65% $4,572 $5,143 $5,715 $6,172 $6,629 $7,086 $7,544 2.27$ 47% 65%-UL 70% $4,924 $5,539 $6,154 $6,647 $7,139 $7,631 $8,124 2.54$ 52% 75% $5,275 $5,935 $6,594 $7,122 $7,649 $8,177 $8,704 2.77$ 57% 80% $5,627 $6,330 $7,034 $7,596 $8,159 $8,722 $9,284 2.99$ 62% 85% $5,979 $6,726 $7,473 $8,071 $8,669 $9,267 $9,865 3.22$ 66% 90% $6,330 $7,122 $7,913 $8,546 $9,179 $9,812 $10,445 3.44$ 71% 95% $6,682 $7,517 $8,352 $9,021 $9,689 $10,357 $11,025 3.67$ 76% 100% $7,034 $7,913 $8,792 $9,495 $10,199 $10,902 $11,605 4.86$ 100% 80% of MI 90% of MI 100%MI 108% of MI 116% of MI 124% of MI 132% of MI MI = Median Income for families of different sizes EL = Entry Level - Level of Income at which a family may qualify to receive CPA Subsidy UL = Upper Limit- Level of Income at which a family must begin transitioning out of CPA Subsidy XL = Extremely Low Income according to HUD effective 2/25/13 (Based on State Income Limits reflecting the New Hold Harmless Policy) https://ca-losgatos.civicplus.com/documents/8/12/203/2013A-%20INCOME%20LIMITS%20-%20hold%20harmless_201303281755410659.pdf http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/rep/state/inc2k13.pdf FAMILY SIZE MI for a family of 4 - based on HUD Income Limit for 2013 - effective 2/25/13 US Dept of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Income Limits - Santa Clara County Jurisdictions FY 2013 - DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 28 EXHIBIT C INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 NO PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 150807 dm 0073617 29 III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 EMAIL: InsuranceCerts@CityofPaloAlto.org DocuSign Envelope ID: 22569E79-56A1-4A92-B393-B4C020A388A8 Special Meeting May 12, 2014 10. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Council on Moving Agreements with Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care out of the Human Services Resource Allocation Process. Minka van Der Zwaag, Community Services Senior Programs Manager, reviewed the Finance Committee's actions and the Human Relations Commission's (HRC) recommendations. The Council referred removal of Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) from the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) to the Policy and Services Committee. PACCC and Avenidas had long relationships with the City. Before the HRC, representatives of PACCC and Avenidas articulated their wish to be removed from HSRAP. The HRC was concerned that removal of PACCC and Avenidas along with their funding would jeopardize future funding for smaller agencies. In addition, other long- time funding recipients would request direct contracts with the City. The HRC attempted to draft a compromise that addressed the concerns of the Council, PACCC, and Avenidas while retaining PACCC and Avenidas within HSRAP. The Policy and Services Committee (Committee) recommended the Council direct Staff to separate funding contracts with Avenidas and PACCC from HSRAP and to contract directly with them. Council Member Price reported the Committee had a split vote on the item with one Member absent. All Members present agreed that senior and youth services were a critical part of services. MOTION: Council Member Price moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to direct Staff to separate the funding contracts with Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) from the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) and to contract directly with them. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL EXCERPT OF FINAL MINUTES Council Member Klein indicated the Council should recognize that PACCC and Avenidas were different from other agencies. PACCC and Avenidas provided services that in other cities were provided directly by the city. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to keep Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) in the Human Services Resource Allocation Process. Council Member Holman explained that Avenidas and PACCC were recognized as different from other agencies in that they submitted a Request for Proposal (RFP) every six years. She referenced Human Relations Commissioner Bacchetti's remarks regarding competition for budget increases. Council Member Schmid remarked that the City had a limited Budget for human services. The Council identified a Commission to review and recommend funding for HSRAP to allow the Council to consider additional funding for human services. Council Member Scharff requested Ms. O'Nan comment on the HRC's recommendation. Jill O’Nan, Human Relations Commission Chair, believed all agencies would benefit from Avenidas and PACCC remaining within HSRAP to work through funding issues. The HRC did not intend to foster agency competition for funding. It was difficult for the HRC to address new and emerging needs without reducing agency funding. The HRC recommendation attempted to protect Avenidas and PACCC. Council Member Scharff felt the HRC recommendation met PACCC's and Avenidas' concerns. The Council should honor the HRC's work. INCORPORATED INTO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add the HRC recommendations identified on Packet Page 274: 1) Avenidas and PACCC will be assured that their HSRAP funding will not be cut in order to fund reallocations to other HSRAP grantees; 2) when the Council determines annual adjustments to reflect the increased costs of doing business in the nonprofit sector, Avenidas and PACCC will be assured their proportional shares; 3) when the Council makes an incremental allocation over and above any annual adjustment, the HRC will recommend redistribution of those funds according to its assessment of human service needs at that time. Incremental allocations will be recommended according to a review covering all HSRAP recipients (including Avenidas and PACCC) and new applicants; and 4) in the case of budget reductions set by the Council and staff, Avenidas and PACCC will bear their proportional share, but no more, in the HRC’S recommendations. Mayor Shepherd expressed concern that PACCC and Avenidas had no commonality with smaller agencies. The Council should allow PACCC and Avenidas to withdraw from HSRAP. SUBSTITUTE MOTION AS AMENDED FAILED: 3-6 Holman, Scharff, Schmid yes James Keene, City Manager, reported Staff may need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for services provided by PACCC and Avenidas to allow the City to contract directly with PACCC and Avenidas. MOTION PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Schmid no City of Palo Alto (ID # 5978) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Avenidas, Inc. 5 year Contract Title: Approval of a Five-Year Contract No. C16159539 With Avenidas, Inc. for Provision of Comprehensive Services to Older Adults in the Amount of $453,897 Per Fiscal Year From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract (Attachment A: Avenidas, Inc. (“Avenidas”) Contract 2015-2020) in the amount of $453,897 annually with Avenidas. for a five-year term (July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2020) for the provision of comprehensive services to older adults, their families and caregivers in Palo Alto. Executive Summary The scope of services in this contract covers the provision of comprehensive services to older adults in the community including information & referral services, case management, counseling, support groups, classes and workshops for older adults that assist with mental and physical health and well-being, socialization and lifelong learning, transportation, provision of routine health maintenance screening and immunizations, volunteer opportunities, provision of services that assist older adults in being able to live safely and independently as a long as possible in their own homes, and establishing partnerships with other local organizations to provide additional critical services for seniors that contractor does not provide. Avenidas is the only provider of comprehensive services to older adults in the community with the sufficient agency capacity and experience to perform the services requested, justifying award as a sole source contract and exempt from solicitation. A solicitation would be impractical at this time where any resulting award to other than the incumbent (Avenidas) would cause substantial financial loss and risk substantial delay/disruption and potential inferior results to delivering a public service. Ref. PAMC 2.30.360(b)(2). City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background To understand the relationship between the City and Avenidas, one must understand the history of the provision of senior services in Palo Alto. Avenidas’ (previously the Senior Coordinating Council) relationship with the City covers a forty-plus year period. Several significant events and changes occurred during this time period: The City established its own Senior Adult Services in 1971, based on a study of Palo Alto senior residents completed by the Senior Coordinating Council (SCC), and witnessed an expansion of those services over the next few years. The City funded the SCC administration, Senior Day Health program and Home Repair Service prior to the establishment of the Senior Center of Palo Alto, while concurrently funding its own Senior Adult Services. After lengthy discussions over time, the City agreed to offer the Old Police/Fire Station building to the SCC at a nominal yearly fee, provided the SCC raised the necessary funds ($1.2 million) to renovate the facility. Implicit in this agreement was a commitment to help the SCC with operating funds for the Senior Center as well as continuing support for its other programs. In 1978, the City transferred its Senior Adult Services to the SCC and first provided funds for the operation of the Senior Center. The City and the SCC agreed that the SCC would always make substantial efforts to secure community support and other non-city public funds. That objective remained part of the SCC’s contract Scope of Services. The Senior Coordinating Council changed its name to Avenidas in 1996. Avenidas continues to lease the Senior Center facility on Bryant Street in Palo Alto for $1/year. Current lease expires in 2027. Avenidas is responsible for all of the maintenance and upkeep, the City maintains the roof and exterior. On June 23, 2014, Avenidas approached the City requesting a second fifty year (50) lease to replace the current lease based on plans to undertake a major rehabilitation and modernization of the interior of the building in order to meet the growing needs of the City’s seniors and to continue its many services. The purpose of the extension was twofold: 1) It allows Avenidas the foundation to begin credible fund raising efforts for an estimated $12 million to undertake a major and comprehensive rehabilitation and modernization of the building at 450 Bryant Street; 2) the new lease will serve to assure that Avenidas will continue its services at the present location for many years to come. The new lease was approved. Avenidas’ funding has been allocated by means of the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (contract #C12143390A, 2013-2017.) In 2014, Avenidas, along with PACCC, requested that they be removed from the HSRAP process of City of Palo Alto Page 3 contract application review and become direct contractors with the City. Their allocation requests were being reviewed and funding recommendations made to Council based on the recommendations of the Human Relations Commission (HRC.) The agencies felt that the HRC did not factor in their long term and “special relationships” with the City (both agencies were essentially started by the City) when making funding recommendations. As their allocations were substantially higher than that of other HSRAP funded agencies, Avenidas and PACCC reported that on several occasions the HRC had recommended cuts to their allocations to “free” up a portion of the finite HSRAP budget to allocate to new or smaller agencies; with the recommendations only being reversed later when they protested at Council. They reasoned that without Avenidas and PACCC, the HRC would no longer have to factor in “special relationships” when making its HSRAP funding recommendations all that all future increases of the HSRAP budget could be allocated to existing and new agencies. Council concurred with this request at their meeting on May 12, 2014 (Attachment B – Excerpt from Council Minutes 5-12-14) and directed Staff to separate the funding contracts with Avenidas and PACCC from HSRAP and to contract directly with them. In regards to the justification for an exemption from solicitation request; the fact is that no other single entity is able to provide as comprehensive an array of older adult services in Palo Alto as Avenidas. The only other providers of “broader” based older adult services available in Palo Alto are those provided to older adults living in retirement facilities such as Lytton Gardens, Channing House, etc., the Oshman Family Jewish Community Center (JCC) and the Family YMCA. The JCC’s older adult specific programs consist of excursions, a bi-monthly lunch and a bi-monthly Yiddish club. The JCC operates a gym and fitness center offering a wide array of fitness classes. Approximately 10% of these classes are marked as “all levels” and more geared for seniors, although anyone can participate. The Family YMCA in Palo Alto offers services and classes to older adults, but exclusively health and wellness related. They offer water fitness and group exercise classes specifically geared towards older adults. For all of our surrounding communities, comprehensive older adult services are provided in city operated senior centers. As detailed at the beginning of the background section, the City of Palo Alto made a conscious decision in 1978 to transfer older adult services to Avenidas and provided initial funding for the operation of the senior center. Since that time, the City has provided significant funding to Avenidas (10% of their total operating budget) for the provision of comprehensive services to older adults in Palo Alto. Discussion The following tasks will be performed by Avenidas in the management of comprehensive services to older adults for the contract period of 2015 – 2020. This work plan will include but is not limited to the following tasks: City of Palo Alto Page 4 1. Leverage its staff resources by partnering with community organizations; Utilize the services of volunteers to provide services to participants and clients and to assist with administrative support tasks. 2. Leverage existing resources through fundraising from the community. 3. Provide weekly academic, health and fitness courses to facilitate intellectual and physical stimulation and to provide opportunity for new skill building such as computer use. 4. Provide a wide variety of lectures to broaden perceptions and to cultivate ideas. 5. Provide entertainment, fellowship, and information exchange at special events, bingo and bridge games, dances, concerts and other recreational activities. 6. Provide health maintenance screenings including audiology, dentistry, skin cancer, vision/glaucoma, podiatry, blood pressure and mammography. 7. Provide information about health and wellness. 8. Facilitate one-to-one counseling services through scheduling, coordination, and provide meeting space. 9. Provide information and referral to seniors, family members and service providers. 10. 11 In addition to the scope of services discussed above, Avenidas and City staff are in discussions about the possibility of increasing social services to the senior homeless t population in Palo Alto. The City has recently experienced an increase in senior homeless persons who often spend time (camp/live) in Cogswell Plaza, next door to Avenidas. The City has requested that Avenidas consider, as part of its partnership with the City, additional provision of services to the homeless. Avenidas has agreed to participate in such conversations in good faith. For the full scope of services see Attachment A: Avenidas Contract. Resource Impact The contract amount for FY 2016 is $453,897 and was budgeted within the Community Services Department as part of the approved Fiscal Year 2016 Operating Budget. For City of Palo Alto Page 5 Fiscal Years 2017 - 2020, the cost for the contract will be subject to the City Council annual appropriation of funds. Policy Implications The Comprehensive Plan addresses the needs of seniors and children in Goal C-3: Improved Quality, Quantity, and Affordability of Social Services, Particularly for Children, Youth, Seniors, and People with Disabilities. Attachments: Attachment A - Contract C16159539 Avenidas Inc.1.pdf (PDF) Attachment B – Excerpt from Council Minutes 5-12-14 (PDF) CONTRACT NO. C16159539 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND AVENIDAS, INC. FOR SENIOR SERVICES This Contract No. C16159539 is entered into ___________________, 2015, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a chartered city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (“CITY”), and AVENIDAS, INC., a corporation duly organized and existing under the Nonprofit Corporation Law of the State of California, located at 450 Bryant Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (“CONSULTANT”). RECITALS: WHEREAS, CITY desires to obtain the provision of senior (“Program”), as more fully described in Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT, including its employees, if any, in providing the Services by reason of its qualifications and experience in performing the Services, and CONSULTANT has offered to complete the Program on the terms and in the manner set forth herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Contract, the parties agree: SECTION 1. TERM 1.1 This Contract will commence on July 1, 2015 and will terminate on June 30, 2020 unless this Contract is earlier terminated by CITY. Upon the receipt of CITY’s notice to proceed, CONSULTANT will commence work on the initial and subsequent Program tasks in accordance with the time schedule set forth in Exhibit “A”. Time is of the essence of this Contract. In the event that the Program is not completed within the time required through any fault of CONSULTANT, CITY’s city manager will have the option of extending the time schedule for any period of time. This provision will not preclude the recovery of damages for delay caused by CONSULTANT. SECTION 2. SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES; CHANGES & CORRECTIONS 2.1 The scope of Services constituting the Program will be performed, delivered or executed by CONSULTANT under the phases of the Basic Services as described below. 2.2 CITY may order substantial changes in the scope or character of the Basic Services, or the Program, either decreasing or increasing the amount of work required of CONSULTANT. In the event that such changes are ordered, subject to the approval of CITY’s City Council, as may be required, CONSULTANT will be entitled to full compensation for all work performed prior to CONSULTANT’s receipt of the notice of change and further will be entitled to an extension of the time schedule. Any increase in compensation for substantial changes will be determined in accordance with the provisions of this Contract. CITY will not be liable for the cost or 130628 dm 0073574 1 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 payment of any change in work, unless the amount of additional compensation attributable to the change in work is agreed to, in writing, by CITY before CONSULTANT commences the performance of any such change in work. SECTION 3. QUALIFICATIONS, STATUS, AND DUTIES OF CONSULTANT 3.1 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has the expertise and professional qualifications to furnish or cause to be furnished the Services. CONSULTANT further represents and warrants that the program director and every individual, including any consultant, charged with the performance of the Services are duly licensed or certified by the State of California, to the extent such licensing or certification is required by law to perform the Services, and that the Program will be executed by them or under their supervision. 3.2 In reliance on the representations and warranties set forth in this Contract, CITY hires CONSULTANT to execute, and CONSULTANT covenants and agrees that it will execute or cause to be executed, the Program. 3.3 CONSULTANT will assign a single program director to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Program. The program director will represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Program. If circumstances or conditions subsequent to the execution of this Contract cause the substitution of the program director, the CONSULTANT shall notify the program manager of such a change. 3.4 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it will: 3.4.1 Procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incident to the due and lawful prosecution of the Program; 3.4.2 Keep itself fully informed of all existing and future Federal, State of California, and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Contract and any materials used in CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services; 3.4.3 At all times observe and comply with, and cause its employees and consultants, if any, who are assigned to the performance of this Contract to observe and comply with, the laws, ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees mentioned above; and 3.4.4 Will report immediately to the program manager, in writing, any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in the laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to the deliverables. 3.5 Any deliverables given to, or prepared or assembled by, CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, under this Contract will become the property of CITY and will not be made available to any individual or organization by CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, without the prior written approval of the city manager. 3.6 CONSULTANT will provide CITY with two (2) copies of any documents which are a part of the deliverables upon their completion and acceptance by CITY. 130628 dm 0073574 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 3.7 If CITY requests additional copies of any documents which are a part of the - deliverables, CONSULTANT will provide such additional copies and CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for its duplicating costs. 3.8 CONSULTANT will be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to execute the Program. All consultants of CONSULTANT will be deemed to be directly controlled and supervised by CONSULTANT, which will be responsible for their performance. 3.9 In the execution of the Program, CONSULTANT and its consultants, if any, will at all times be considered independent contractors and not agents or employees of CITY. 3.10 CONSULTANT will perform or obtain or cause to be performed or obtained any and all of the following Additional Services, not included under the Basic Services, if so authorized, in writing, by CITY: 3.10.1 Providing services as an expert witness in connection with any public hearing or meeting, arbitration proceeding, or proceeding of a court of record; 3.10.2 Incurring travel and subsistence expenses for CONSULTANT and its staff beyond those normally required under the Basic Services; 3.10.3 Performing any other Additional Services that may be agreed upon by the parties subsequent to the execution of this Contract; and 3.10.4 Other Additional Services now or hereafter described in Exhibit “A” to this Contract. 3.11 CONSULTANT will be responsible for employing all consultants deemed necessary to assist CONSULTANT in the performance of the Services. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the performance of its consultants or subcontractors in fulfilling the provisions of this contract. 3.12 CONSULTANT shall coordinate its services with other existing organizations providing similar services in order to foster community cooperation and to avoid unnecessary duplication of services. 3.13 CONSULTANT shall seek out and apply for other sources of revenue in support of its operation or services from county, state, federal and private sources. Unless deemed inappropriate by the program manager, CITY shall support CONSULTANT in its search of grants, funding, or other income by serving as a sponsoring agency, by providing letters of support, or by rendering advice on application for grants. 3.14 CONSULTANT shall include an acknowledgment of CITY funding and support in all appropriate publicity or publications regarding its programs and services using words to the effect that “services are provided in cooperation with the City of Palo Alto” or “through City of Palo Alto funding” as approved by the program manager. 130628 dm 0073574 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 3.15 Throughout the term of this Contract, CONSULTANT shall remain an independent, nonprofit corporation under the laws of California governed solely by a Board of Directors, with up-to-date bylaws. CONSULTANT shall operate by its Bylaws. Any changes in CONSULTANT’s Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws, or tax-exempt status shall be reported by CONSULTANT immediately to the Program Manager. 3.16 The Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall include representation from the broadest possible cross section of the community including: those with expertise and interest in CONSULTANT’s services, representatives from community organizations, and users of CONSULTANT’s services. 3.17 All meetings of the Board of Directors of CONSULTANT shall be open to the public, except meetings, or portions thereof, dealing with personnel or litigation matters. 3.18 CONSULTANT shall keep minutes of all regular and special meetings of its Board of Directors. SECTION 4. DUTIES OF CITY 4.1 CITY will furnish or cause to be furnished the services listed in Exhibit “A” and such information regarding its requirements applicable to the Program as may be reasonably requested by CONSULTANT. 4.2 CITY will review and approve, as necessary, in a timely manner the deliverables and each phase of work performed by CONSULTANT. CITY’s estimated time of review and approval will be furnished to CONSULTANT at the time of submission of each phase of work. CONSULTANT acknowledges and understands that the interrelated exchange of information among CITY’s various departments makes it extremely difficult for CITY to firmly establish the time of each review and approval task. CITY’s failure to review and approve within the estimated time schedule will not constitute a default under this Contract. 4.3 The city manager will represent CITY for all purposes under this Contract. The Manager, Office of Human Services is designated as the program manager for the city manager. The program manager will supervise the performance, progress, and execution of the Program, and will be assisted by the Management Assistant for the Office of Human Services. 4.4 In the event CITY should determine from any identifiable source, including but not limited to reports submitted by CONSULTANT under this contract or any evaluation report from any identifiable source, that there is a condition which requires correction, CITY may forward to CONSULTANT requests for corrective action. Such requests shall indicate the nature of the issue or issues which are to be reviewed to determine the need for corrective action and may include a recommendation as to appropriate corrective action. Within thirty (30) days of CITY’s request, CONSULTANT shall submit its response, which shall include its views of the problem and proposed action, if any. Upon request of either party, the parties shall meet to discuss any such request and response within the thirty-day period specified. 130628 dm 0073574 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 SECTION 5. COMPENSATION 5.1 CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for the following services and work: 5.1.1 In consideration of the full performance of the Basic Services, including any authorized reimbursable expense, CITY will pay CONSULTANT a fee not to exceed Four Hundred Fifty-three Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-seven Dollars ($453,897) for the first contract year (fiscal year 2015-16) subject to approval of Section 17.12. 5.1.2 In consideration of the full performance of the Basic Services for the second through the fifth contract years (fiscal years), including any authorized reimbursable expenses; CITY will pay CONSULTANT a fee not to exceed Four Hundred Fifty-three Thousand Eight Hundred Ninety-seven Dollars ($453,897). The parties agree that the amount of compensation for the second through the fifth contract years may be adjusted up or down, depending on availability of funds. The actual maximum amount of compensation for the second through the fifth year of this contract shall be determined by the city manager and reflected in a letter agreement setting forth the amount of total compensation and a budget in the form of Exhibit “B” reflecting the revised allocation of funds. The actual amount of compensation shall be subject to the provisions of 17.12 of this contract. 5.1.3 On the billing form provided by CITY, CONSULTANT shall submit a bill by the fifteenth (15th) working day of the following month for services provided under this Contract during the preceding three months. The bill shall specify actual expenditures directly related to this Contract, in accordance with Exhibit “B”. The fees of the consultants, who have direct contractual relationships with CONSULTANT, will be approved, in advance, by CITY. CITY reserves the right to refuse payment of such fees, if such prior approval is not obtained by CONSULTANT. 5.1.4 The full payment of charges for extra work or changes, or both, in the execution of the Program will be made, provided such request for payment is initiated by CONSULTANT and authorized, in writing, by the program manager. Payment will be made within thirty (30) days of submission by CONSULTANT of a statement, in triplicate, of itemized costs covering such work or changes, or both. Prior to commencing such extra work or changes, or both, the parties will agree upon an estimated maximum cost for such extra work or changes. CONSULTANT will not be paid for extra work or changes, including, without limitation, any design work or change order preparation, which is made necessary on account of CONSULTANT’s errors, omissions, or oversights. 5.1.5 Direct personnel expense of employees assigned to the execution of the Program by CONSULTANT will include only the work and other documents pertaining to the Program, and in services rendered during the program to the extent such services are expressly contemplated under this Contract. Included in the cost of direct personnel expense of these employees are salaries and mandatory and customary benefits such as statutory employee benefits, insurance, sick leave, holidays and vacations, pensions and similar benefits. 5.2 The schedule of payments will be made as follows: 5.2.1 Payment of the Basic Services will be made in quarterly progress payments in proportion to the quantum of services performed, or in accordance with any other schedule of 130628 dm 0073574 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 payment mutually agreed upon by the parties, as set forth in Exhibit “B”, or within thirty (30) days of submission. Final payment will be made by CITY after CONSULTANT has submitted all deliverables, including, without limitation, reports which have been approved by the program manager. 5.2.2 No deductions will be made from CONSULTANT’s compensation on account of penalties, liquidated damages, or other sums withheld by CITY from payments to general contractors. SECTION 6. PROGRAM RECORDS Upon reasonable notice, CONSULTANT shall grant the program manager access to all CONSULTANT records, data, statements, and reports, which pertain to this Program. CONSULTANT shall secure all necessary client and/or personnel release of information forms to allow the program manager and others specifically designated, in writing by the program manager to be afforded such access. Access to clinical records will be coordinated with the client, the client’s representative and the CONSULTANT upon reasonable request from the program manager. CONSULTANT is not required to provide information, the disclosure of which is expressly prohibited by California or Federal laws. SECTION 7. ACCOUNTING, AUDITS, OWNERSHIP OF RECORDS 7.1 CONSULTANT shall appoint a fiscal agent who shall be responsible for the financial and accounting activities of CONSULTANT, including the receipt and disbursement of CONSULTANT funds. 7.2. CONSULTANT shall appoint from its Board a treasurer who shall review Financial Statements of CONSULTANT on a regular basis. 7.3 Records of the direct personnel expenses and expenses incurred in connection with the performance of Basic Services and Additional Services pertaining to the Program will be prepared, maintained, and retained by CONSULTANT in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and will be made available to CITY for auditing purposes at mutually convenient times during the term of this Contract and for three (3) years following the expiration or earlier termination of this Contract. 7.4 CONSULTANT shall provide for independent audit of its fiscal year transactions, records, and financial reports at least every two (2) years. The certified public accountant shall submit the report to both parties. The cost of this audit shall be borne by CONSULTANT. 7.5 The originals of the deliverables prepared by or under the direction of CONSULTANT in the performance of this Contract will become the property of CITY irrespective of whether the Program is completed upon CITY’s payment of the amounts required to be paid to CONSULTANT. These originals will be delivered to CITY without additional compensation. CITY will have the right to utilize any final and incomplete drawings, estimates, specifications, and any other documents prepared hereunder by CONSULTANT, but CONSULTANT disclaims any responsibility or liability for any alterations or modifications of such documents. 130628 dm 0073574 6 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 SECTION 8. INDEMNITY 8.1 CONSULTANT agrees to protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents, from any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, caused by or arising out of CONSULTANT’s, its officers’, agents’, consultants’ or employees’ negligent acts, errors, or omissions, or willful misconduct, or conduct for which applicable law may impose strict liability on CONSULTANT in the performance of or failure to perform its obligations under this Contract. 8.2 CITY shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CONSULTANT, its directors, officers, employees and agents, from any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, caused by or arising out of CITY’s negligence or willful misconduct in the exercise of its rights or performance or failure of performance of its obligations under this Contract. SECTION 9. WAIVERS 9.1 The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Contract or of the provisions of any ordinance or law will not be deemed to be a waiver of any such covenant, term, condition, provision, ordinance, or law or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other covenant, term, condition, provision, ordinance or law. The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee or other money which may become due hereunder will not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the other party of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Contract or of any applicable law or ordinance. 9.2 No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Contract. SECTION 10. INSURANCE 10.1 CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Contract, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit “C”, insuring not only CONSULTANT and its consultants, if any, but also, with the exception of workers’ compensation, employer’s liability and professional liability insurance, naming CITY as an additional insured concerning CONSULTANT’s performance under this Contract. 10.2 All insurance coverage required hereunder will be provided through carriers with Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are admitted to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all consultants of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Contract will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Contract, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 10.3 Certificates of such insurance, preferably on the forms provided by CITY, will be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Contract. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s risk manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is 130628 dm 0073574 7 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 primary coverage and will not be canceled or altered by the insurer except after filing with the CITY’s city clerk thirty (30) days prior written notice of such cancellation or alteration, and that the City of Palo Alto is named as an additional insured except in policies of workers’ compensation, employer’s liability, and professional liability insurance. Current certificates of such insurance will be kept on file at all times during the term of this Contract with the city clerk. 10.4 The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT’s liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Contract. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Contract, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Contract is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 11. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 11.1 CONSULTANT, by executing this Contract, certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and certifies that it will comply with such provisions, as applicable, before commencing the performance of the Program. SECTION 12. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF CONTRACT OR PROGRAM 12.1 The city manager may suspend the execution of the Program, in whole or in part, or terminate this Contract, with or without cause, by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT, or immediately after submission to CITY by CONSULTANT of any completed item of Basic Services. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance under this Contract. 12.2 CONSULTANT may terminate this Contract or suspend its execution of the Program by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY or in the event CITY indefinitely withholds or withdraws its request for the initiation or continuation of Basic Services or the execution of the Program. 12.3 Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be compensated for the Basic Services and Additional Services performed and deliverables received and approved prior to receipt of written notice from CITY of such suspension or abandonment, together with authorized additional and reimbursable expenses then due. If the Program is resumed after it has been suspended for more than 180 days, any change in CONSULTANT’s compensation will be subject to renegotiation and, if necessary, approval of CITY’s City Council. If this Contract is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY, as such determination may be made by the city manager in the reasonable exercise of his discretion. 130628 dm 0073574 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 12.4 In the event of termination of this Contract or suspension of work on the Program by CITY where CONSULTANT is not in default, CONSULTANT will receive compensation as follows: 12.4.1 For approved items of services, CONSULTANT will be compensated for each item of service fully performed in the amounts authorized under this Contract. 12.4.2 For approved items of services on which a notice to proceed is issued by CITY, but which are not fully performed, CONSULTANT will be compensated for each item of service in an amount which bears the same ratio to the total fee otherwise payable for the performance of the service as the quantum of service actually rendered bears to the services necessary for the full performance of that item of service. 12.4.3 The total compensation payable under the preceding paragraphs of this Section will not exceed the payment specified under Section 5 for the respective items of service to be furnished by CONSULTANT. 12.5 Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will deliver to the city manager immediately any and all copies of the deliverables, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its consultants, if any, in connection with this Contract. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 12.6 The failure of CITY to agree with CONSULTANT’s independent findings, conclusions, or recommendations, if the same are called for under this Contract, on the basis of differences in matters of judgment, will not be construed as a failure on the part of CONSULTANT to fulfill its obligations under this Contract. SECTION 13. ASSIGNMENT 13.1 This Contract is for the personal services of CONSULTANT, therefore, CONSULTANT will not assign, transfer, convey, or otherwise dispose of this Contract or any right, title or interest in or to the same or any part thereof without the prior written consent of CITY. A consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be a consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of CITY will be void and, at the option of the city manager, this Contract may be terminated. This Contract will not be assignable by operation of law. SECTION 14. NOTICES 14.1 All notices hereunder will be given, in writing, and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 130628 dm 0073574 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 Copy to: Office of Human Services Manager City of Palo Alto 4000 Middlefield Road, T-2 Palo Alto, CA 94303 To CONSULTANT: Attention of the program director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 15. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 15.1 In accepting this Contract, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 15.2 CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Contract, it will not employ contractors or persons having such an interest mentioned above. CONSULTANT certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest under this Contract is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. SECTION 16. NONDISCRIMINATION 16.1 As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. 16.2 CONSULTANT agrees that each contract for services from independent providers will contain a provision substantially as follows: “Avenidas, Inc. will provide the independent contractor with a certificate stating that Avenidas, Inc. is currently in compliance with all Federal and State of California laws covering nondiscrimination in employment; and that Avenidas, Inc. will not discriminate in the employment of any person under this contract because of the age, race, skin color, national origin, ancestry, religion, disability, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight, height or gender of such person.” 16.3 If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Act or similar provisions of Federal law or executive order in the performance of this Contract, it will be in default of this Contract. Thereupon, CITY will have the power to cancel or suspend this Contract, in whole or in part, or to deduct the sum of twenty-five dollars ($25) for each person for each calendar day during which such person was subjected to discrimination, as damages for breach of contract, or both. Only a finding of the State of 130628 dm 0073574 10 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 California Fair Employment Practices Commission or the equivalent federal agency or officer will constitute evidence of a breach of this Contract. SECTION 17. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 17.1 CONSULTANT represents and warrants that it has knowledge of the require- ments of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Government Code and the Health and Safety Code of the State of California, relating to access to public buildings and accommodations for disabled persons, and relating to facilities for disabled persons. CONSULTANT will comply with or ensure by its advice that compliance with such provisions will be effected pursuant to the terms of this Contract. 17.2 Upon the agreement of the parties, any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Contract may be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrators may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 17.3 This Contract will be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflicts of law. 17.4 In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 17.5 The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the terms of this Contract or arising out of this Contract may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees expended in connection with that action. 17.6 This document represents the entire and integrated Contract between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 17.7 All provisions of this Contract, whether covenants or conditions, will be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. 17.8 The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Contract will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants, as the case may be, of the parties. 17.9 If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Contract or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Contract and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 17.10 All exhibits referred to in this Contract and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Contract and will be deemed to be a part of this Contract. 130628 dm 0073574 11 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 17.11 This Contract may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 17.12 This Contract is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Contract will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Contract are no longer available. This Section 17.12 will take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Contract on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: ______________________________ Director of Community Services APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ______________________________ Manager Office of Human Services CITY OF PALO ALTO ______________________________ City Manager AVENIDAS, INC. By: __________________________ Name: Amy Andonian Title: President & CEO Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES & TIME SCHEDULE EXHIBIT “B”: CONTRACT BUDGET EXHIBIT “C”: INSURANCE 130628 dm 0073574 12 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 EXHIBIT “A” AVENIDAS, INC. Senior Services 2015-2020 SCOPE OF PROGRAM SERVICES I PROGRAM SERVICES CONSULTANT shall provide services to the elderly and their families and caregivers through enrichment and individual and family services. II PROGRAM GOALS 1) To provide a comprehensive local resource for seniors and caregivers that identify their needs and designs and delivers programs and activities to meet these needs and interests. 2) To support senior adults in their efforts to maintain and improving their functional ability to remain in their own homes. 3) To support caregivers, particularly spouses and adult children in their work of providing in-home care to less independent seniors. 4) To support older adults in maintaining their homes, keeping them safe and in good operating condition at an affordable cost. 5) To support senior adults in maintaining or improving health and level of fitness. 6) To support seniors in achieving greater satisfaction in life and improved emotional well being. 7) To support the seniors and caregivers in their search for information about, and assistance with, complex and ever-changing issues and problems associated with aging. III PROGRAM OBJECTIVES For Goal #1: 1) To continue to survey the community and its participants to assess the needs of local seniors and caregivers and the extent to which Avenidas programs and services are meeting these needs, with particular focus on the growing Baby Boomer population. 2) To continue to fulfill the requests of City of Palo Alto City Council and staff for information meeting these needs. 130628 dm 0073574 13 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 3) To regularly re-evaluate its programs and services and make changes as necessary. 4) To successfully complete a capital campaign to renovate and expand the Avenidas Bryant Street Center in order to provide even more programs and services for the community’s increasing number of older adults and family caregivers. 5) To launch a new “Generations Lab” program aimed at reducing the technology divide between younger and older people, and creating a new forum where developers of new products for older adults can meet and get feedback from potential users. 6) To continue working on community-based long-term care integration at the Avenidas Rose Kleiner Adult Day Health Center, focusing on cultivating stronger relationships with local health plans and hospital systems serving Avenidas’ target population. For Goal #2: 1) Provide case management (assessment, care planning and resource linkages) to 40 frail, homebound seniors. 2) Provide 1,000 brief sessions of resource, housing and practical support. 3) Provide support group assistance to 600 attendees. 4) Provide 5,000 one-way trips to the grocery store, to lunch at La Comida, or to personal appointments. 5) Provide 8,000 days of adult day health services to less independent seniors, including 25 Palo Alto residents each year and providing counseling, referral or enrollment to 200 individuals and their families. For Goal #3: 1) Provide support group assistance to 150 attendees. 2) Provide conferences, workshops and classes on care-giving issues to 150 attendees. 3) Provide private counseling and support to 150 participants. For Goal #4: 1) Deliver 300 handyman jobs at below-market cost. For Goal #5: 1) Provide fitness and health information classes to 1,000 attendees. 130628 dm 0073574 14 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 2) Provide 750 health maintenance screenings. 3) Provide 1,100 personal services, such as podiatry services and massages. 4) Provide 250 influenza immunizations. For Goal #6: 1) Provide enrichment classes to 4,000 attendees. 2) Provide conferences, lectures and workshops on issues of interest to seniors to 1,500 attendees. 3) Provide volunteer opportunities to 450 volunteers for a total of 18,000 volunteer hours. For Goal #7: 1) Provide 600 one-to-one counseling service sessions on such issues as legal matters, income tax preparation and health insurance. IV PROGRAM METHODS 1) Leverage its staff resources by partnering with community organizations; Utilize the services of volunteers to provide services to participants and clients and to assist with administrative support tasks. 2) Leverage existing resources through fundraising from the community. 3) Provide weekly academic, health and fitness courses to facilitate intellectual and physical stimulation and to provide opportunity for new skill building such as computer use. 4) Provide a wide variety of lectures to broaden perceptions and to cultivate ideas. 5) Provide entertainment, fellowship, and information exchange at special events, bingo and bridge games, dances, concerts and other recreational activities. 6) Provide health maintenance screenings including audiology, dentistry, skin cancer, vision/glaucoma, podiatry, blood pressure and mammography. 7) Provide information about health and wellness. 8) Facilitate one-to-one counseling services through scheduling, coordination, and provide meeting space. 9) Provide information and referral to seniors, family members and service providers. 130628 dm 0073574 15 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 10) Provide case management that includes assessment, care planning, and service arrangements to seniors and frail homebound seniors. 11) Provide emotional support to seniors through support groups facilitated by a master’s level social worker. 12) Provide consultations to caregivers for practical advice, linkage to community resources and emotional support. 13) Provide emotional support to caregivers through monthly support groups facilitate by social work staff. 14) Provide emotional and practical support to homebound seniors through trained volunteers. 15) Provide brief resource counseling and practical support to clients through person-to- person or telephone sessions. 16) Develop and maintain linkages with local senior housing facilities through regular site visits. 17) Provide counseling, referral or enrollment into adult day health services for individuals and their families who are in search of assistance for less independent older adults. V DELIVERABLES 1) Consultant shall provide semiannual activity reports relating to this Scope of Services for the periods ending December 31, 2015; June 30, 2016; December 31, 2016; June 30, 2017; December 31, 2017; June 30, 2018; December 31, 2018; June 30, 2019; December 31, 2019; and June 30, 2020 within fifteen days after these dates. 2) Each report shall cover the preceding six months and other such information as the Program Manager may request. The final report shall focus on the preceding six months, but shall also provide information on contract services for the entire year. The additional summary report shall cover the period for the entire contract period up to the date prior to submission. Each report shall be prepared in the form agreed upon by the Program Manager and the Consultant. VI TIME SCHEDULE • Services shall commence on July 1, 2015 and continue through June 30, 2020. • Semiannual progress reports shall be completed and submitted to the City on the fifteenth day after each six-month period. 130628 dm 0073574 16 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 VII REQUIREMENTS • The City of Palo Alto requires mention of its name in all materials that acknowledge donors in any public announcements or publicity regarding funded programs. • CONSULTANT shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. END OF SCOPE 130628 dm 0073574 17 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 Exhibit "B" AVENIDAS, INC. Senior Services FY 2015-16 CONTRACT BUDGET Program (s) Expenses FY15/16 Contract Budget Salaries 336,990.00$ Program Operating Expenses 42,200.00$ Insurance 11,723.00$ Audit 4,179.00$ Rent -$ Utilities 4,936.00$ Phone 1,878.00$ Postage 920.00$ Office Supplies 2,478.00$ Travel 1,463.00$ Staff Development/Training 1,264.00$ Computer Hardware/Software 2,731.00$ Equipment 1,254.00$ Maintenance/Repair 11,349.00$ Books/Publications 1,467.00$ Printing/Publishing 5,980.00$ Capital Expenses 23,085.00$ Other (Specify)* TOTAL $453,897.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 Attachment “C” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS – CONTRACT C16159539 Rev. 11/07 CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 NO PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 Attachment “C” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS – CONTRACT C16159539 Rev. 11/07 THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 EMAIL: InsuranceCerts@CityofPaloAlto.org DocuSign Envelope ID: 3F25D98B-4C32-48D0-87F9-C00CEE295E57 Special Meeting May 12, 2014 10. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Council on Moving Agreements with Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care out of the Human Services Resource Allocation Process. Minka van Der Zwaag, Community Services Senior Programs Manager, reviewed the Finance Committee's actions and the Human Relations Commission's (HRC) recommendations. The Council referred removal of Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) from the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) to the Policy and Services Committee. PACCC and Avenidas had long relationships with the City. Before the HRC, representatives of PACCC and Avenidas articulated their wish to be removed from HSRAP. The HRC was concerned that removal of PACCC and Avenidas along with their funding would jeopardize future funding for smaller agencies. In addition, other long- time funding recipients would request direct contracts with the City. The HRC attempted to draft a compromise that addressed the concerns of the Council, PACCC, and Avenidas while retaining PACCC and Avenidas within HSRAP. The Policy and Services Committee (Committee) recommended the Council direct Staff to separate funding contracts with Avenidas and PACCC from HSRAP and to contract directly with them. Council Member Price reported the Committee had a split vote on the item with one Member absent. All Members present agreed that senior and youth services were a critical part of services. MOTION: Council Member Price moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to direct Staff to separate the funding contracts with Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) from the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) and to contract directly with them. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL EXCERPT OF FINAL MINUTES Council Member Klein indicated the Council should recognize that PACCC and Avenidas were different from other agencies. PACCC and Avenidas provided services that in other cities were provided directly by the city. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to keep Avenidas and Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) in the Human Services Resource Allocation Process. Council Member Holman explained that Avenidas and PACCC were recognized as different from other agencies in that they submitted a Request for Proposal (RFP) every six years. She referenced Human Relations Commissioner Bacchetti's remarks regarding competition for budget increases. Council Member Schmid remarked that the City had a limited Budget for human services. The Council identified a Commission to review and recommend funding for HSRAP to allow the Council to consider additional funding for human services. Council Member Scharff requested Ms. O'Nan comment on the HRC's recommendation. Jill O’Nan, Human Relations Commission Chair, believed all agencies would benefit from Avenidas and PACCC remaining within HSRAP to work through funding issues. The HRC did not intend to foster agency competition for funding. It was difficult for the HRC to address new and emerging needs without reducing agency funding. The HRC recommendation attempted to protect Avenidas and PACCC. Council Member Scharff felt the HRC recommendation met PACCC's and Avenidas' concerns. The Council should honor the HRC's work. INCORPORATED INTO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add the HRC recommendations identified on Packet Page 274: 1) Avenidas and PACCC will be assured that their HSRAP funding will not be cut in order to fund reallocations to other HSRAP grantees; 2) when the Council determines annual adjustments to reflect the increased costs of doing business in the nonprofit sector, Avenidas and PACCC will be assured their proportional shares; 3) when the Council makes an incremental allocation over and above any annual adjustment, the HRC will recommend redistribution of those funds according to its assessment of human service needs at that time. Incremental allocations will be recommended according to a review covering all HSRAP recipients (including Avenidas and PACCC) and new applicants; and 4) in the case of budget reductions set by the Council and staff, Avenidas and PACCC will bear their proportional share, but no more, in the HRC’S recommendations. Mayor Shepherd expressed concern that PACCC and Avenidas had no commonality with smaller agencies. The Council should allow PACCC and Avenidas to withdraw from HSRAP. SUBSTITUTE MOTION AS AMENDED FAILED: 3-6 Holman, Scharff, Schmid yes James Keene, City Manager, reported Staff may need to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for services provided by PACCC and Avenidas to allow the City to contract directly with PACCC and Avenidas. MOTION PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Schmid no City of Palo Alto (ID # 6038) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Electric Cost of Service Analysis Consultant Contract Award Title: Approval of an Agreement for Professional Services with EES Consulting, Inc. in a Not to Exceed Amount of $200,000 for the Performance of Electric Utility Financial Planning and Rate Consulting Services on an On- Call Task Order Basis for Fiscal Year 2016 through Fiscal Year 2020 From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a professional services master agreement with EES Consulting, Inc. (EES Consulting) (Attachment A) in the amount of $200,000 for financial consulting services for the City’s electric utility over the next five years, primarily focusing on cost of service allocation, rate design and financial planning and forecasting. Various projects will be undertaken under this master agreement. The scope and budget for each project will be agreed upon between the City and the consultant through the execution of a signed task order before the project begins. The first task order will be to perform an electric cost of service analysis (COSA) in time for a July 1, 2016 rate change. The first task order is in the amount of $97,839, which will leave $102,161 remaining for future tasks. Executive Summary Many changes are occurring in the electric utility industry including expanded local distributed generation (i.e. solar photovoltaic systems) and the introduction of distributed storage. Smart grid components and the availability of smart appliances, sensors and controllers have led to expanded customer choices and the ability for customers to control their energy consumption patterns and sources. In Palo Alto, due to the City’s carbon neutral electric supply portfolio, electrification of end uses such as water and space heating as well as the expansion of electric vehicles is of interest to many customers. In July 2009, when they were last adjusted, the City’s forecasts did not reflect these changes. In addition, the latest Electric Financial Plan projects the need for a 6% rate increase in July 2016 (Staff Report 5881). Staff seeks expert assistance to develop electric rates that meet the City’s needs as well as comply with the cost of service requirements of State law. EES Consulting has been selected to provide this assistance. City of Palo Alto Page 2 The consultant’s first task will be for an electric COSA, which will support rate changes anticipated to take place July 1, 2016. A detailed scope and budget ($97,839) for this first task are included in Exhibits A-1 and C attached to the professional services master agreement (Attachment A). Subsequent tasks will require a separate scope and budget and be memorialized in a separate signed task order. The first task, the COSA, will involve reviewing the City’s existing cost of service methodology and creating an updated cost of service methodology supported by a cost of service model and a report. The scope broadly describes the typical steps involved in a cost of service study, but the specifics of the consultant’s work will be guided by the policy guidance provided by the City Council through a set of design guidelines reviewed by the Utilities Advisory Commission and the Council’s Finance Committee. These guidelines are proposed for Council adoption on September 15, 2015. The cost of service model will be the basis for any subsequent work done by the consultant (issued on separate task orders), which may include: Updating the model to incorporate future rate changes prompted by policy changes over the next five years; Reviewing electric utility connection fees; Reviewing the rate and cost issues associated with electric vehicles, storage, distributed generation, and electrification and making recommendations for changes to the cost of service methodology; and Researching rate and financial trends in California and advising the City on rates-related issues. Staff anticipates the need for consultant assistance with several rates-related projects over the next five years due to the changing policy landscape for the electric utility, both at the local and at the State levels. Keeping a single rate consultant involved in all rate-related projects over this time will be more efficient and will allow for policy continuity. Background Traditionally, utilities use a COSA to allocate costs among customer classes and to design rates. COSAs gained a more important role for California publicly-owned utilities after the passage of Proposition 26 (2010). Proposition 26 added provisions to the State Constitution essentially defining every local government fee or charge as a tax requiring voter approval unless one of seven exceptions applies. Municipal electric rates that do not exceed the reasonable costs of providing electric service are one exception from the constitutional definition of a tax and its voter approval requirements. The Electric Utility’s rates were last adjusted when a 10% rate increase went into effect on July 1, 2009, prior to the passage of Proposition 26. Although Proposition 26 is not retroactive, it will apply to the City’s electric rates the next time they are adjusted. The current rates are based on a COSA completed in 2007. Staff intends to complete a new electric COSA in advance of the anticipated July 1, 2016 rate adjustment. The primary goal of the COSA will be to review the allocation of costs to customer classes and the electric rate City of Palo Alto Page 3 design to ensure customers are charged according to the cost to serve them. However, the COSA will also include a review of the rate design issues created by increasing numbers of local solar installations, higher electric vehicle penetration, and the potential for electrification of buildings. These issues were discussed in depth by the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) on July 1, 2015 and by the Finance Committee on August 18, 2015 (Staff Report 5965)1. At those meetings short-term (Phase One) and long-term (Phase Two) work plans were discussed for addressing various types of rate design issues and a set of design guidelines were established for the Phase One work plan. The guidelines are proposed for Council adoption on September 15, 2015. These will guide the consultant in the completion of Task Order 1, the electric COSA. Subsequent task orders may be signed with the consultant to support staff in its work developing guidelines for the Phase Two work prior to UAC consideration and Council approval, and to complete any rate analysis and cost of service methodology updates required during Phase Two. Discussion A Request for Proposals (RFP #159281) was issued on June 12, 2015 seeking on call financial and rate consultant services for the City’s electric utility. Consultants were also asked to provide a budget for Task Order 1, creation of a COSA. Budgets for Task Order 1 ranged from $72,140 to $117,055, with most proposers in the $90,000 to $100,000 range. Attachment A, the professional services master agreement, contains a general description of the on-call services to be provided, as well as the specific scope and budget for Task Order 1. Summary of Solicitation Process Proposal Title Electric Utility Cost of Service and Rate Study Proposal Number 159281 Proposed Length of Project Five Years Number of RFPs Mailed/Emailed 18 Total Days to Respond to Proposal 32 Pre-Proposal Teleconference June 18, 2015 Number of Company Attendees at Pre-proposal Meeting 13 Number of Proposals Received: 7 Proposers interviewed 4 Cost of Consultant Services An evaluation committee reviewed the proposals, proposer qualifications and responses to the criteria identified in the RFP. After interviewing four of the seven proposing consultants, staff determined that EES Consulting was the best fit for the work anticipated to be performed over the next five years. The following criteria were used during the evaluation process to identify the most qualified firms, considering qualitative factors before viewing price proposals: Quality and completeness of proposal 1 Council is set to consider the Finance Committee recommendation on the Design Guidelines for the Phase One Electric COSA in September. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Quality, performance and effectiveness of the solution or work plan to be provided Quality of written reports Ability to meet schedule Proposer's experience, including the experience of staff Cost to the City Quality of sample COSA model Resource Impact The funds for this contract will come from existing budgets for rate consulting. Task Order 1, for $97,839, is anticipated to be expended in FY 2016. Funding for additional task orders, if any additional task orders are requested, either in FY 2016 or in future years, will also be provided from existing consulting budgets. Policy Implications This contract will provide the City with a consultant with the expertise necessary to create a COSA that will support the City’s establishment of cost-justified rates. The analysis performed as part of this COSA will also support other policy initiatives, including the Local Solar Plan (Staff Report 4608) and the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP). The consultant’s work will involve analysis of the impacts of rate design on electrification, and are therefore part of staff’s response to the December 15, 2014 Council Colleagues Memo on Climate Action Plan Implementation Strategies to Reduce Use of Natural Gas and Gasoline through Fuel Switching to Carbon Free Electricity (Staff Report 5961). The consultant’s work will also support adoption of a hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism that is part of the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Implementation Plan (Staff Report 1317). Environmental Review Council award of this contract does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act, thus no environmental review is required. Attachments: Attachment A: Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and EES Consulting Services, Inc. for Professional Services (PDF) Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C16159281 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND EES CONSULTING, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 14th day of September, 2015, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and EES CONSULTING, INC., a Washington corporation, located at 570 Kirkland Way, Suite 100, Kirkland, Washington 98033 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY’s Utility Department intends to study its cost of service allocation and rate design and engage in financial planning and forecasting related to the operation of its electric Utility (“Project”). B. CITY periodically requires consulting services to design and update cost of service studies as part of an evaluation related to the adequacy and fairness of its rate structure, as well as provide additional related services from time to time on an on-call basis. C. CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to support CITY in continuing rate analysis and potential rate adjustments resulting from policy and operational evaluations CITY is currently undertaking, as well as industry and cost-justification trends, and to provide CITY with additional related services from time to time on an on-call basis as agreed upon by the parties (“Services”). D. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. E. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services as set forth on the Scope of Services at Exhibit “A” and as more particularly described in any Task Order(s), including Task Order One: Electric Cost of Service Analysis Scope of Services (“Task Order One”) attached at Exhibit “A-1” and any subsequent On-Call Services task orders (as defined DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 2 and described further below) (all task orders together, the “Services”), in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. Optional On-Call Task Order Provision Services will be authorized by CITY, as needed, with a Task Order assigned and approved by CITY’s Project Manager and executed by both parties. As of the date of this Agreement’s full execution, CITY hereby authorizes the performance of the work described in Task Order One attached hereto, and CONSULTANT hereby acknowledges receipt and acceptance of Task Order One. Each subsequent Task Ordershall designate a CITY Project Manager; shall contain a specific scope of work, a specific schedule of performance and a specific compensation amount; and shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A-2 (“On-Call Services”). The total price of all Task Orders, including Task Order One and all task orders related to On-Call Services, issued under this Agreement shall not exceed the Not to Exceed Amount of compensation set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for work performed under an authorized Task Order and CITY may elect, but is not required, to authorize work up to the Not to Exceed Amount of maximum compensation set forth in Section 4. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through September 13, 2016, with the option to extend the agreement for up to four (4) additional years upon mutual written agreement by CONSULTANT and CITY, or unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) (“Not To Exceed Amount”). In the event Additional Services are authorized in excess of the Not to Exceed Amount, the total compensation for Services, Additional Services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed zero Dollars ($0.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out at Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 2 which is not included within the Scope of Services described at Exhibit “A”, including Task Order One attached as Exhibit “A-1” and any subsequent task orders authorized thereunder up to the Not To Exceed Amount. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the Services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the Services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C- 1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to CITY for aligning the Project design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 3 CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Anne Falcon as the project supervisor to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. CITY’s project manager is Jon Abendschein, Utilities Department, WGW Division, 3201 East Bayshore Road, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: (650)329-2309. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 5 intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys’ fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 6 carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 7 default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 8 and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: All printed materials provided by CCONSULTANT to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks. Goods purchased by CONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Division’s office. Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONSULTANT shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 9 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, CITY shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 4 CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Deputy. City Attorney EES CONSULTING, INC. By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “A-1”: TASK ORDER ONE: ELECTRIC COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “A-2” PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ON-CALL TASK ORDER EXHIBIT “B”: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C-1”: SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Gary Saleba presidenet/ceo Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 11 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES The Consultant, EES Consulting, Inc., will provide the City of Palo Alto with financial consulting services related to the operation of its Electric Utility, primarily focusing on cost of service allocation, rate design, and financial planning and forecasting. Utility staff performs annual financial forecasts in-house, but periodically requires consulting services to design and update cost of service studies as part of an evaluation of the adequacy and fairness of its rate structures. Consultant will support the City in continuing rate analysis and adjustments to its rates resulting from policy and operational evaluations the City is currently undertaking, as well as industry and cost-justification trends. The policy and operational evaluations include a smart grid planning effort, a potential transition to a new billing system, and revisions to the City’s sustainability plan. Industry trends include a trend toward time of use pricing among California utilities, the need to develop a successor to the utility’s current net energy metering rules, evolving cost of service requirements related to Proposition 26, higher electric vehicle penetration, and the continuing development of new customer-side technologies such as storage, net-zero energy buildings, and grid-interactive appliances. Many of these plans and trends are likely to have rate impacts, either in the short term or in the long term. The consultant will provide advisory services and analysis on these topics as requested and subject to an agreed upon budget and scope of each project. This contract is a master services agreement. The contract specifies the consultant rates, but the consultant and project manager must agree upon a scope of services and budget for each project before work begins which must be memorialized in a separate task order. Projects may include, but are not limited to: Building cost of service models related to the electric utility Connection fee studies or other fee studies Major and minor updates to cost of service models, fee studies, and rate studies Rate design studies for new major customers or customer types Assistance with designing pilot program rates Load research studies Marginal cost studies Financial planning studies or analysis Providing general advice, research, or analysis related to ratemaking, financial planning, or financial impacts of long term system planning Writing reports related to ratemaking, financial planning, or financial impacts of long term system planning Presenting to policy makers, stakeholders, internal staff, or others regarding ratemaking, financial planning, or financial impacts of long term system planning DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 EXHIBIT A-1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER TASK ORDER ONE: ELECTRIC COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS SCOPE OF SERVICES I. Project Overview: The scope of services for Task Order One: Electric Cost of Service Analysis includes a comprehensive cost of service analysis (COSA) on the City of Palo Alto’s Electric Utility and proposed revisions to existing rate structures if necessary. The final deliverables will include a cost of service model, recommended rates, and a public report detailing the assumptions used and the consultant’s recommended rates. The report and model will provide full cost justification for proposed rate structures including tiered pricing, if necessary, consistent with the requirements of the California constitution, specifically those added by Proposition 26 (2010). The study will show determination of revenue requirements using the Cash basis. For an example of the City’s electric utility financial projections and detailed utility information, please refer to the City’s proposed FY 2016 Electric Utility Financial Plan: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/46767 Due to the City’s budget cycle and associated timelines, the study will be conducted in two phases. Phase I (subtasks one through four) will consist of calculating the cost of service by rate class. In Phase II of the study (subtasks five through eight), the focus will be a review of current rate structures and proposed changes where necessary. In each phase the consultant will be expected to coordinate the cost of service model with the following parallel projects: 1. Development of a hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism (coordinated by City staff); 2. Development of a set of rules and rates for solar customers once the City’s net energy metering program reaches capacity (coordinated by City staff); 3. Updating of the City’s renewable and non-renewable energy buyback rates (coordinated by City staff); and 4. A connection fee study (coordinated by consultant or City staff). The City’s list of existing rates is shown below. Rate schedules may be found on the utility’s website at: Residential rates: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/residents/rates.asp Non-residential rates: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/business/rates.asp DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 Customer Class Rate Schedule(s) Description Link to Rate Schedule Separately metered residential E-1, E-1 TOU E-1: Three tier rate E-1 TOU: Tiered TOU rate No fixed or minimum charges E-1 E-1 TOU Small Commercial (less than 8,000 kWh per month, three highest months) E-2 Seasonal uniform rate No demand charge No fixed or minimum charges E-2 Medium Commercial (more than 8,000 kWh per month, three highest months, but less than 1,000 kW demand.) E-4, E-4 TOU E-4: Seasonal uniform variable rate with seasonal demand charge E-4 TOU: Seasonal TOU variable rate with seasonal non-TOU demand charge No fixed or minimum charges Standby charge for customer-owned generation (no customers on this rate) E-4 E-4 TOU Large Commercial (more than 1,000 kW demand.) E-7, E-7 TOU E-7: Seasonal uniform variable rate with seasonal demand charge E-7 TOU: Seasonal TOU variable rate with seasonal non-TOU demand charge No fixed or minimum charges Standby charge for customer-owned generation (no customers on this rate) E-7 E-7 TOU City Customers E-18 Seasonal uniform rate No demand charge No fixed or minimum charges E-18 Unmetered Lighting E-14 Fixed charge per lamp E-14 Unmetered Miscellaneous Equipment E-16 Fixed charges for traffic signal equipment, custom contract for other types of equipment Charges for pole attachments and conduit use E-16 All rate schedules listed above should be incorporated into the COSA model. In doing this, some issues of particular concern to the City include: The need for a clear cost of service justification for any rate design proposed, not just for allocations between customer classes, but for the rate design itself. For example, if the final outcome of the study is to continue with an inclining block rate for residential customers, the COSA model and report should be able to justify and explain the reasons that allocating additional costs to higher tiers represents the cost of serving the impacted DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 customers (for example, and for illustrative purposes only, a higher marginal cost of energy or the allocation of peaking costs to higher tiers). The time periods and hourly cost assumptions underlying the residential TOU and non-residential TOU should be coordinated, and should match the assumptions underlying the energy buyback rate schedules being developed by City staff. While the consultant must examine all customer classes to determine their equity and reasonableness, the City is especially interested in existing non-residential customer classes (E-2, E-4, E-7, and E-18) and seeks a determination on whether any customer classes should be consolidated or changed, or new customer classes added. The City’s unmetered lighting and equipment rates (E-14 and E-16) should be updated. Standby rate features of the E-4 and E-7 rate schedules should be included in the cost of service model. When evaluating residential rate design, the consultant should be prepared to evaluate the differing load profiles of customers with electric vehicles and electric heating and whether adjustments to the base residential rate design should apply to these customers. Throughout the Project, the City’s responsibilities will include: Providing overall project management and scheduling Communicating with elected and appointed officials and other stakeholders Providing load data, cost data, and other information required for the project Providing the consultant with background on the City’s operations, customer characteristics, and policy objectives Working with the consultant to determine how rate proposals will affect the utility and its customers Throughout the Project, Consultant’s responsibilities will include: Providing City staff with regular updates on project progress Providing brief memos summarizing recommendations at key phases during model development Developing a clear cost of service model in Excel that can be updated by City staff as part of future rate changes Reviewing existing customer classes and rate structures and recommending changes if necessary. Providing a comprehensive report summarizing the results for the COSA, the rate structure options reviewed and proposed rate structure revisions, if any. The report will provide details of key assumptions and algorithms used in the study results. The report will also include a detailed, clear presentation and explanation of allocation of costs by rate schedule, the required rate adjustments, and the impact of various rate design options on customer bills at various usage levels. Comparisons will be shown between bills in Palo Alto versus similar bills in neighboring cities. Presenting the results of the study to City staff and policy bodies upon request. II. SUBTASKS AND DELIVERABLES: The following subtasks and deliverables are required for the study: DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 Subtask 1 – Initial project meeting Objective: To determine the scope of work, and the utility’s policy goals and objectives. The first action for the project will be a kickoff meeting where City staff and Consultant meet to discuss overall project objectives, expectations and deliverables. Key assumptions that will be used in the development of rate design will be discussed and a method for obtaining the necessary data will be developed. 1. Key issues and changes identified by the utility from the most recent COSA, and the project goals and objectives will be determined during an initial project kickoff meeting. 2. In addition, communication protocols will be outlined and clarified to ensure a quick response to any requests by the City. 3. A review of the most recent COSA and key issues and recommended changes will be discussed with City staff. The City’s most recent COSA assumptions and methodology will be reviewed and possible modifications will be suggested as appropriate. 4. Assist the City staff in developing an overall cost allocation and rate philosophy. 5. Determine coordination needs with City staff related to the hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism, solar rules and rates, generation buyback rates, and connection fee study. Deliverables A summary of any adjustments to be made to project scope/schedule. A list of all data to be collected during Subtask 2. Subtask 2 – Data collection Objective: Gather the necessary data to perform the Cost of Service model and analysis. Consultant will accumulate the necessary data and evaluate current and alternative rate structures. Utilities staff will provide data noted in Subtask 2 of the RFP. A data request will be provided to the utility and a process to obtain the information necessary to complete the study will be developed. Work with City staff to develop detailed power supply costs data to identify the cost causation rationale for all potential cost components of the City’s electric rates, including TOU rates, tiered rates, demand rates, generation buyback value, net-metering rates, and hydro risks and associated costs. Deliverables Written acknowledgement that all data has been received. Subtask 3 – Review of Existing Customer Classes Objective: Consultant will review the City’s customer classes and its retail rate objectives as well as review load data, customer class characteristics, and impacts of customers on the distribution system. Consultant, working with staff, will develop an agreed-upon list of customer DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 classes to be used in the model. 1. A review of the appropriate number of rate classes, based on the character of service provided, will be completed to ensure the proper rate classes are being considered. Deliverables Memo summarizing recommended adjustments to customer classes. Subtask 4 – Cost of Service Model Development – Cost Allocation Objective: Identify the current and projected revenues and expenses for the utility’s electric system. Build COSA model. Determine an equitable allocation of the annual revenue requirement to the various customer classes using generally accepted cost allocation methods. Consultant will determine the revenue requirements for FY 2017-2023 and calculate the revenue requirements using cash basis. A key concept in this process is the “cost causation” nature of each expense incurred by the utility. While a seven year revenue requirement will be developed, it is anticipated that the COSA and rate design will be done for only one year at a time. Consultant will then compare revenues received from each class to the cost of service and recommend an overall average rate adjustment target and adjustments required for each rate class. Revenue Requirement Tasks 1. The model will be set up using a cash basis revenue requirement. 2. The test period will be set up as specified by the City following discussion with the consultant. 3. The City’s load and customer forecast for the utility will be reviewed and incorporated into the COSA model. 4. The utility’s financial records will be analyzed to evaluate the current and budgeted system revenues from current rates and resources available to finance the forecast revenue requirement for the desired test period. 5. The impact of projected revenues and expenses on the utility’s debt-related financial ratios will be determined. 6. The cost of power supply and transmission expenses, other operation and maintenance expenses, taxes, debt service expenses, capital improvements funded from revenues, reserve fund requirements and all other necessary costs associated with the operation of the utility’s system will be analyzed to determine the annual revenue requirement for each year of the study period. 7. Projected revenues will be compared to the annual revenue requirement (total expenses) to identify the need for a rate adjustment to existing monthly rates and charges. If necessary and requested by City, a plan can be developed to phase-in rate changes over time, should large adjustments be required. Model Building Tasks 8. Consultant has developed an embedded cost of service model consisting of a multi-year forecast period. The model is transparent and costs remain “unbundled” throughout the analysis. This enables utility staff and other reviewers to follow each cost item throughout the process of functionalization, classification and allocation. The cost of service model will be given to the DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 City at no additional cost. COSA Tasks 9. The City’s most recent COSA assumptions and methodology will be reviewed and modifications will be suggested as appropriate. 10. Costs will be functionalized by itemizing plant investments and related expenses by the following functions: production, transmission, distribution, customer services, and administrative and general (A&G). 11. Costs will be classified to determine whether each individual plant investment or cost was incurred to meet a customer’s demand, energy or customer related need. Consultant will consult with the City planning engineers to ensure cost-causation for each function is proper. 12. Costs will be allocated to the utility’s rate classes by developing allocation factors based on customer information, historic load data and projected usage by rate class. Where data is not available, industry standard data from Consultant will be applied. A review of the planning, design, and operational data for the system will be used to determine the facilities in place and how each rate class benefits from and uses these facilities. Some costs may be directly assigned to a specific rate class where appropriate. 13. Average unit costs by functional category will be provided based on the allocated costs and billing determinants developed for each rate class. Unit costs will be presented for energy (¢/kWh), demand ($/kW), and customer related ($/Customer/Mo.) charges for each customer class. The average unit costs represent cost of service rates and can be used as an input in the rate setting process. 14. Any cost shifts that may exist between rate classes will be identified in this task and addressed and reasonable suggestions to remedy them provided by the consultant, before starting any rate design. Prop 26 considerations will be discussed and coordinated with the City’s legal team. Deliverables Draft cost of service model showing allocations of costs to customer classes. Memo summarizing any adjustments. Subtask 5 – Review of Existing Rate Structures and Rate Design Scoping Objective: Based on the City’s goals and adopted rate design guidelines, review the existing rate structures and provide recommendation on possible adjustments going forward. Consultant will review the City’s current rate structures and its retail rate objectives as well as assess the structure of existing rate designs. Consultant, working with City, will develop a list of recommended adjustments to existing rates. 1. Review each current rate schedule and provide a discussion on the potential issues or concerns with each rate schedule. 2. Review load profiles, customer class characteristics, power supply characteristics, distribution system requirements to assess the appropriateness of the current rate structure. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 3. The City’s current schedule of rates and charges is fairly standard and in keeping with generally-accepted utility practice; however, a couple of specific issues may warrant closer consideration in this study. Deliverables Memo summarizing any recommended adjustments to existing rate designs. Subtask 6 - Cost of Service Model Development – Rate Design and Final Draft Model Objective: Develop rate options using a variety of approaches, which must each conform to the principle that rates must represent the cost to the City’s utility of providing service. While average unit costs provide the cost basis for setting rates, other criteria will also be considered in designing rate options. Consultant will implement rate designs for each customer class incorporating any adjustments from Subtask 5. A comparison of typical bills under existing and proposed rates will be completed. 1. Different rate options based upon the goals and objectives identified by the utility will be analyzed. 2. Proposed rates for energy (¢/kWh), demand ($/kW), and customer related ($/Customer/Mo.) charges will be provided for each customer class for the COSA test period. 3. Alternative rate designs including changing the inclining blocks, time of use, seasonal, residential demand rates, electric vehicles impacts, minimum bill and other appropriate charges may be developed, if desired. The pros and cons of each option will be discussed with City staff and documented in the final report. 4. Customer bill comparisons for a large sample group for each rate schedule will be developed to determine the rate impacts on different customers for different rate alternatives. New rate proposals will also be compared to other neighboring electric utilities to compare the relative rate competitiveness of the utility to other local utilities. 5. Un-metered lighting and equipment rates will be reviewed and Consultant will work with city staff to determine the cost of service for these customers. These rates are usually best handled outside the traditional cost of service model as the data available is not sufficient for proper modeling. 6. Standby rate objectives and guidelines will be discussed with City staff. Options for calculating and designing the standby rates will be provided. Based on City staff input, standby rates will be calculated. Deliverables Final draft cost of service model, including all recommended rates. Memo summarizing the existing and proposed rates and bill comparisons for residential and non-residential customers. Subtask 7 – Final Report and Model Objective: A draft report with the results of the cost of service analysis will be provided after the preliminary cost of service analysis is finalized. In addition, consultant will meet with City staff to review and discuss the results and receive feedback on the analysis and results. Once staff has reviewed the report, comments will be incorporated and a final report will be provided to the DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 City. The report will summarize the results for the cost of service analysis, the rate structure options reviewed and proposed rate structure revisions, if any. The report will provide details of key assumptions and algorithms used in the study results. The report will also include a detailed, clear presentation and explanation of allocation of costs by rate schedule, the required rate adjustments, and the impact of various rate design options on customer bills at various usage levels. Comparisons will be shown between bills in Palo Alto versus similar bills in neighboring cities. In addition, consultant will provide training on the COSA model as well as provide model documentation. Deliverables Final cost of service model in Excel format. Model documentation and training session. Electronic copy of comprehensive final report. Subtask 8 – Workshops, Meetings and Public Hearings Objective: Consultant will present results and make recommendations to the City’s management staff and policymakers, as desired. Included in the estimated budget is one kick-off meeting and two additional planning meetings on-site to meet with staff. Additional meeting have not been included in the budget. Any additional meetings will require amendment of this Task Order or approval of an additional task order. I hereby authorize the performance of I hereby acknowledge receipt and acceptance the work described above in this Task Order. of this Task Order and warrant that I have authority to sign on behalf of Consultant. APPROVED: APPROVED: CITY OF PALO ALTO EES CONSULTING, INC. BY:__________________________________ BY:____________________________________ Name ________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title_________________________________ Title___________________________________ Date _________________________________ Date ___________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 EXHIBIT “A-2” PROFESSIONAL ON-CALL SERVICES TASK ORDER Consultant hereby agrees to perform the work detailed below in accordance with all the terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced in Item 1A below. All exhibits or attachments referenced in Item 8 are incorporated into the Agreement by this reference. The Consultant shall furnish the necessary facilities, professional, technical and supporting personnel required by this Task Order as described below. CONTRACT NO. ISSUE DATE Purchase Requisition No. 1A. MASTER AGREEMENT NUMBER 1B. TASK ORDER NO. 2. CONSULTANT 3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: START: COMPLETION: 4 TOTAL TASK ORDER PRICE: $__________________ BALANCE REMAINING IN MASTER AGREEMENT $__________________________________ 5. BUDGET CODE: _______________ COST CENTER_________________ COST ELEMENT______________ WBS/CIP___ _______PHASE___ 6. CITY PROJECT MANAGER’S NAME/DEPARTMENT _________________________________________ 7. DESCRIPTION OF SCOPE OF SERVICES MUST INCLUDE: WORK TO BE PERFORMED SCHEDULE OF WORK BASIS FOR PAYMENT & FEE SCHEDULE DELIVERABLES REIMBURSABLES (with “not to exceed” cost) 8. ATTACHMENTS: A: Scope of Services B: __________________________________ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I hereby authorize the performance of I hereby acknowledge receipt and acceptance the work described above in this Task Order. of this Task Order and warrant that I have authority to sign on behalf of Consultant. APPROVED: APPROVED: CITY OF PALO ALTO EES CONSULTING, INC. BY:__________________________________ BY:____________________________________ Name ________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title_________________________________ Title___________________________________ Date _________________________________ Date ___________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 2 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the time period specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of execution of the task order. Milestones Final Deadline 1. Task One – Cost of Service Analysis January 8, 2016 2. Subsequent tasks – On-call Services As set forth in separate task order TASK ORDER ONE: COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Notice to Proceed with Task Order One: September 15, 2015 Subtask 1 (Scoping) Complete: September 21, 2015 Subtask 2 (Data Collection) Complete: September 28, 2015 Subtask 3 (Customer Class Review) Complete: October 12, 2015 Subtask 4 (COSA Model – Allocations) Complete: October 19, 2015 Subtask 5 (Rate Structure Review) Complete: November 2, 2015 Subtask 6 (COSA Model – Final Draft) Complete: November 16, 2015 Draft report for City review: December 7, 2015 Report and model finalized: January 8, 2016 DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 18 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all Services, including those set forth on Task Order One and on any subsequent task order(s), including any reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed $200,000. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Services, including On-Call Services and reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $200,000 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $0.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task Order One $97,839.50 (Cost of Service Analysis) Total budget for all subsequent tasks $102,160.50 (On-Call Services) – actual budget for each task to be agreed upon in the task order Maximum Total Compensation $200,000.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services, if any, only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 19 request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 20 EXHIBIT “C-1” COMPENSATION HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE President ............................................................................................ $200 Senior Associate ................................................................................... 195 Manager ............................................................................................... 190 Senior Project Manager ....................................................................... 185 Project Manager .................................................................................. 180 Senior Analyst/Engineer ...................................................................... 175 Analyst/Engineer .................................................................................. 170 Senior Administrative Assistant ........................................................... 120 DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 21 EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 22 THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON- PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 INSR ADDLSUBRLTRINSRWVD DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) PRODUCER CONTACTNAME: FAXPHONE(A/C, No):(A/C, No, Ext): E-MAILADDRESS: INSURER A : INSURED INSURER B : INSURER C : INSURER D : INSURER E : INSURER F : POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXPTYPE OF INSURANCE LIMITS(MM/DD/YYYY)(MM/DD/YYYY) GENERAL LIABILITY AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY UMBRELLA LIAB EXCESS LIAB WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, if more space is required) AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # Y / N N / A (Mandatory in NH) ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVEOFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? EACH OCCURRENCE $ DAMAGE TO RENTEDCOMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY $PREMISES (Ea occurrence) CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person)$ PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $ GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER:PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ $PRO-POLICY LOCJECT COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $(Ea accident) BODILY INJURY (Per person)$ANY AUTO ALL OWNED SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY (Per accident)$AUTOS AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $AUTOS (Per accident) $ OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $ DED RETENTION $$ WC STATU-OTH- TORY LIMITS ER E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ If yes, describe under E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER:REVISION NUMBER: CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION © 1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORDACORD 25 (2010/05) ACORDTM CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 8/20/2015 Kibble & Prentice, a USI Co PR 601 Union Street, Suite 1000 Seattle, WA 98101 206 441-6300 610-362-8528 pl.certrequest@kpcom.com EES Consulting, Inc. 570 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 Travelers Indemnity Co. of Amer U. S. Specialty Insurance Compa 25666 29599 A X X X 6805975L780 11/01/2014 11/01/2015 1,000,000 1,000,000 10,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 A X X BA7577L693 11/01/2014 11/01/2015 1,000,000 A N 6805975L780 (WA Stop Gap) 11/01/2014 11/01/2015 X 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 B Professional Liability USS1525668 03/16/2015 03/16/2016 $1,000,000 per claim $1,000,000 annl aggr. The General Liability and Automobile Liability policies include an automatic Additional Insured endorsement that provides Additional Insured status to the City of Palo Alto, its council members, officers, agents and employees, only when there is a written contract that requires such status, and only with regard to work performed on behalf of the named insured. The General Liability policy contains a special endorsement with "Primary and Noncontributory" wording, when required by written contract. City of Palo Alto Attn: Carolynn Bissett 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 1 of 1 #S16040398/M14602592 EESCONClient#: 331763 MXTJU 1 of 1 #S16040398/M14602592 DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 This page has been left blank intentionally: DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 COMMERC GENERAL L LIALIABIITY THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY.PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED (ARCHITECTS,ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS) This endorsement i ies insurance pro ided under t folmodfvhelowing: COMMERC GENERAL L ITY VERA AIALIABILCOGEPRT INSURANCE (Section III)for this Co eragevA.WHO IS AN INSUREDThefolisaddedtolowing Part.(Sectio II):n B.a.4.The fo lowing is added to Paragraph oflAnypersonororganizationthatyouagreeina Other I C IAL GENERALnsuranceOMMERCin"contract or agreement requir insurance"to in-ing LIABILI Y C T ONS (nTONDIISectio IV):clude as an additional insured on this Coverage Part,but only with respect to liabi ity "bodi n-l for ly i Howe i f ll "contract orver,f you speci ica y agree in a jury""property damage"or "personal injury",agreement requi ng "that theriinsurance insurance caused,in whole or in part,by your acts or omis-pro ided to an addit insured under this Co -v ional v sions or the acts or omissions of those acting on erage Part must apply on a primary basis,or ayourbehalf:pri -contributormaryandnony basis,this insurance is pri to other insurance that is a lable tomaryvaia.In the per mance o your ongoing opera-for f such additional insured which co such addi-verstions; tional will notinsuredasanamedinsured,and web.In connection with pre ises owned by orm share with the other v that:insurance,pro idedrentedtoyou;or (1)The "bodil in "or "property da "foryjurymagec.In connection with "your work"and included which co is sought occurs;andveragewithinthe"products-completed operations hazard".(2)The "personal injury"for which co erage isv sought arises out of f m itanofensecomted;Such person or organization does not quali asfy an additional insured for "bodi injury""propertyly,af you ha entered into that "contrac ortervet damage"or "personal injury"fo which that per-r agreement requi insurance".But th insur-ring is son or organization has assumed l l in a con-iabi ity ance stil v id and collect le otherlisexcessoveralib tract or ment.agree insurance,whether pri xcess,contingent ormary,e on any other basis,that is a i to the insuredvalableTheinsuranceprovadditionalidedtosuchinsuredwhentheinsuredisanadditionalinsuredunderislmfolows:i ited as l any other insurance.d.This insurance does not apply on any basis to C.8.TransferThefolowingisaddedtoParagraphlanypersonororganizationforwhichcoer-v Of R hts Of Recovery Against Ot T Usighersoageasanadditionainsuredspecicalislfily in CO GENERAL LIABIL TY CON-MMERCIAL IaddedbyanotherendorsementtothisCor-ve DI ONS onTI(Secti IV):age Part. W wai e any rights o reco ery we may haevfvvee.This insurance does not apply to the render- against any person or organization because ofingoorfaluretorenderany"profifessional serv ".ices payments we make for "bodily injur ","propertyy damage"or "personal injury"arising out of "yourf.The li i of insurance af to the addi-m ts forded work"perfor by you,or on your behalf undermed,tional insured shall be the li i which youmts a "contract ment requi insurance"withoragreeringagreedinthat"contract or agreement requir- that person or organization.W wai theseeveinginsurance"to pro i for that additvdeional rights only where you ha agreed to do so asveinsured,or the li ts shown in the Declara-mi part of the "contract or agreement requir insur-ingtionsforthCoPartwhicheareisverage,ver less.This endorsement does not increase the ance"with such person or organization entered li i of insurance stated in themts LIMI S OFT into by you before,and in e fec when,the "bodilyft CG D3 81 09 07 ©2007 The Travelers Companies,Inc.Page 1 of 2 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office,Inc.,with its permission DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 COMMERC GENERAL L LIALIABIITY injury or "property damage"occurs,or the "per-erage Part,pro ided that the "bodily in "and"v jury sonal injury"f m iofenseiscomtted."property damage"occurs,and the "personal in- jury"f m itted:is caused by an o fense co mD.DEFINI ONSThefoldeftionisaddedtolowinginiTI a.A you ha en ered into that contract orftervet(Sectio :n V) agreement;"Contract or agreement requiring insurance" b.W i f t or agreementhlethatpartothecontrac ismeansthatpartoanycontractoragreeun-f ment in e f ;andfectderwhichyouarerequiredtoincapersonorlude organization as an additional insured on this Cov-c.Before f li iod.the end o the po cy per Page 2 o 2f ©2007 The Travelers Companies,Inc.CG D3 81 09 07 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office,Inc.,with its permission DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 COMMERCIAL AUTO THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY.PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BUSINESS AUTO EXTENSION ENDORSEMENT This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF COVERAGE This endorsement broadens coverage.However,coverage for any injury,damage or medical expenses described in any of the provisions of this endorsement may be excluded or limited by another endorsement to the Coverage Part,and these coverage broadening provisions do not apply to the extent that coverage is excluded or limited by such an endorsement.The following listing is a general cover- age description only.Limitations and exclusions may apply to these coverages.Read all the provisions of this en- dorsement and the rest of your policy carefully to determine rights,duties,and what is and is not covered. H.HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE LOSS OFA.BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED USE INCREASED LIMITB.BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED I.PHYSICAL DAMAGE TRANSPORTATIONC.EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO EXPENSES INCREASED LIMIT D.EMPLOYEES AS INSURED J.PERSONAL PROPERTY E.SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS INCREASED K.AIRBAGS LIMITS L.NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR F.HIRED AUTO LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV-LOSS ERAGE INDEMNITY BASIS M.BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION G.WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE GLASS N.UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS PROVISIONS this insurance applies and only to the extent thatA.BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED person or organization qualifies as an "insured"The following is added to Paragraph A.1.,Who Is under the Who Is An Insured provision containedAnInsured,of SECTION II COVERED AUTOS in Section II.LIABILITY COVERAGE: C.EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTOAnyorganizationyounewlyacquireorformdur- 1.The following is added to Paragraph A.1.,ing the policy period over which you maintain Who Is An Insured,of SECTION II COV-50%or more ownership interest and that is not ERED AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE:separately insured for Business Auto Coverage. An "employee"of yours is an "insured"whileCoverageunderthisprovisionisaffordedonlyun- operating an "auto"hired or rented under atilthe180thdayafteryouacquireorformtheor- contract or agreement in an "employee's"ganization or the end of the policy period,which-name,with your permission,while performingeverisearlier.duties related to the conduct of your busi-B.BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ness. The following is added to Paragraph c.in A.1.,2.The following replaces Paragraph b.in B.5., Who Is An Insured,of SECTION II COVERED Other Insurance,of SECTION IV BUSI- NESS AUTO CONDITIONS:AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: b.For Hired Auto Physical Damage Cover-Any person or organization who is required under age,the following are deemed to be cov-a written contract or agreement between you and ered "autos"you own:that person or organization,that is signed and (1)Any covered "auto"you lease,hire,executed by you before the "bodily injury"or rent or borrow;and"property damage"occurs and that is in effect during the policy period,to be named as an addi-(2)Any covered "auto"hired or rented by tional insured is an "insured"for Covered Autos your "employee"under a contract in Liability Coverage,but only for damages to which an "employee's"name,with your CA T3 53 02 15 ©2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company.All rights reserved.Page 1 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office,Inc.with its permission. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 COMMERCIAL AUTO permission,while performing duties (a)With respect to any claim made or "suit" related to the conduct of your busi-brought outside the United States of America,the territories and possessionsness. of the United States of America,PuertoHowever,any "auto"that is leased,hired,Rico and Canada:rented or borrowed with a driver is not a covered "auto".(i)You must arrange to defend the "in- sured"against,and investigate or set-D.EMPLOYEES AS INSURED tle any such claim or "suit"and keepThefollowingisaddedtoParagraphA.1.,Who Is us advised of all proceedings and ac-An Insured,of SECTION II COVERED AUTOS tions.LIABILITY COVERAGE:(ii)Neither you nor any other involvedAny"employee"of yours is an "insured"while us-"insured"will make any settlementingacovered"auto"you don't own,hire or borrow without our consent.in your business or your personal affairs.(iii)We may,at our discretion,participateE.SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS INCREASED in defending the "insured"against,orLIMITSinthesettlementof,any claim or 1.The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(2),"suit". of SECTION II COVERED AUTOS LIABIL-(iv)We will reimburse the "insured"forITYCOVERAGE:sums that the "insured"legally must (2)Up to $3,000 for cost of bail bonds (in-pay as damages because of "bodily cluding bonds for related traffic law viola-injury"or "property damage"to which tions)required because of an "accident"this insurance applies,that the "in- we cover.We do not have to furnish sured"pays with our consent,but only up to the limit described in Para-these bonds. graph C.,Limits Of Insurance,of2.The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(4),SECTION II COVERED AUTOSofSECTIONIICOVEREDAUTOSLIABIL-LIABILITY COVERAGE.ITY COVERAGE: (v)We will reimburse the "insured"for(4)All reasonable expenses incurred by the the reasonable expenses incurred"insured"at our request,including actual with our consent for your investiga-loss of earnings up to $500 a day be-tion of such claims and your defensecauseoftimeofffromwork.of the "insured"against any suchF.HIRED AUTO LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV-"suit",but only up to and includedERAGEINDEMNITYBASISwithinthelimitdescribedinPara- The following replaces Subparagraph (5)in Para-graph C.,Limits Of Insurance,of graph B.7.,Policy Period,Coverage Territory,SECTION II COVERED AUTOS of SECTION IV BUSINESS AUTO CONDI-LIABILITY COVERAGE,and not in addition to such limit.Our duty toTIONS: make such payments ends when we(5)Anywhere in the world,except any country or have used up the applicable limit ofjurisdictionwhileanytradesanction,em-insurance in payments for damages,bargo,or similar regulation imposed by the settlements or defense expenses.United States of America applies to and pro- hibits the transaction of business with or (b)This insurance is excess over any valid within such country or jurisdiction,for Cov-and collectible other insurance available ered Autos Liability Coverage for any covered to the "insured"whether primary,excess, contingent or on any other basis."auto"that you lease,hire,rent or borrow without a driver for a period of 30 days or less (c)This insurance is not a substitute for re-and that is not an "auto"you lease,hire,rent quired or compulsory insurance in anyorborrowfromanyofyour"employees",country outside the United States,its ter-partners (if you are a partnership),members ritories and possessions,Puerto Rico and(if you are a limited liability company)or Canada.members of their households. Page 2 of 4 ©2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company.All rights reserved.CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office,Inc.with its permission. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 COMMERCIAL AUTO (2)In or on your covered "auto".You agree to maintain all required or compulsory insurance in any such coun-This coverage applies only in the event of a total try up to the minimum limits required by theft of your covered "auto". local law.Your failure to comply with No deductibles apply to this Personal Propertycompulsoryinsurancerequirementswillcoverage.not invalidate the coverage afforded by K.AIRBAGSthispolicy,but we will only be liable to the same extent we would have been liable The following is added to Paragraph B.3.,Exclu- had you complied with the compulsory in-sions,of SECTION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE surance requirements.COVERAGE: Exclusion 3.a.does not apply to "loss"to one or(d)It is understood that we are not an admit- more airbags in a covered "auto"you own that in-ted or authorized insurer outside the flate due to a cause other than a cause of "loss"United States of America,its territories set forth in Paragraphs A.1.b.and A.1.c.,butandpossessions,Puerto Rico and Can- only:ada.We assume no responsibility for the furnishing of certificates of insurance,or a.If that "auto"is a covered "auto"for Compre- for compliance in any way with the laws hensive Coverage under this policy; of other countries relating to insurance.b.The airbags are not covered under any war- ranty;andG.WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE GLASS c.The airbags were not intentionally inflated.The following is added to Paragraph D.,Deducti- ble,of SECTION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE We will pay up to a maximum of $1,000 for any COVERAGE:one "loss". No deductible for a covered "auto"will apply to L.NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR glass damage if the glass is repaired rather than LOSS replaced.The following is added to Paragraph A.2.a.,of H.HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE LOSS OF SECTION IV BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: USE INCREASED LIMIT Your duty to give us or our authorized representa- tive prompt notice of the "accident"or "loss"ap-The following replaces the last sentence of Para- plies only when the "accident"or "loss"is knowngraphA.4.b.,Loss Of Use Expenses,of SEC- to:TION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE: (a)You (if you are an individual);However,the most we will pay for any expenses for loss of use is $65 per day,to a maximum of (b)A partner (if you are a partnership); $750 for any one "accident".(c)A member (if you are a limited liability com- I.PHYSICAL DAMAGE TRANSPORTATION pany); EXPENSES INCREASED LIMIT (d)An executive officer,director or insurance manager (if you are a corporation or other or-The following replaces the first sentence in Para- ganization);orgraphA.4.a.,Transportation Expenses,of SECTION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVER-(e)Any "employee"authorized by you to give no- AGE:tice of the "accident"or "loss". We will pay up to $50 per day to a maximum of M.BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION $1,500 for temporary transportation expense in-The following replaces Paragraph A.5.,Transfercurredbyyoubecauseofthetotaltheftofacov-Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us,ered "auto"of the private passenger type.of SECTION IV BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- TIONS:J.PERSONAL PROPERTY 5.Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery AgainstThefollowingisaddedtoParagraphA.4.,Cover- Others To UsageExtensions,of SECTION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE:We waive any right of recovery we may have against any person or organization to the ex-Personal Property tent required of you by a written contract We will pay up to $400 for "loss"to wearing ap-signed and executed prior to any "accident" parel and other personal property which is:or "loss",provided that the "accident"or "loss" arises out of operations contemplated by(1)Owned by an "insured";and CA T3 53 02 15 ©2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company.All rights reserved.Page 3 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office,Inc.with its permission. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 COMMERCIAL AUTO such contract.The waiver applies only to the The unintentional omission of,or unintentional person or organization designated in such error in,any information given by you shall not contract.prejudice your rights under this insurance.How- N.UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ever this provision does not affect our right to col- lect additional premium or exercise our right ofThefollowingisaddedtoParagraphB.2.,Con- cancellation or non-renewal.cealment,Misrepresentation,Or Fraud,of SECTION IV BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Page 4 of 4 ©2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company.All rights reserved.CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office,Inc.with its permission. DocuSign Envelope ID: E14464F0-23A1-473C-805A-8EEF41859AC5 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5996) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Grant Funds Receipt for Institute of Museum and Library Services Title: Approval of $43,125 for Expenses Associated With the Creative Ecology Project at the Palo Alto Art Center and Junior Museum & Zoo for Fiscal Year 2016 and Adoption of the Associated Budget Amendment Ordinance From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommended Motion Staff recommends that Council authorize the approval of $43,125 for planned expenses in Fiscal Year 2016 in conjunction with the Creative Ecology project at the Palo Alto Art Center and Junior Museum & Zoo, to be reimbursed by the Institute of Museum and Library Services upon expenditure. In addition, staff recommends the authorization of a Budget Amendment Ordinance recognizing $43,125 in additional revenue and appropriating $43,125 in the Community Services Department General Fund budget. This action represents a portion of the total $88,010 Institute of Museum and Library Services grant, which will span Fiscal Years 2016 and 2017. Background The Palo Alto Art Center and Junior Museum & Zoo received a grant of $88,010 from the Institute of Museum and Library Services to present the project Creative Ecology. This grant was approved by Council on November 17, 2014 (CMR 5257). Creative Ecology is an innovative art and science residency program that promotes learning about and appreciation of the natural world through the creative process, engaging artists, art and science educators, and the larger community. This unique STEAM education and exhibition opportunity is intended to provide a model for the museum field. This advance covers anticipated expenses during Fiscal Year 2016, for artists Linda Gass, David Tomb, and Jenny Odell, along with associated staffing expenses, evaluation and materials costs. The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is the primary source of federal support for the nation’s 123,000 libraries and 35,000 museums. Their mission is to inspire libraries and museums to advance innovation, lifelong learning, and cultural and City of Palo Alto Page 2 civic engagement. Their grant making, policy development, and research help libraries and museums deliver valuable services that make it possible for communities and individuals to thrive. This grant program is highly competitive. “The Institute of Museum and Library Services enlists hundreds of library and museum professionals throughout the United States to review grant applications and make recommendations on projects most worthy of funding,” says IMLS Director Susan H. Hildreth. “Receiving a grant from IMLS is a significant achievement and we congratulate the Palo Alto Art Center for being among the 2014 IMLS museum grantees.” Discussion This IMLS grant will be used to support the project Creative Ecology: Exploring Our Environment with Art, Science, and the Community project—a collaboration between the Palo Alto Art Center and the Junior Museum & Zoo. This 18-month project, commencing in July 2015, will comprise a series of four artist residencies, each with an artist who explores the natural world in his or her artwork. Each artist, with a group of community participants, will explore the natural open spaces around Palo Alto, then create a culminating artwork at the Palo Alto Art Center. An art educator from the Palo Alto Art Center and a science educator from the Junior Museum & Zoo will work together to create opportunities for learning and engagement in the residency and with associated programming around the culminating exhibition. In Fiscal Year 2016, the Creative Ecology project will involve residencies with artists Linda Gass and David Tomb, as well as the start of a residency with Jenny Odell. Grant funds will support honoraria for participating artists, additional staff support for the art and science educators to devote time to this project, materials costs, and a portion of the professional evaluator’s contract fees. Resource Impact The Creative Ecology project began in July 2015 and expenses will be incurred throughout Fiscal Year. The $43,125 will be reimbrused to the City from the IMLS grant this fiscal year. The remaining $44,885 in grant funds will be requested for Fiscal Year 2017, when additional grant activities occur. There is a $90,627 match associated with this grant, which will be fulfilled in-kind with existing regular and temporary salaries from Fiscal Years 2016 and 2017. Attachments: Attachment A: IMLS Award Notification Letter (PDF) Attachment B: CMR 5339 (PDF) Attachment C: Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOCX) Official Award Notification for Grants and Cooperative Agreements Date of Award August 12, 2014 From Total Award Amount To Award Period Award Number Awardee Name and Address Project Director 1305 Middlefield RoadPalo Alto, CA 94301-3349 October 01, 2014 March 31, 2016 MA-10-14-0431-14 $ 88,010.00 08/12/2014 $88,010.00 Original Award Authorizing OfficialRebecca Barbee 1313 Newell RoadPalo Alto, CA 94303 1313 Newell RoadPalo Alto, CA 94303 City of Palo AltoOrg. Unit: Palo Alto Art Center Foundation, Inc MFA-Learning Experiences Museums for America Lisa Ellsworth CFDA Number: 45.301 Basic Award Information IMLS Authorizing Official Signature Name and Title Christopher J. Reich Senior Advisor, Office of Museums 59140301P0.2014.MP140.65010.41 Accounting Code: 59140301P0.2014.MP140.65010.41 1. The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) provides this grant support pursuant to 20 USC § 9101 et seq. 2. The award is made in support of the purposes set forth in the original application or, if noted in the special terms and conditions of the award, in a revised plan of work that has been approved by IMLS program staff. 3. The administration of this grant and the expenditure of grant funds are subject to the special terms and conditions of this award, which appear on the second page of the award notification, and the General Terms and Conditions for IMLS Discretionary Awards. The latter document incorporates by reference the audit requirements of OMB Circular A-133 and the applicable uniform administrative requirements and cost principles promulgated by the Office of Management and Budget. 4. The first request for payment will indicate the grantee’s acceptance of the award. 5. The schedule of due dates for financial and performance reports is attached as the final page of the award notification. TIN No. - 946000389 DUNS No. - 050520782 Official Award Notification, page 2 City of Palo Alto MA-10-14-0431-14 IMLS CONTACTS Questions related to changes in project activities, personnel, and budgets or the extension of the grant period should be addressed to Helen Wechsler at (202)653-4779 or hwechsler@imls.gov . Questions related to the processing of payments, financial reports, notices of overdue reports, interest earned on grant funds, or audit requirements should be sent via e-mail to the financial specialist for your award, whose name and contact information may be found at http://www.imls.gov/recipients/administration.aspx. Alternatively, you may e-mail grantsadmin@imls.gov. Please include your log number, MA-10-14-0431-14, in the subject line of your message. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD The budget submitted on July 3, 2014 is approved. Changes in this budget will be subject to the limitations set forth in the General Terms and Conditions for IMLS Discretionary Awards. The grantee is required to cost share project expenses at no less than the level indicated in the approved budget. The approved budget includes a cost share of $90,627. The grantee is required to secure prior written approval from IMLS to replace or to substantially reduce the level of effort of the Project Director or the Authorizing Official identified on page 1 of this grant award notification, and/or of any personnel named in the List of Key Project Staff and Consultants submitted with the application. All requests for approval of such changes must be submitted as set forth in the General Terms and Conditions for IMLS Discretionary Awards. City of Palo Alto (ID # 5339) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 12/8/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: IMLS Museums for America Grant Application Title: Approval of the Submission of an Institute of Museum and Library Services Grant Application in the Amount of $25,000 for the Palo Alto Art Center From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommended Motion Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to submit an application for the Museum and Library Services “Museums for America” grant program in the amount of $25,000 to support the project “Discovery Kits for Families.” Executive Summary The Palo Alto Art hopes to request a $25,000 ‘Museums for America’ grant in support of its project “Discovery Kits for Families--Seeing and Making Art in a Non-Collecting Museum.” Background The Palo Alto Art Center has received two previous Museums for America grants—one to support the On the Road initiative during the Art Center’s renovation (received by the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation) and one this year to support a collaboration with the Junior Museum and Zoo to create an artist-in-residence program. Discussion During this ten-month proposed project, the Art Center will develop, prototype, test and evaluate an interactive kit containing a variety of art materials and activities that will help children and families explore the temporary exhibitions presented in the Art Center galleries. This project reinforces the Art Center mission and is informed by the guiding philosophy that an understanding and appreciation of the visual arts is best achieved by combining seeing and making art. Notification of the potential award for this grant is Fall 2015, with possible implementation beginning in December 2015. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Resource Impact Grant funds will support the enlistment of a consultant to research, prototype, and test the Discovery Kits, as well as funds to produce and implement the Kits. Minimal staff support will be involved in the project. There are no matching requirements in expenses or staff time required for this project. Policy Implications This proposed grant program is consistent with City policies and does not suggest any change to City policies or procedures. The review of this grant application by City Council is consistent with City-wide Policy 1-12 (Grant and funding request Applications) in order for Council to understand any on-going resource impacts. Environmental Review The recommendation in this report does not constitute a project requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: Attachment A - IMLS Museums for America (PDF) 1 Revised July 23, 2015 5996/mb Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 TO INCREASE REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR GRANTS IN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT BY $43,125 WITH A CORRESPONDING INCREASE TO THE EXPENDITURE ALLOCATION FOR THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT OF $43,125 IN THE GENERAL FUND. The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 15, 2015 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2016; and B. The Palo Alto Art Center and Junior Museum & Zoo received a grant of $88,010 from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) to present the project Creative Ecology. This grant was approved by Council on November 17, 2014 (CMR 5257); and C. Creative Ecology is an innovative art and science residency program that promotes learning about and appreciation of the natural world through the creative process, engaging artists, art and science educators, and the larger community; and D. This IMLS grant will be used to support the project Creative Ecology: Exploring Our Environment with Art, Science, and the Community project—a collaboration between the Palo Alto Art Center and the Junior Museum & Zoo; and E. City Council authorization is needed to amend the 2016 budget as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. The revenue estimate for grants in the Community Services Department in the General Fund is hereby increased in the amount of Forty Three Thousand One Hundred Twenty Five ($43,125). SECTION 3. The expenditure budget for the Community Services Department in the General Fund is hereby increased by Forty Three Thousand One Hundred Twenty Five ($43,125). SECTION 4. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, a two- thirds vote of the City Council is required to adopt this ordinance. SECTION 5. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. 2 Revised July 23, 2015 5996/mb SECTION 6. The actions taken in this ordinance do not constitute a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services ____________________________ Director of Community Services City of Palo Alto (ID # 6061) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Adoption of Design Guidelines for Electric Cost of Service Analysis Title: Finance Committee Recommendation That the City Council Approve Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff, the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC), and the Finance Committee recommend that Council approve the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis (Attachment A). Executive Summary Electric rates were last adjusted when a 10% rate increase went into effect on July 1, 2009. Staff intends to complete an electric cost of service analysis (COSA) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 in advance of a rate adjustment that staff projects will be necessary on July 1, 2016. The primary goal of the COSA will be to review the allocation of costs to customer classes and the electric rate design to ensure customers are charged according to the cost to serve them. However, the COSA will also include a review of the rate design issues created by increasing numbers of local solar installations, higher electric vehicle penetration, and the potential for building electrification. The COSA will be divided into short-term (Phase One) and long-term (Phase Two) work plans for addressing various types of rate design issues. The recommended action is for Council to approve the guidelines for the Phase One work plan, which must be completed in time to support the July 1, 2016 rate change. Staff will return for further discussion of the Phase Two work plan and will recommend additional rate design guidelines at that time to guide Phase Two rate design activities. The UAC reviewed the proposed guidelines at its June 3, 2015 meeting and voted to recommend that Council approve the guidelines. At its August 18, 2015 meeting, the Finance Committee voted unanimously to recommend that Council approve the guidelines. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background Traditionally, utilities use a COSA to allocate costs among customer classes and to design rates. COSAs gained a more important role for California publicly-owned utilities after the passage of Proposition 26 (2010). Proposition 26 added provisions to the State Constitution essentially defining every local government fee or charge as a tax, requiring voter approval, unless one of seven exceptions applies. Municipal electric rates that do not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing electric service are one exception from the constitutional definition of a tax, and its voter approval requirements. Although Proposition 26 is not retroactive, it will apply to the City’s electric rates once they are increased next via Council adoption. The FY 2016 Electric Utility Financial Plan (Staff Report 5681) projected the need for a 6% rate increase on July 1, 2016. The current rates, which were last changed on July 1, 2009, are based on a COSA performed in 2007. The fundamental structure of the City’s current rates has remained the same since the early 1980s. Discussion Staff has identified a variety of rate design issues to address in coming years. Some of the issues are more relevant to the long-term operation of the utility (five to ten years from now), and others are relevant to its operation over the next three to five years. These are summarized below and discussed in more detail in the report (Staff Report 5965) provided for the Finance Committee’s August 18, 2015 meeting (Attachment B). The short-term rate design issues include: The need to update the City’s electric COSA before the next rate increase. Managing drought-related hydroelectric resource variability. Increasing customer interest in efficient electric water heating and space heating. Higher penetration of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids. The need to address next steps for the City’s net energy metering (NEM) tariff for solar customers as the NEM capacity is needed within the next one to three years. The long-term rate design issues include: Decisions regarding installation of advanced metering that could enable time of use and other rate designs. Long-term potential for customer disconnection from the electric grid. Changing utility rate design trends. Rate impacts and opportunities of potential new State and local long-term carbon reduction targets. Staff proposes a two-phase work plan for addressing these issues. Phase One addresses the short-term rate design issues since staff anticipates the need to increase rates 6% on July 1, 2016 to preserve the financial position of the electric utility. Longer-term rate design issues will be addressed in Phase Two since these issues are not critical to address prior to July 1, 2016, City of Palo Alto Page 3 but preliminary analysis and some stakeholder discussions regarding those issues can begin in 2015 and 2016. Many of the Phase Two projects do not have specific deadlines for completion because they are driven by other planning efforts, such as the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and the City’s advanced metering planning efforts. The table below lists the issues to be addressed in each phase of the work plan. Note that the guidelines proposed for adoption at this time only address the Phase One work plan. Staff will return to the UAC and Council with additional guidelines for any Phase Two rate design work. Table 2: Electric Rate Design Work Plan Phase One Work Plan (to be completed by July 1, 2016) Before the spring 2016 financial forecasting and budget adoption process, develop an electric COSA that addresses the rate design issues discussed in the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Utility COSA (Attachment A). As part of the spring 2016 financial forecasting and budget adoption process, bring completed COSA and new proposed rate schedules to the UAC and Council for review and adoption. Develop rules and rates governing solar customers once the NEM program reaches capacity. Examine projected impacts of the current residential tiered rate design on customers with electric heating and electric vehicles, and explore pilot programs, rebates, or other methods for addressing those impacts, as needed. Complete a connection fee study to evaluate existing fees and address rules related to transformer upgrades. Phase Two Work Plan (to begin in 2015, completion dates to be determined) As the City establishes new sustainability goals as part of the S/CAP and continues to analyze future trends in energy use, identify the impact of these on electric rate design and the electric utility’s financial position and develop appropriate responses. As the CustomerConnect advanced metering pilot program progresses, and as a long-term plan is developed regarding advanced metering and other smart grid technologies, evaluate TOU rate structures and other rate designs those technologies could enable. Monitor electric rate trends at the State level and among other publicly owned utilities. Consider the use of fixed charges to recover certain types of costs. Begin assessing the impact of distributed generation, storage, grid-interactive appliances, and electric vehicles on the distribution system and identify the rate designs that would send appropriate and cost-based price signals to customers using these technologies. Develop a framework for monitoring the utility’s cost recovery and competitiveness in light of customer self-provision of power and disconnection from the electric grid. Evaluate the long-term rate impact to the electric utility of new electric vehicle and building electrification loads, as well as new highly efficient building code standards that are currently in development. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Rate Design Guidelines In the past, the UAC and Council have expressed concern about having limited ability to make changes to proposed rate structures once a COSA is completed. Staff agrees, and has committed to having policy discussions with the UAC and Council prior to embarking on a COSA. The proposed rate design guidelines for Phase One (Attachment A) will guide staff’s work over the next year. Separate rate design guidelines will be developed for Phase Two. The guidelines for the Phase One COSA are summarized below and discussed in more detail in the Finance Committee report (Attachment B): Guideline 1. Rates must be based on the cost of service. Guideline 2. Energy charges should be structured similarly to the way they are currently structured, if feasible. Guideline 3. All existing rates should be reviewed for inclusion in the COSA or for retirement. Guideline 4. The COSA should consider the impact of rate designs on electric vehicle and electric heating customers. Guideline 5. The COSA should consider the need for a minimum charge. Guideline 6. A hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism should be evaluated. Guideline 7. The effect of rate design on current and future solar customers should be considered. Guideline 8. A study of connection fees should be completed. Guideline 9. The effect of proposed rate design changes on low income customers should be considered. Committee Review and Recommendation At its June 3, 2015 meeting, the UAC voted to recommend Council approve the proposed Design Guidelines for Phase One of the Electric COSA. The final excerpted minutes from the UAC’s June 3, 2015 meeting are provided as Attachment C. The Finance Committee reviewed the proposed guidelines at its August 18, 2015 meeting. There were some discussion of how environmental goals could be balanced with the goal of creating cost-justified rates, and how this would be addressed in the second phase of the work plan. There were also questions about the impact of the drought on hydroelectric generator output, how that impacts the City’s renewable goals, and how the City can manage those impacts. However, the Finance Committee expressed overall support for the design guidelines, particularly based on the UAC’s recommendation. Action minutes from the August 18, 2015 Finance Committee meeting are provided as Attachment D. Timeline Following Council approval of these design guidelines and a consulting contract for the COSA (Staff Report 6038), staff will begin work on the COSA. The COSA is expected to be completed City of Palo Alto Page 5 by the spring of 2016 so that updated rates can be adopted as part of the FY 2017 budget process to be effective on July 1, 2016. Resource Impact The work associated with this project will be absorbed using existing staff and contract budgets. The new rates adopted as a result will be designed to generate adequate sales revenue to fund the electric utility’s operations in FY 2017. For FY 2017, the utility is projected to need roughly 6% more sales revenue ($8.8 million) than is generated by current rates, mainly due to increased costs associated with renewable projects. In addition, if the drought continues through FY 2017, additional revenue (as much as $10 million to $15 million) may be needed to fund higher market purchase costs resulting from low output of hydroelectric resources. As part of the COSA, staff will evaluate a hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism that could add a temporary charge to customer bills to generate additional revenue under a drought scenario. For more detail on these projections see the proposed FY 2016 Electric Utility Financial Plan (Staff Report 5681). Policy Implications The process of adopting these design guidelines provides the UAC and Council an opportunity to provide policy guidance to staff before work begins on the COSA. Once a COSA is complete, it can be difficult to modify the resulting rate design without reviewing and possibly amending the analysis. It is worth noting, however, that an additional discussion regarding a new set of design guidelines will be provided prior to the Phase Two (long-term) work plan described above. The analysis performed as part of this COSA will support other policy initiatives, including the Local Solar Plan (Staff Report 4608) and the S/CAP. Both the Phase One and Phase Two work plans involve analysis of the impacts of rate design on electrification, and are therefore part of staff’s response to the December 15, 2014 Council Colleagues Memo on Climate Action Plan Implementation Strategies to Reduce Use of Natural Gas and Gasoline through Fuel Switching to Carbon Free Electricity. The analysis of the hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism is part of the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Implementation Plan (Staff Report 1317). Environmental Review Adoption of the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act, thus no environmental review is required. Attachments: Attachment A: Electric COSA Rate Design Guidelines (PDF) Attachment B: Finance Committee Staff Report 5965 Design Guidelines for Electric COSA (without attachments) (PDF) Attachment C: Final Excerpted Minutes from the June 3, 2015 UAC meeting (PDF) Attachment D: Draft Excerpted Finance Committee Minutes of August 18, 2015 (PDF) Attachment A Design Guidelines for the 2015 (Phase One) Electric Utility Cost of Service Analysis 1. Rates must be based on the cost to serve customers. This is the overriding principle for the cost of service analysis (COSA); all other rate design considerations are subsidiary to this basic premise. 2. For this cost of service study, and to the extent feasible, energy charges should be based on existing rate structures. This includes: a. A tiered rate design structure for residents b. A flat general service rate for small non-residential users c. A flat demand and energy rate for large non-residential users 3. The COSA should involve a review of all existing rate schedules for inclusion in the COSA or retirement. 4. The COSA should take into account the impact of rate designs on electric vehicles and electric heating customers, and should investigate: a. the extent to which these customers have different load profiles from other residential customers; and b. the extent to which existing rate designs should be adjusted for these differing load profiles 5. The COSA should evaluate the need for a minimum charge. 6. A hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism should be evaluated. 7. The COSA should evaluate the impact of rate designs on the economics of local solar for current and future customers and should be coordinated with an analysis of long-term solar policies to be put into effect after the existing net energy metering tariff reaches capacity. 8. A connection fee study should be performed and policies regarding residential transformer upgrades should be reviewed, either as part of the COSA or as part of a parallel analysis. The COSA methodology should be coordinated with any potential connection fee changes or policy changes. 9. The impact of any proposed changes on low income customers should be evaluated City of Palo Alto (ID # 5965) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 8/18/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Design Guidelines for Electric COSA Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Approve Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the Finance Committee recommend that Council approve the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis (Attachment B). Executive Summary Electric rates were last adjusted when a 10% rate increase went into effect on July 1, 2009. Staff intends to complete an electric cost of service analysis (COSA) in Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 in advance of a rate adjustment that staff projects will be necessary on July 1, 2016. The primary goal of the COSA will be to review the allocation of costs to customer classes and the electric rate design to ensure customers are charged according to the cost to serve them. However, the COSA will also include a review of the rate design issues created by increasing numbers of local solar installations, higher electric vehicle penetration, and the potential for building electrification. This report discusses the existing rate design, gives an overview of the issues to be addressed in the COSA analysis, and sets forth short-term (Phase One) and long-term (Phase Two) work plans for addressing various types of rate design issues. The attached guidelines are only intended to address the Phase One work plan, which must be completed in time to support the July 1, 2016 rate change. Staff will return for further discussion of the Phase Two work plan and will recommend additional rate design guidelines at that time to guide Phase Two rate design activities. Background Traditionally, utilities use a COSA to allocate costs among customer classes and to design rates. COSAs gained a more important role for California publicly-owned utilities after the passage of Proposition 26 (2010). Proposition 26 added provisions to the State Constitution essentially defining every local government fee or charge as a tax, requiring voter approval, unless one of seven exceptions applies. Municipal electric rates that do not exceed the reasonable costs to ATTACHMENT B City of Palo Alto Page 2 the local government of providing electric service are one exception from the constitutional definition of a tax, and its voter approval requirements. Although Proposition 26 is not retroactive, it will apply to the City’s electric rates once they are increased next via Council adoption. The FY 2016 Electric Utility Financial Plan (Staff Report 5681) projected the need for a 6% rate increase on July 1, 2016. The current rates, which were last changed on July 1, 2009, are based on a COSA performed in 2007. The fundamental structure of the City’s current rates has remained the same since the early 1980s, though the commodity, distribution, and public benefits portions of the rates were “unbundled,” or separated out, during California’s deregulation of the electric market in the late 1990s. Like many utilities, Palo Alto had declining block rates (rates that decreased with increasing consumption) for all customers until the late 1970s, at which point the City switched to the current system. For residents, the current system includes inclining block rates (rates that increase with consumption, more commonly called tiered rates), and for the more diverse non-residential customer classes, flat seasonal rates with demand charges for larger customers. As Palo Alto transitioned to its current rate design, fixed charges for both types of customers were switched to minimum charges and eventually eliminated. The main driver for these changes was to encourage conservation. Discussion The following sections provide a review of the current rate structure and a discussion of rate design issues affecting the utility in the short term and in the long term. They also include a work plan and a proposed set of rate design guidelines to guide the COSA. Summary of Existing Rate Structure Table 1, below, summarizes the number of customers on each electric rate schedule and the percentage of the City’s sales volume they represent. Currently the electric rate for separately- metered residential customers (Rate Schedule E-1) has three tiers, with rates that increase when customer use exceeds roughly 300 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per month and again when the customer exceeds roughly 600 kWh. Non-residential customers’ rates are flat (not tiered) and are higher during the summer. Larger non-residential customers are billed based on their peak demand (the highest fifteen minutes of consumption in the month, measured in kilowatts, or kW) in addition to their monthly energy use. These demand charges are higher in the summer than in the winter, just like the energy charges. None of the major rate schedules include fixed or minimum charges. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Table 1: Existing Electric Rate Schedules Rate Applicability Description Number of customers(1) Share of sales(1) E-1 Separately-metered residential customers Three tiered rate No fixed or minimum charge 25,341 16% E-2 Small non-residential customers and master metered multi-family customers Flat energy charge that varies seasonally No fixed or minimum charge 3,073 7% E-4 Demand-metered non- residential customers, peak demand <1000 kW Flat energy and demand charges that vary seasonally No fixed or minimum charge 736 32% E-7 Demand-metered non- residential customers , peak demand >1000 kW Flat energy and demand charges that vary seasonally No fixed or minimum charge 66 42% E-18 City-owned facilities Flat energy charge that varies seasonally No fixed or minimum charge 123 3% (1) FY 2014 The City also has a number of optional, pilot, and special use rate schedules. Both the E-4 and E-7 customer classes have optional time-of-use (TOU) rate schedules. There is a pilot residential (E-1) TOU rate schedule as well, though it is limited to the small group of customers participating in the pilot program. The E-14 rate establishes charges for street and highway lighting, and the E-16 rate deals with unmetered electrical equipment such as billboards, wireless antennas, and traffic cameras. There are also generation-related rates, such as the E-3 rate and E-NSE rate. The E-3 rate establishes wholesale energy purchase prices for certain types of customer-owned generating facilities. The City designed this schedule to comply with the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA). The E-NSE rate establishes the City’s purchase price for surplus generation from customer-owned net-metered solar systems. Lastly, the voluntary PaloAltoGreen rate is still available for certain commercial customers who want it for sustainability reporting purposes. Rate Design Issues, Short-Term and Long-Term Staff has identified a variety of rate design issues to address in coming years. Some of the issues are more relevant to the long-term operation of the utility (five to ten years from now), and others are relevant to its operation over the next three to five years. The short-term rate design issues include: The need to update the City’s electric COSA. Since the current COSA was completed over 8 years ago, an updated COSA is needed before implementing any changes to existing rates. Drought-related hydroelectric resource variability. This variability could potentially be managed using a hydro rate adjustment mechanism. Customer interest in electric water heating and space heating. The City’s Carbon Neutral Portfolio has led some customers to consider electrifying the space and water City of Palo Alto Page 4 heating systems in their homes, or replacing gas-using appliances with electric ones. The electric rate structure has an impact on these decisions. More electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids are on the market. Replacing gasoline or diesel fueled vehicles with electric vehicles is another form of electrification and, again, the electric rate structure can have an impact on these customer choices. The City’s net energy metering (NEM) tariff for solar customers may reach capacity within the next one to three years. The City should have new rules and rates ready for customers who install solar systems after the NEM cap is reached, and should consider the impact of existing and proposed rate designs on the economics of solar. The long-term rate design issues include: Advanced metering. This technology would enable wider applicability of TOU rate structures and charges based on customer peak demand. The utility will need to evaluate whether to apply these rate structures more widely. Long-term potential for customer disconnection from the electric grid. As building technology advances and energy storage and distributed generation technologies become cheaper, it may become feasible for customers to disconnect from the distribution system. The utility should begin considering how to monitor these trends and how pricing strategies might need to be adapted. Changing utility rate design. The largest utilities are considering a shift to residential TOU rate or even real-time varying rates. They are also considering the rate design issues raised by distributed solar, electric vehicles, building electrification, and other developing technologies. The City attempts to maintain some consistency with the rate designs in nearby communities, so the responses of larger utilities to these trends are worth monitoring. New carbon reduction targets. More vehicle and building electrification will be required to achieve some of the targets being considered by the State and the City. This will have cost and rate implications for the electric utility. The utility should begin evaluating those long term impacts. To address the issues listed above, staff is proposing a two phase work plan. Phase One involves completing a COSA that addresses only the short-term rate design issues. Staff forecasts a need to increase rates 6% on July 1, 2016 to preserve the financial position of the electric utility, so that date will drive the work plan for Phase One. Longer-term rate design issues will be addressed in Phase Two since these issues are not critical to address prior to July 1, 2016, but preliminary analysis and some stakeholder discussions can begin in 2015 and 2016. Many of the Phase Two projects do not have specific deadlines for completion because they are driven by other planning efforts, such as the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and the City’s advanced metering planning efforts. Table 2, below, shows the issues to be addressed in each phase of the work plan. Note that the guidelines proposed for adoption only address the Phase One work plan. Staff will return to the UAC and Council with additional guidelines for any Phase Two rate design work. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Table 2: Electric Rate Design Work Plan Phase One Work Plan (to be completed by July 1, 2016) Before the spring 2016 financial forecasting and budget adoption process, develop an electric COSA that addresses the rate design issues discussed in the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Utility COSA (Attachment B). As part of the spring 2016 financial forecasting and budget adoption process, bring completed COSA and new proposed rate schedules to the UAC and Council for review and adoption. Develop rules and rates governing solar customers once the NEM program reaches capacity. Examine projected impacts of the current residential tiered rate design on customers with electric heating and electric vehicles, and explore pilot programs, rebates, or other methods for addressing those impacts, as needed. Complete a connection fee study to evaluate existing fees and address rules related to transformer upgrades. Phase Two Work Plan (to begin in 2015, completion dates to be determined) As the City establishes new sustainability goals as part of the S/CAP and continues to analyze future trends in energy use, identify the impact of these on electric rate design and the electric utility’s financial position and develop appropriate responses. As the CustomerConnect advanced metering pilot program progresses, and as a long-term plan is developed regarding advanced metering and other smart grid technologies, evaluate TOU rate structures and other rate designs those technologies could enable. Monitor electric rate trends at the State level and among other publicly owned utilities. Consider the use of fixed charges to recover certain types of costs. Begin assessing the impact of distributed generation, storage, grid-interactive appliances, and electric vehicles on the distribution system and identify the rate designs that would send appropriate and cost-based price signals to customers using these technologies. Develop a framework for monitoring the utility’s cost recovery and competitiveness in light of customer self-provision of power and disconnection from the electric grid. Evaluate the long-term rate impact to the electric utility of new electric vehicle and building electrification loads, as well as new highly efficient building code standards that are currently in development. Rate Design Guidelines In the past, the UAC and Council have expressed concern about having limited ability to make changes to proposed rate structures once a COSA is completed. Staff agrees, and has committed to having policy discussions with the UAC and Council prior to embarking on a COSA. Staff is proposing a set of rate design guidelines for Phase One (Attachment B) to guide its work over the next year. Separate rate design guidelines will be developed for Phase Two. The guidelines for the Phase One COSA are summarized below and discussed in more detail in subsequent sections: Guideline 1. Rates must be based on the cost of service. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Guideline 2. Energy charges should be structured similarly to the way they are currently structured, if feasible. Guideline 3. All existing rates should be reviewed for inclusion in the COSA or for retirement. Guideline 4. The COSA should consider the impact of rate designs on electric vehicle and electric heating customers. Guideline 5. The COSA should consider the need for a minimum charge. Guideline 6. A hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism should be evaluated. Guideline 7. The effect of rate design on current and future solar customers should be considered. Guideline 8. A study of connection fees should be completed. Guideline 9. The effect of proposed rate design changes on low income customers should be considered. Guideline 1: Rates to be based on the cost of service The goal of a COSA is to identify the costs associated with serving each customer class and the rates required to recover those costs. Historically, electric utilities have been able to make some adjustments to COSA-recommended rates to achieve environmental or social objectives. After Prop. 26, such rates cannot be structured solely to achieve policy objectives unless they are also cost-based, absent voter approval. The COSA has become an important tool for demonstrating that utility rates are based on the cost of service. As a result, this guideline must be the overriding one for the COSA. Guideline 2: Use existing rate design for energy charges For Phase One, staff recommends against considering major modifications to the structure of energy charges (such as shifting customers to flat rates, TOU rates, or real-time pricing) for this COSA. The City has not installed the necessary metering technology to implement advanced rate designs like TOU in the short term, and does not expect to do so for several years. The installation of advanced metering may take place within the next several years, and that would be the appropriate time to consider major changes to existing rate structures. This is anticipated in Phase Two of the work plan. If feasible, the COSA should continue the current structure for energy charges, including: A tiered energy rate for residential customers A uniform energy rate (possibly with seasonal variation) for non-residential customers A demand and energy rate for large non-residential users, possibly with seasonal variation Although staff anticipates retaining the existing structure for energy charges, minor adjustments, as discussed in subsequent guidelines, may be advisable (e.g. adding a minimum charge). City of Palo Alto Page 7 Guideline 3: Evaluation of all existing rate schedules for continuation, consolidation, or retirement Staff recommends evaluating all existing rate schedules to determine whether they should be continued or retired. The main focus of this review will be the customer class definitions for non-residential customers. Staff will ask a consultant to evaluate whether the boundaries between small (E-2), medium (E-4), large (E-7), and City-owned (E-18) non-residential customers should be redefined and whether some of the rate schedules should be consolidated. Guideline 4: Impact on electric vehicle and electric heating customers Residential customers represent a fairly uniform customer class when compared to non- residential customers. Electric vehicles are becoming more available, however, and some customers are considering greater use of electricity in their homes by replacing natural gas fueled water and space heaters with efficient heat pump water and space heaters. These customers are likely to have significantly different load profiles from the average residential customer. Staff recommends evaluating whether the cost to serve these customers differs from other residential customers substantially. If so, adjusting the pricing structure applicable to these customers may be appropriate. Guideline 5: Minimum Charge The electric utility incurs costs for billing, metering, and system maintenance for each customer connected to its distribution system, regardless of whether that customer uses energy. Many utilities use a fixed or minimum service charge to recover some or all of those costs. More California utilities are adopting these charges in recent years because the rapidly decreasing cost of rooftop solar and energy storage has enabled some customers to completely eliminate their electric bills through the use of NEM. These customers still use the distribution system when their solar system is not generating, and also incur costs for customer service, billing, meter reading, and maintenance of meters and service drops. A fixed or minimum charge recovers those costs. Fixed and minimum charges can be designed to recover similar costs, but differ in the way they operate: A fixed service charge is applied each month in addition to the consumption charge. Revenue generated from a fixed charge allows the consumption rate to be reduced. Fixed charges are useful for reducing revenue variability for utilities with high load variability due to weather or other factors. A minimum charge applies only if a customer’s consumption charge falls below a specified amount. For example, if the utility had a rate of $0.10/kWh, a customer using 30 kWh would pay $3 (30 kWh x $0.10/kWh) in the absence of a minimum charge. With a $5 minimum charge, a customer using 30 kWh would pay $5. If the customer used 100 kWh, the customer’s bill would be $10 (100 kWh x $0.10/kWh), and the minimum charge would not apply. A minimum charge generally does not generate as much City of Palo Alto Page 8 revenue as a fixed charge, and may not generate much revenue at all unless there are substantial numbers of customers with little or no energy consumption. However, it can be useful for ensuring that very low users or solar customers contribute to the cost of operating the utility. For this COSA staff recommends considering a minimum charge as a way of ensuring that all customer groups contribute their share of the utility’s operating costs. This is consistent with the approach currently being implemented by PG&E and other investor-owned utilities, as well as a number of publicly-owned utilities throughout California. Many of these utilities are considering eventually implementing fixed charges rather than minimum charges. Staff recommends considering a fixed charge in the Phase Two work plan, but only evaluating the addition of a minimum charge in the Phase One COSA work. Staff estimates that a minimum charge, if adopted, would be between $5 and $7 per month. Staff estimates that such a charge would affect less than 1% of all non-solar customers. It would affect slightly more customers on the rate assistance program, since these customers tend to use less energy on average. Even so, it would still only affect 1% to 3% of these customers, and they would still have lower bills than customers in the rest of the state. As part of the COSA, staff will evaluate how this charge (and other aspects of the rate design) would affect the economics of solar in Palo Alto. Guideline 6: Hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism Hydroelectric resources make up roughly 50% of the City’s electric supply portfolio. The output of these resources varies with annual rainfall, but their costs are largely fixed. When rain and snow is plentiful and hydroelectric resources generate more than usual, the City does not need to buy as much electricity in the markets (or can sell surplus electricity) and its costs decrease. During a dry year the opposite happens. Costs increase because the City must buy more energy in the markets to replace the hydroelectric generation. This variability can result in as much as $11 million to $13 million in additional costs in a dry year or cost savings in a wet year. The City maintains reserves to help manage these changes in cost in the short term, but the costs must be passed through in the rates eventually. Some agencies use a rate adjustment mechanism to make these rate impacts more transparent by passing on the costs and savings to customers as they occur. These rate adjusters provide a temporary rebate in a wet year or impose a temporary adder in a dry year. In addition to transparency, they have the added benefit of reducing the reserves needed to manage cost variability. Staff recommends evaluating a hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism during development of the COSA. This would be done in parallel with the Phase One COSA and would involve additional discussions with the UAC and Council. If a hydro rate adjuster were recommended for adoption as part of this process, it would then be incorporated into the COSA. City of Palo Alto Page 9 Guideline 7: Rate design and solar customers As a result of Senate Bill (SB) 1 (2006), investor-owned utilities and publicly-owned utilities like the City were required to offer NEM to customers who installed solar systems. Under NEM, solar customers who generate surplus energy in the summer receive a credit that can be used to offset their bill in the winter. SB 1 required utilities to offer this program until installed solar capacity reaches 5% of the utility’s peak load. The City, like many other utilities, will likely reach that point within the next one to three years. Investor-owned utilities are currently working with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to define rules for solar customers after the NEM cap is reached. Staff is monitoring this effort and also working on its own analysis specific to Palo Alto to develop a successor to the existing NEM rules. For some customers, NEM can result in the elimination of the total electric bill on an annual basis, or even a small net surplus. One criticism leveled at NEM is that it is unsustainable and inequitable. Solar customers continue to use the distribution system during the night and winter, but customers with large systems do not contribute to the upkeep of the system because they pay no electric bill (or a very small bill). Solar advocates counter that existing rate structures may not properly account for the value that solar systems provide to the distribution system. Efforts are being made at the State level to balance these considerations in future rate design, and staff will do the same in this COSA. Discussions about post-NEM rules for solar customers will take place in parallel with the COSA and will involve additional discussions with the UAC and Council. The COSA will also evaluate the impact of any recommended rate design on the economics of solar systems. Guideline 8: Connection fee study The City currently charges customers a one-time fee to connect to the distribution system. The City charges a flat fee for a 200 ampere capacity connection, but requires a customized estimate for higher capacity connections. Fees for higher capacity connections can be substantially more expensive, especially if the new connection triggers the need for a residential transformer upgrade. These higher capacity connections, previously rare, are becoming more common as electric vehicle penetration increases and some customers begin to install electric space and water heaters. As part of the COSA, staff will re-evaluate its policies and fees for new and upgraded customer connections. Guideline 9: Impact on low income customers Changes in rate design can have different impacts on customers who use different amounts of electricity. Low-income customers have lower electricity usage than other customers, on average. Staff intends to evaluate the impact of any recommended rate design changes on low- income consumers and may recommend mitigation of those impacts if necessary. Commission Review The UAC reviewed the staff recommendation at its June 3, 2015 meeting. Commissioners were largely supportive of the staff proposal after asking a variety of clarifying questions. There was some discussion of whether it was possible, even in light of Prop. 26, to establish incentive rates City of Palo Alto Page 10 that incorporated the value of the environmental and societal benefits associated with switching transportation and heating uses away from fossil fuels. One suggestion was to place the incentive rates on the ballot, and a question was asked whether there was a simple way to incorporate these incentive rates into the Phase One work plan. Staff recommended deferring this analysis to Phase Two of the work plan due to the short time line associated with the Phase One work plan. Ultimately, the UAC voted to recommend that Council approve the proposed Design Guidelines for Phase One of the Electric COSA and to recommend that staff consider rate designs that reduce the global climate footprint in Phase Two by a vote of 3-1-1 (Commissioners Cook, Danaher, and Schwartz voting yes, Chair Foster abstaining, Commissioner Hall opposed, and Commissioners Eglash and Van Dusen absent). Commissioner Hall was opposed to the motion since he wanted the analysis to be conducted in Phase One instead of Phase Two. Final excerpted notes from the UAC’s June 3, 2015 meeting are provided as Attachment B. Timeline After receiving the Finance Committee’s recommendation, Council will consider approval of the Phase One Electric COSA design guidelines. The COSA is expected to be completed by the spring of 2016 so that updated rates can be adopted as part of the FY 2017 budget process to be effective on July 1, 2016. Resource Impact The work associated with this project will be absorbed using existing staff and contract budgets. The new rates adopted as a result will be designed to generate adequate sales revenue to fund the electric utility’s operations in FY 2017. For FY 2017, the utility is projected to need roughly 6% more sales revenue ($8.8 million) than is generated by current rates, mainly due to increased costs associated with renewable projects. In addition, if the drought continues through FY 2017, additional revenue (as much as $10 million to $15 million) may be needed to fund higher market purchase costs resulting from low output of hydroelectric resources. As part of the COSA, staff will evaluate a hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism that could add a temporary charge to customer bills to generate additional revenue under a drought scenario. For more detail on these projections see the proposed FY 2016 Electric Utility Financial Plan (Staff Report 5681). Policy Implications The process of adopting these design guidelines provides the UAC and Council an opportunity to provide policy guidance to staff before work begins on the COSA. Once a COSA is complete, it can be difficult to modify the resulting rate design without reviewing and possibly amending the analysis. The analysis performed as part of this COSA will support other policy initiatives, including the Local Solar Plan (Staff Report 4608) and the S/CAP. Both the Phase One and Phase Two work plans involve analysis of the impacts of rate design on electrification, and are therefore part of City of Palo Alto Page 11 staff’s response to the December 15, 2014 Council Colleagues Memo on Climate Action Plan Implementation Strategies to Reduce Use of Natural Gas and Gasoline through Fuel Switching to Carbon Free Electricity. The analysis of the hydroelectric rate adjustment mechanism is part of the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Implementation Plan (Staff Report 1317). Environmental Review Adoption of the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act, thus no environmental review is required. Attachments: Attachment A: Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis - Phase One (PDF) Attachment B: Excerpted Draft UAC Minutes of June 3, 2015 meeting (PDF) Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: July 1, 2015 Page 1 of 5 EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE JUNE 3, 2015 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING ITEM 4: ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Approving Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis Chair Foster explained to the newer commissioners that the past practice was when utility rates were proposed to the UAC or Council, there was little discretion once the cost of service model was developed, since the rates were based on the results of the cost of service analysis (COSA). But, staff now holds a policy discussion with the UAC and Council prior to conducting a COSA so that there can be input to the policies used to develop the rates. Senior Resource Planner Jon Abendschein thanked Chair Foster for the explanation of why staff is bringing forward this item. He noted that the last Electric COSA was completed in 2007 and that the last Electric rate change was effective July 2009. He explained that the Electric COSA will be done in two phases to deal with the short- and long-term issues. Abendschein said that the short-term issues will be dealt with in Phase One of the COSA, which needs to be completed in time to get new rates in place by July 2016. The Phase Two work will take longer to complete and deal with longer-term issues such as those that can only be implemented with a new billing system or advanced meters. For Phase One, no large departures from existing rate structures are contemplated. The COSA was an important way of demonstrating that the City’s rates reflected the cost to serve customers, which was necessary to avoid having them be considered a tax under sections of the California Constitution added by Proposition 26 (2010). The goal was to complete the COSA by the end of the year so the rates would be ready for adoption with the FY 2017 budget in the spring. He discussed the design guidelines. Cook asked how often a COSA should be completed. Abendschein said that they should be redone every 3 to 5 years. Commissioner Schwartz asked if efficiencies could be achieved with the use of technology, such as helping customers understand when they were approaching a higher usage tier. Abendschein said that there was a smart meter pilot program underway experimenting with these types of approaches, and that the longer-term impacts and implications of technology and innovation will be addressed in Phase Two. Commissioner Hall asked if a hydro adjuster mechanism would allow rates to be adjusted on a monthly or quarterly basis without returning to Council. ATTACHMENT C Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: July 1, 2015 Page 2 of 5 Abendschein said that it could be done that way, or the rates could be changed annually. The goal would be to keep the adjuster simple and base it on a clear formula. Commissioner Danaher said that he supported the proposed guidelines, including the minimum charge. He said he was interested in looking at other rate designs that might not be in line with a cost of service study but that could go to the voters for approval. He thought this might not be appropriate for Phase One, but could be looked at later. Vice Chair Cook agreed that the rate design could be approved by voters, for example in the case where restrictions based on Constitution might lead to flat rates, but the community could decide that conservation efforts would be much improved with tiered rates. Commissioner Hall stated that Phase Two would take several years, and some parts should be worked on earlier. It was important to begin realizing carbon benefits from electrification sooner than later. Staff should look at ways of including environmental benefits in rate design and use that to provide subsidies in rates for greenhouse gas reducing activities, such as EV charging. He was in favor of changing the design guidelines to ask staff to consider climate benefits in the rates and structuring rates to provide incentives for activities that benefit the climate. Abendschein asked that if the UAC considered such an amendment, that it only direct staff to evaluate the use of externalities rather than direct staff to use externalities. Rates are typically based on direct costs to serve customers, and it could be a challenge to include externalities. Commissioner Hall said he thought staff could evaluate whether a policy framework adopted by the Council might enable the use of externalities, and that if it did not, that the question could be put to the voters. Senior Assistant City Attorney Grant Kolling agreed that the question can go to the voters for decision. Director Fong noted that there was a constrained timeline and that it was important to complete a COSA. Commissioner Hall said that he was only suggesting a guideline that stated that staff would evaluate the approach, not directing staff to use such an approach. Commissioner Schwartz said that the true cost imposed by customers with solar systems and electric vehicles (EVs) did need to be dealt with. She asked if the value of solar via net metering will be determined as part of this study. Abendschein responded that the City will be reaching its cap for net energy metering in the next several years so that the City needs to be prepared for solar after NEM cap reached. He said that this is part of the Phase One work plan. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: July 1, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Commissioner Schwartz asked who advocates for ratepayers, especially low income customers. Director Fong stated that the Council performs the function of advocating for the ratepayers. She noted that the City's utility is not for profit, unlike the investor-owned utilities that are regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission. Vice Chair Cook noted that the UAC can perform the role of ratepayer advocate as well. Council Member Scharff said that the City needed to think about energy efficiency versus conservation. The three-tiered rate structure may not achieve the goals of the Council regarding electrification. If using electricity efficiently, people should be able to use more without being penalized. Since the electric supplies were carbon neutral, Council was moving toward encouraging electrification. He noted that the three-tiered rate structure does not encourage fuel switching. The UAC should consider that in their policy discussions. Commissioner Danaher said that the rate structures should be driven by a low carbon policy. This might ultimately require voter approval. Commissioner Schwartz said that the issue is more complex. Electricity Palo Altans consumed at night did not come from the City’s solar energy projects. The electricity Palo Alto uses costs different amounts depending on the time of day. Achieving cost of service was not as simple as changing from tiered rates to flat rates. Council Member Scharff said that he agreed with the need for time of use rates, but not tiered rates. He said energy efficiency was what was important, not conservation. Chair Foster asked if the Council has adopted a policy on electrification. Director Fong stated that the Council had considered electrification, but had not yet taken a policy position on the issue. Council Member Scharff agreed, but noted that there was broad support on the Council to support electrification, even if the details of the policy had not been worked out yet. Commissioner Schwartz said that there could be value in the efficient use of natural gas. Director Fong said that the UAC would discuss this issue at its next meeting. ACTION: Commissioner Hall made a motion to adopt the proposed guidelines with the addition of a new guideline to the Phase One COSA as follows: The COSA should evaluate the opportunities for rate designs that reduce the global climate footprint and those that increase all-fuel energy efficiency. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: July 1, 2015 Page 4 of 5 Commissioner Danaher asked Commissioner Hall to clarify whether the evaluation should take place within the COSA framework or outside the COSA framework. Commissioner Hall said it should take place within the COSA framework. Phase One was the right time to do this evaluation rather than waiting until Phase Two. Abendschein said this would be a difficult goal to achieve within the timeline for Phase One. Director Fong stated that the proposed guideline was very broad. It would be difficult for staff to know whether proposed rates met the guideline. Commissioner Hall said that the consultant could do an evaluation of what was necessary for such a rate to be adopted. He believed a Council policy could be sufficient to allow these types of rate designs. If legal analysis revealed this was not the case, the rate design could be put to the voters. Director Fong discussed the feed-in tariff, which had been a specific example of a time that the Council had put some value on externalities. There had been specific direction for a specific purpose. The proposed guideline was too broad to implement. Abendschein said that this issue could be dealt with early in Phase Two rather than Phase One. Not everything in Phase Two had to be evaluated at the same time. Commissioner Hall said the “all-fuel” section of the guideline might be difficult, but the “global footprint” section could be handled in Phase One. Two elements of the evaluation could be incentives for electric vehicles and increased pricing for solar energy. If the only thing preventing these rate structures was a Council policy, one could be adopted quickly. Abendschein said that the risk of including this in Phase One was that there would not be enough time to do a thorough evaluation of the legal approach, and staff would simply return saying it was not possible. Commissioner Hall said that was fine, and the analysis could then continue in Phase Two. The motion died for the lack of a second. ACTION: Commissioner Hall moved, seconded by Chair Foster, to approve the Staff recommendation with the addition of a new guideline to the Phase One COSA as follows: The COSA should evaluate the opportunities for rate designs that reduce the global climate footprint. ACTION Commissioner Schwartz made a substitute motion, seconded by Commissioner Cook, to approve the Staff recommendation and to recommend that Staff consider rate designs that reduce the global climate footprint in Phase Two. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes Approved on: July 1, 2015 Page 5 of 5 Commissioner Hall said he would vote against the motion, but he agreed with the overall approach. He only thought that it should be evaluated in Phase One. Commissioner Danaher asked Staff whether this approach would be unduly burdensome. Director Fong said Staff had considered including this in Phase Two, and that it could be considered early in Phase Two. The motion carried (3-1-1 with Commissioners Cook, Danaher, and Schwartz voting yes, Chair Foster abstaining, Commissioner Hall opposed, and Commissioners Eglash and Van Dusen absent). FINANCE COMMITTEE DRAFT MINUTES Special Meeting Tuesday, August 18, 2015 Chairperson Schmid called the meeting to order at 6:06 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Filseth, Kniss, Schmid (Chair) Absent: Scharff Oral Communications None Agenda Items 1.Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Approve Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis. Valerie Fong, Director of Utilities: Valerie Fong, Utilities Director. On my left I have Senior Resource Planner Jon Abendschein, Rates Manager but also Acting Water, Gas, Wastewater Operations Manager. Two roles here. I'd also like to acknowledge Assistant Director Jane Ratchye. We have with us as well Utilities Advisory Committee (UAC) Commissioner Judith Schwartz, who will be able to provide a few comments about the UAC's deliberation on this issue. Jon Abendschein, Manager of Utilities Operations: Good evening, Council Members. Jon Abendschein, Senior Resource Planner, here to talk about the Design Guidelines for our Electric Cost of Service Analysis. I'm going to give you a little bit of background on our rates generally. I'm going to talk a little bit about project goals. We're proposing to divide the project into two phases, so I'll talk about Phase 1 of the project, which begins with rates adopted July 1, 2016. In ATTACHMENT D Phase 2, which is longer term, we're going to address some of the bigger issues that our community is discussing right now. Our existing rate structure has been in place since the '80s. Our last Cost of Service Study was in 2007. We hadn't had a rate increase since 2009. In 2010, Prop 26 was passed. It has some very similar effects to what Prop 218 has done for the water world. Our current rates are not subject to Prop 26, but they will become subject to Prop 26 the second we change them. As you heard earlier this year, we are likely to need a 6 percent rate increase July 1, 2016. A Cost of Service Analysis is what we would use to demonstrate that our rate changes are cost- based, which is something we've demonstrated with Prop 26. There are also a wide variety of sustainability goals. There's new legislation and regulations and new technologies that are having impacts on the electric industry. Our rates need to start taking that into consideration as well. Some of the challenges we're thinking through as we think about our rates over the next five years. First off, like I said, we need a Cost of Service Study to support the rates that we'd like to adopt July 1, 2016. That's a fairly urgent timeline for us, to be able to meet that July 1, 2016 date. A Cost of Service Analysis can be fairly involved. On top of that, we also have some drought-related impacts on our costs because of the large hydroelectric component to our portfolio. We've been talking about a rate adjustment mechanism to deal with that. We have some growing interest in electrification, and we'd like to look at all electric customers and see if we can adjust our rates to take those customers' needs into account. Our net energy metering tariff is close to capacity. In the long term, there's a lot of technology that is changing how people use electricity. We're also looking at smart meters which could change the pricing that we have available to us. Rate design throughout California is changing. We want to be tracking those trends as well. A lot of these things are happening over the long term. They're not going to happen before July 1, 2016, and that's why we're dividing this project into two phases. This is the schedule for the short-term work plan. We're talking about getting these Design Guidelines adopted and getting our consultant on board and getting them working on the Cost of Service Study through the fall based on these Design Guidelines. In the spring, we would come back and we will do a UAC and Council review with a goal of having the new rates effective July 1, 2016. We're proposing a set of Design Guidelines for you tonight. These Design Guidelines are only meant to guide the work for this first phase. We'll come back to you with a second set of Design Guidelines to govern the second phase. The Design Guidelines are summarized in the Staff Report, so I won't go over them one-by-one. The key overall points that we're trying to take into account. First off, the absolute overriding concern is that these rates be cost-based. We're also doing some other adjustments. We're taking a look at our customer classes. Reviewing to make sure that everything is the way we want it. We're also taking a look at the impacts of the rates on electric heating and electric customers. We're looking at the impacts on solar, low-income customers. We're also looking at whether to incorporate some sort of hydroelectric rate adjustment. This is a short summary of the tentative long-term work plan for Phase 2. What we're planning to do is stay involved with the Sustainability/Climate Action Plan. We're also doing an evaluation for a new billing system and smart meter installations. These are things we'll be coming back to you at some point. We need to have some analysis done of some of these issues before we decide how to design rates for the long term. We're also following the climate goals that are being set at the State level and also the rate design procedures for PG&E. We're continuing to research the technology trends in the industry. As we start to get our heads around all of that, we'll come back to you, we're expecting, in 2016 with a Phase 2 work plan and Design Guidelines and implementation over the following two years. Our goal will be to keep the same consultants over that entire time. We should be coming back to you with a consultant contract sometime in September. That pretty much sums it up. I know that the topic of residential rate design has come up a few times because of the tiered residential rate system. We're proposing to at least evaluate cost-based tiered residential rates. The reason that we're proposing to do that is that without advanced metering and without time of use, tiered rates can take into account the seasonal changes in energy use that do have impacts on our distribution system. They won’t take into account daily impacts in the way that a time of use rate might. They do take into account some of the seasonal effects and the effects of having different sources of electricity on the cost of our portfolio. I'm sure there are plenty of questions. There's a lot in the Staff Report. I'm happy to answer everything I can. Council Member Kniss: I've got one information question about hydroelectric. Is it related to the drought or is it something different that might not be intuitive? Mr. Abendschein: It's related to the drought, yes. There is less water flowing down the rivers, so there's less electricity being generated. Almost all of the costs of a hydroelectric project are fixed, so you have to continue to pay for them whether you get very low energy or a lot of energy. When you get a lot of energy, they're very cheap, very cost effective. When you get less energy, you have to buy additional energy in the market to replace the hydroelectric generation you're not getting. That imposes an extra cost on us, and that happens during drought. Council Member Filseth: That cost gets passed through to ratepayers. What's the time cost? Does your rate adjust every week or every six months? Mr. Abendschein: We would expect it to adjust once a year. We would take a look in April after the water year is done. That's when we'd evaluate it. We'd have a pretty good idea of what you're going to get at that point. Chair Schmid: Before we go into any more questions, the UAC had an opportunity to discuss this. It would be good to hear from Judith Schwartz. Judith Schwartz, Utilities Advisory Committee Commissioner: Hi. Thank you for allowing me to speak to you tonight. We had a good conversation at the UAC when we were looking at this. It was a good presentation. What was great about it was that we looked at it first in the big picture of what are the kinds of things that we're trying to do long term and what are the general goals as well as the specifics. In my professional life, I work in this area of rate design and dynamic pricing and consumer engagement and how do you use pricing to encourage consumers to take the actions that you would like them to take in terms of achieving whatever the goals are. This is a very complicated issue. Pretty much all the commissions that you talk to around the country are all feeling like this is incredibly complicated. The way we got to these complex things is this organic process over time. Everybody would love to wipe the slate clean and start over, but reality is you don't get to do that. There's a lot of movement that's happening of people looking at different concepts, not just related to the fact that you have solar and net metering and issues around that. There's a lot of stuff that's changing. There are two parts of this that we have an opportunity for. One is that there's a tremendous opportunity for simplification in a way that is understandable for people. We are a municipal utility, so that does give us some flexibility that might be an easier thing to do. The other thing has to do with transparency. When people understand what the costs are associated with, it becomes much more logical about why you have to do it. Where you were just talking and asking the question about the drought, people can understand that you have a fixed cost associated with this contract. If there's less water, that means its more expensive. These things can be explained in a way that the public can understand. The crux of our discussion at the UAC was that the Commissioners were very much in favor of the kinds of subtleties that are possible when this is technology-enabled. That is going to take a little more time than what you can do in this short time when the technology to support this is not in place. If you can't do interval metering, you can't know if somebody's purchasing the expensive electricity or the cheap electricity. It's not possible to do. Where we had the point of contention was how soon should we bring in an in- depth analysis of the impact on our carbon footprint. Some of the Commissioners wanted to be much more aggressive and take that carbon footprint into account sooner. What Jon tried to say and I agreed with is that this is complicated. You're going to have precision without accuracy if you force it to happen too fast. We don't have the tools to dial it in to be subtle; we have to do it in sync with having these other technologies available to be able to measure the right things. What we ended up agreeing on in our vote was that we would have the more subtle discussion about how it ties to greenhouse gas more effectively with Phase 2, because it needed to be studied in a way that was more robust and comprehensive. Chair Schmid: We can then pursue any questions we have with either the Staff or the UAC. Our goal tonight is to endorse the Design Guidelines, which is Attachment A. Council Member Kniss: Why don't we push a little on what Judy's been talking about? Your comment of how do you get the consumer either to consume what you'd like them to consume or to understand what it is, is an important one. You're right that provision of electricity isn't very simple anymore, and it is coming from multiple sources. You could have solar on your roof and be selling electricity back. There are a whole number of different things that you could be doing. I want to hear a little more about that. You spent a lot of time on this as a Committee? Ms. Schwartz: We talked about it some. There's a mix of reasons why people do a behavior change. We have a large concentration of people in Palo Alto who are committed to being green. If you know what the rules are of how it works, you can do those without having any special equipment on your house. I don't run my dishwasher or my washing machine on a hot summer afternoon. Even though I'm not affected by the price on my electric bill, I know that the system is straining region- wide, so I don't want to do that. I will make that call without there necessarily being a feedback device. There are other people, that if you don't give them a price signal, they won't make the change. Some people are motivated by the cost of it. That's where these tools are very effective. If you believe that a large segment of the population is motivated by price, then you need to give them a price signal in order to get them to not do a particular behavior. That's one of the things where there's a partition. In my many years of marketing I have not seen it as pronounced as it is here. If you are somebody who tends to make your decisions based on the environment, you tend to project that everybody else feels that way. If you're cost conscious, you tend to project that everybody's going to do it for cost. There are some people who love the data. They're techies and they want to look at the data and they want to study it. They think that everybody else cares about the data when most of these other people could care less. There are people who are completely indifferent. People tend to respond to this and project this onto everybody else. Because we have a large, significant segment in Palo Alto who are motivated from the most altruistic, green principles, there tends to be a religious fervor about it when in reality you have to have some other trigger points for other people. Chair Schmid: I wonder if I could step back for a moment and try to clarify. Prop 26 is like Prop 218, is that right? Ms. Fong: We prefer to defer to the City Attorney on that. Chair Schmid: Maybe a clarification from the Attorney. The Capistrano case says you should charge the same to everybody for the same service. Prop 26 does not seem quite as strong as that. You're starting with tiered rates on the residential side. Under Prop 26, are those tiered rates likely to disappear or can they be retained and on what basis can they be retained? Molly Stump, City Attorney: Thank you, Vice Mayor Schmid. You're correct that the language of Prop 218 and Prop 26 differ in several respects. There are many commonalities between the two laws. We'd be looking at tiers from a cost of service basis to create an evidentiary record to support tiering. I'll leave it to Staff to explain the status of that. Ms. Fong: The commodity market in water isn't the same as the commodity market on the electric side. On the electric side, you do have different costs of commodity. It could vary by time. It could vary by contract that you might have. On the water side, we have one supplier. It's a flat per-unit charge. Tiers make more sense right now from a cost of service perspective, not just in terms of the facilities but even on the commodity side with respect to electric. Chair Schmid: Historically we have given subsidies to people who are using solar, because we want to create a market, or incentives. Under Proposition 26, will incentives continue moving in an environmental direction or will we run into a Capistrano case? Mr. Abendschein: We're going to have to look very carefully at any sort of cross subsidies in our rates. Ms. Stump: Vice Mayor Schmid, this is a very complex area. What you might be thinking of is that the electric utility has determined that it is appropriate to purchase solar power in some cases at a higher rate than it might purchase some other brown types of power. We have looked very carefully at that and believe that that's supportable under the law. That's distinct from once the electrons are in the system how users are charged for the use of them. Chair Schmid: The City can't continue to say we have clean energy goals and we are willing to provide extra payments in order to achieve our own targets or goals. Ms. Schwartz: One of the ideal goals that you get with the positive side of tiered pricing is that if somebody is going to use very large amounts of energy for their personal use, then perhaps it is appropriate for them to pay a higher amount. Then you are using that to help support places where you want to offer a subsidy because you're looking at elderly people who are on fixed income. You want to make sure that you take care of them. Maybe you want to say that if somebody's living alone, you want to give them free electricity. I'm not saying that that's what we should do. You can make determinations for a broad set of reasons. That's one of the things that's come up in the conversation nationally about pricing. The same amount for everybody doesn't always make sense. People who have a particular passion are willing to pay more. You saw with PaloAltoGreen that people were willing to pay a premium because they wanted to support this. The whole idea of incentives for solar on your rooftop was because there was a period where hardly anyone was doing it and it was very expensive to do. There was an idea that this would help push the market. Now the discussion has been is that necessary any more. Ms. Stump: All of these pricing areas are things we're looking at very closely with Staff and the consultants to maintain compliance with Prop 26. Because there hasn't been a rate increase, it's not triggered yet. Staff has been watching it very closely and aligning the rate-setting practice with the requirements of the law. We're ready. We will be proposing rates that are compliant with Prop 26. Chair Schmid: It's a new law, so we don't have a landmark case like the Capistrano case. Ms. Stump: There are some court cases in the Prop 26 world, not as many as in Prop 218, because in many jurisdictions the law is already triggered. It does have this non-retroactivity. Because there hasn't been a rate increase in a long time, it's not in effect here yet. It is in many other jurisdictions. Chair Schmid: Liz, I'm sorry for interrupting your question. Ms. Fong: Can I point out that in terms of the Design Guidelines, we purposely put as number one rates must be based on cost of service. We do recognize that that is going to compel some of what the outcome might be. Council Member Kniss: I want to make a comment. I remember visiting a relative in Spain. She said, "I hate staying up so late, but the rates are so much cheaper between midnight and 6:00." I thought, "Boy, is that a motivator." In Spain, the rates were extraordinarily high, so it was worth your while to stay up 'til midnight to start doing the wash. Ms. Schwartz: Texas has a very open market, a deregulated market. They have things like free nights and weekends. One of the cool things I learned from Staff is that we have a very flat load. A lot of the peak pricing and incentives that they do in other communities, we have a different set of issues. One of the things that is a subtlety as we look at what's appropriate for Palo Alto is we have to look at what are the special patterns that happen for us that may be a little different than some other communities. Mr. Abendschein: That point is well taken. The other side of that coin is that you're going to hear a lot about creative or unusual rate designs in other parts of the country or with investor-owned utilities. Because of Prop 26 requirements, we may not be able to put those in place. It's worth bearing that in mind. Council Member Kniss: We don't have to stay up 'til midnight to do the wash. Mr. Abendschein: If it's going to cost us differently, then maybe. If not, then maybe not. Ms. Schwartz: In terms of solar, this is a big part of the net metering discussion of how you do it. People who have solar on their house don't realize how much cost they're putting on the system as a result, or people who buy an EV. There are extra costs on the system for that. Because there have been the incentives in place trying to encourage people to do that, they didn't always pay the full freight for their costs. When they're talking about cross-subsidies, that's one of the things where people are helping people do that. That's part of the discussion, that there are hidden costs and that's why issues around demand charges and what does it mean to be hooked up to the utility. If you're going to say to someone whether your solar power is working or whether it's raining, or sunny or night, we're going to give you electricity, you have to be hooked up to the grid and you're not really on your own. Council Member Filseth: I have a question regarding what you just said. Thank you for the report. It was pretty clear; I think I understood it, all or most of it. It made sense. We're the Finance Committee. I defer to people with more expertise on how to set rates, the UAC and other people as opposed to us. We're more worried about whether it's going to cost the City money or not. I wanted to ask a question about what you brought up. There's a discussion in here of minimum costs or fixed costs, which I assume is in part related to the idea that if you have solar or some other renewable on your business or your house and you generate a significant amount of your own electricity, then you're free-riding on the infrastructure costs which the City is going to end up paying or other ratepayers pay. Utilities around the state and the country are worried about this kind of stuff too. Do you foresee there is going to be a lot of that in Palo Alto? It's going to be a significant impact on the next several years? Mr. Abendschein: It's less of a concern for the effect on our revenue. It's less about the impact on our revenue and more about the Prop 26 implications. Chair Schmid: I had a question on drought. Hydro is a wonderful thing for us, and we made a good long-term investment many years ago. It provides a good portion of our clean energy. Drought and especially the worry about multiyear droughts come up. You point out that we might need a drought surcharge because, when we go into the market to buy maybe especially renewable energy, with hydro down it'll be more expensive. We're likely to see that on the electricity side. We were talking the other day about water. There's likely to be the same impact on water. If you use less water because of the drought, your rates per unit go up quite dramatically. Are we buying into Palo Alto becoming more vulnerable to drought across utilities? Mr. Abendschein: Can you clarify the question? Council Member Kniss: That's a tricky question. Ms. Fong: I could simply say we've got an electric utility. The significant portion of the portfolio is hydroelectric generation. We've got a water utility that's dependent on water. When there is a drought, there are impacts to both of those utilities. Separately you would see that in the marketplace. We just happen to have both within the City of Palo Alto. PG&E's dealing with it on the electric side. Other water utilities are dealing with the drought on the water side. It just so happens we have both utilities here. Yeah, you're seeing it. Chair Schmid: I bring it up because we had a rate increase the other night and we got 50 notes about "I'm conserving on the water side, yet you're charging me more. What's going on?" Now it seems as though on the electricity side we're going to have the same thing. The drought has cut our electricity and we want this clean energy and we have to pay. Mr. Abendschein: The difference with the electric is that it's not about conservation. It's not related to conservation. If the drought surcharge is on and people use less, it costs the City less. That's different with the water utility where we have to cover our distribution costs. In this case, if they use less, we have to buy less in the market and it costs less. Chair Schmid: I'm concerned if we have our green goals so we want renewable energy, the price differential grows during that period. Mr. Abendschein: It's not that big a price differential. The big differential is related to buying power. Chair Schmid: My concern would be that in a drought year the cost of renewables could go up quite dramatically. Mr. Abendschein: I'm talking about in a drought year. The cost increases that we're talking about aren't related to making those energy purchases green with the use of energy credits. It is about buying the energy. Council Member Filseth: In a way your hydroelectric power costs this which is half our power. In a dry year, it costs that. Let's say coal costs that much. We don't use coal in California. You're worried about the issue of people going ... Chair Schmid: Natural gas. Council Member Filseth: ... "I don't want to pay this much for hydro when natural gas costs this much." Ms. Fong: Just to remind you. The hydro we have and the renewables we have are all under long-term contracts. We can't escape the costs; they're under long-term contracts. What we do when there's a deficit on either of those is go into the market and buy additional power. There's a deficit, and we have to fill that gap. Because we are committed to having a carbon-neutral portfolio within a certain cap, within that cap we will make sure we carbon neutralize that additional kilowatt hours that we have to purchase. We stay within the cap; we've never exceeded the cap; we've not come close to the cap. We made a commitment that we would be back to explain if we needed to exceed the cap or if you wanted us not to make the purchases. Mr. Abendschein: It is important to note too that regardless of whether we have the carbon-neutral goal, regardless of whether we have the renewable energy goals, as long as we have the hydro most of the cost impacts associated with the variability of hydro has very little to do with our renewable goals. That's the important thing to remember. Ms. Schwartz: One of the other factors that we look at is the idea of social norms in a given region. There are parts of the country where people are happy to burn coal and scrape the tops off mountains. We happen to be in northern California in a place where the social norm is that maybe not everybody is an avid environmentalist, but I don't think you're going to see people walking through the streets demanding that we burn coal to save money. This is a place where transparency can be helpful, where it can say this is part of the reality that we're dealing with. If people are sharing in the burden of what it is, then it doesn't feel so horrible. Council Member Filseth: One more comment on that. If we get into a circumstance on electricity where we're trying to explain to people why their electricity rates are going up, you did a lucid description of that with the spot market versus the hydro. This is a hindsight kind of thing. About the water experience, people are writing into the Council. I responded to a couple and you responded to a couple. The label "drought surcharge" was unfortunate. It was confusing to people. The explanation you just gave is much more understandable. If we get into that situation, let's think twice before we call it a "drought something." It distracts from the reality. You're right that people can understand that we have these infrastructure costs. Chair Schmid: Revenue shortfalls. Council Member Filseth: It's a revenue shortfall, but we've still got these costs. People can understand that. Council Member Kniss: This is a comment. The drought, the shortfall, whatever it is we run into. Someone who was in southern California recently, Palm Springs or one of those areas, was horrified because they're using water liberally. Everything is green. The golf course looks terrific. There's real resentment about that. Not that that will change what we are doing, but it does point out the difference in our values. You are comfortable, if you live in ABC, using any amount of water because that is your culture. You need those green golf courses. Ms. Schwartz: I had a question about the distribution of who was using the most water. Was everybody using more or was it concentrated? One of the things that was very instructive to me was seeing that most people are conserving. They want to get the emotional pat that they are conserving. The distribution chart of who's using large amounts of water are very few homes and businesses. It's not something that's across the board. How one decides to communicate that or what to share with people and how do you work on the people who are not being careful has to do with this idea of trying to avoid the resentment from the people who are trying and saying, "I'm doing everything I can. Why is my bill going up?" That's part of the whole Gestalt of how ... Council Member Kniss: I'm praying for El Nino. Council Member Filseth: Once you get finished explaining it to me people, they go, "So what does the drought have to do with it?" Chair Schmid: I like the table you have that shows that 5 percent of the people use 80 percent of the electricity. That's quite dramatic. Council Member Kniss: Yeah. That's an interesting one. Council Member Filseth: The 66 and the 42, yeah. Chair Schmid: The request is to approve Phase 1 of the Design Guidelines. As the discussion has pointed out, we are not making any assumptions about where you're coming out, but rather looking into the consequences of moving ahead in a variety of ways. Council Member Filseth: So moved. Chair Schmid: We have a Motion. Council Member Kniss: Second. Chair Schmid: And a second. MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to recommend the City Council approve the Design Guidelines for the 2015 Electric Cost of Service Analysis. Chair Schmid: Any further discussion on that? Good. We are sending to the Council our recommendation that we move ahead with the Design Guidelines. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Scharff absent City of Palo Alto (ID # 6109) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Mayors Climate Letters Title: Authorize the Mayor to Sign, on Behalf of the City, Letters to the "Compact of Mayors" (Global) and the "Mayor’s National Climate Action Agenda" (Domestic), Committing to Climate-Related Actions the City has Already Undertaken or Set in Motion, and Calling on the President of the United States to Pursue the Strongest Possible Climate Agreement at the Upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommended Motion Staff recommends that Council consider the following motion: Council authorizes the mayor to sign, on behalf of the City, the attached letters to the global Compact of Mayors (Global), committing to climate-related actions the City has already undertaken or set in motion, and to the Mayor’s National Climate Action Agenda (Domestic), calling on the President of the United States to pursue the strongest possible climate agreement at the upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris Recommendation Staff recommends that the City of Palo Alto, by September 30, sign onto both the global Compact of Mayors (Global) and the Mayor’s National Climate Action Agenda (Domestic), committing to actions the City has already undertaken or set in motion, and adding the City’s voice to this important international dialog, and that Council authorize the mayor to sign letters to that effect. Summary: Cities are responsible for producing 70% of climate-changing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions world-wide, and have emerged as leaders in advance climate strategies. Palo Alto is an acknowledged leader, with more than 33% GHG Reductions since 1990, and is currently developing a new sustainability and climate action plan (S/CAP). City of Palo Alto Page 2 In addition to their own efforts, cities are calling on national governments to adopt binding GHG emissions reductions targets that address both short-term (i.e., 2020 or sooner) and long-term commitments (e.g., 80 percent reduction in GHGs by 2050) at COP 21 in (the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) happening in December 2015 in Paris. Discussion 1. Domestic: The Mayors National Climate Action Agenda is the U.S. complement of the Compact of Mayors1, a global cooperative effort among mayors and city officials committed to reducing local greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing resilience to climate change, and tracking progress transparently. The COM has drafted a letter to President Obama, calling on him to “to act in the best interests of the American people and fight for the strongest possible climate agreement at the upcoming 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris, and for federal action to establish binding national greenhouse gas emissions reductions here at home”. See final document draft for White House here. See mayors who have signed on here. President Obama has issued a challenge to all U.S. mayors to publicly commit to a climate action plan ahead of the COP21 climate negotiations in Paris, and set a goal of having at least 100 U.S. cities sign onto the Compact of Mayors by then. The White House also released a fact sheet2 announcing a number of initiatives to increase energy efficiency measures in cities across the United States, and specifically called out the Compact of Mayors as a key effort to achieve President Obama’s goals. A planned letter to White House announced June 2015 at San Francisco US Conference of Mayor’s) commits mayors to: - work toward November 2015 as the target date to sign on the greatest numbers of mayors; - create standards for reporting emissions and tracking reductions; - identify offset projects, strategies to tunnel through any barriers, and commence the offset projects; and - conclude a year-long communications campaign of mayors on the need for binding emission reductions. 1 The Compact of Mayors was launched at the 2014 United Nations Climate Summit by: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Michael R. Bloomberg, U.N. Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40), United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), United Nations Human Settlements Programme UN-Habitat 2 https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/08/24/fact-sheet-president-obama-announces-new- actions-bring-renewable-energy City of Palo Alto Page 3 Palo Alto has been invited to sign on to this letter—which must be submitted by 9/30 to be in the process for Paris. 2. International The global Compact of Mayors is a global cooperative effort among mayors and city officials committed to reducing local greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing resilience to climate change, and tracking progress transparently. The Compact establishes a common platform to capture the impact of cities’ collective actions through standardized measurement of emissions and climate risk, and consistent, public reporting of their efforts. A mayor/City Manager may register on either of the Compact’s standard reporting platforms—the “carbon” Climate Registry or CDP—or email a letter of intent to info@ compactofmayors.org. The letter of intent (see Attachment A) includes commitments to: 1. Reduce local GHG emissions (but does not require specific targets as part of the letter). 2. Measure community emissions inventory using a consistent and robust standard. 3. Identify climate-related hazards. 4. Set data-based targets for the future. 5. Develop climate action plans to deliver on city targets. All these steps are either in progress or already completed for Palo Alto. Through the Compact, cities are: Increasing their visibility as leaders responding to climate change; Demonstrating their commitment to an ambitious global climate solution, particularly as nations convene around a new climate agreement in Paris in December 2015; Encouraging direct public and private sector investments in cities by meeting transparent standards that are similar to those followed by national governments; Building a consistent and robust body of data on the impact of city action; and Accelerating more ambitious, collaborative, and sustainable local climate action. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Participating Cities 3. Benefits Increasing our visibility as leaders responding to climate change; Demonstrating our commitment to an ambitious global climate solution, particularly as nations convene around a new climate agreement in Paris in December 2015; Encouraging direct public and private sector investments in cities by meeting transparent standards that are similar to those followed by national governments; Building a consistent and robust body of data on the impact of city action; and Accelerating more ambitious, collaborative, and sustainable local climate action. Entitles us to apply for the C40 and C100 awards. Timeline Letters must be submitted by September 30 in order to be included in materials being put together for the COP21 conference in Paris in December. Resource Impact None Policy Implications These letters commit the City publically to do things it is already doing, and lend the City’s voice to a multi-city call for US leadership at COP21 later this year. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Environmental Review Not Applicable Attachments: Attachment A: Mayors National Climate Action Agenda (DOCX) Attachment B: Compact of Mayors (DOCX) Letter to Mayors National Climate Action Agenda September 15, 2015 President Barack Obama The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: As Mayors of 27 cities representing almost 20 million people, we write to thank you for your leadership on climate mitigation and resilience. As you said in your State of the Union speech, “No challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.” We are writing to call on you to act in the best interests of the American people and fight for the strongest possible climate agreement at the upcoming 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris, and for federal action to establish binding national greenhouse gas emissions reductions here at home. The United States can and should be the leader in the transition to a clean energy economy. To support your leadership and assist you and the U.S. delegation in reaching the strongest possible agreement, we are launching a campaign today to engage with our constituents, elected officials and other stakeholders to help achieve these strong outcomes at the national and international levels, while building on municipal leadership on climate change. As Mayors, we understand that we are stronger working together. That is why we have come together and created the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda (MNCAA) to help lead the way to a solution to global climate change. A changing and variable climate has tremendous implications for the livability, competitiveness and resilience of communities across the country. The extreme weather events we have all increasingly experienced in recent years and the future projections we face make it clear that we all share a common risk and commitment to safeguarding our communities. The MNCAA is a mayor-to-mayor initiative to raise the collective voice of leading mayors, demonstrate the essential role of cities in working towards climate solutions, and build political will for U.S. leadership. This initiative, established by the Mayors of Houston, Los Angeles and Philadelphia, includes the undersigned, and will continue to grow. The negotiations in Paris will be as challenging as they are critical to our cities’ environmental health and economic prosperity. Cities across the country are already taking the lead. The cities we represent are working to take responsible steps to curb emissions and plan for the changing climate. Many of our cities have reached Kyoto commitments far ahead of states and the national government, and cities across the country are committing to binding targets, creating standardized inventories and climate action plans and laying the ground work for a municipal offset protocol. But we cannot act alone. We need the federal government to provide a path forward to making meaningful reductions in carbon pollution while preparing for the impacts of climate change. Despite the dangerous/irresponsible stalemate in Congress, climate change is not a policy debate in communities all across the United States. The effects of a changing climate are presenting a clear and present threat. Extreme weather is presenting itself more regularly, though it takes many forms—from droughts in the west, wildfires in the intermountain states, to flooding and snow storms in the east and coastal erosion in the Gulf states. Momentum is building for international coordination. COP21 represents a prime opportunity for American leadership. We recognize that local governments have a major role to play in reducing greenhouse gas levels. We are encouraged that there is interest on the part of COP 21 for having language in the final agreement that specifically pertains to cities. The time for strong U.S. action is now. We look forward to standing with you here at home and in Paris to bring leadership and focus to the reality of climate change and to urge national dialogue and action. Sincerely, <<Signature>> Karen Holman Mayor City of Palo Alto Letter of Commitment to Compact of Mayors September 15, 2015 Dear Compact of Mayors Secretariat, I hereby declare the intent of the city of Palo Alto to comply with the Compact of Mayors, the world’s largest cooperative effort among mayors and city leaders to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, track progress, and prepare for the impacts of climate change. The Compact of Mayors has defined a series of requirements that cities are expected to meet over time, recognizing that each city may be at a different stage of development on the pathway to compliance with the Compact. I commit to advancing the city of Palo Alto along the stages of the Compact, with the goal of becoming fully compliant with all the requirements within three years. Specifically, I pledge to publicly report on the following within the next three years: The greenhouse gas emissions inventory for our city consistent with the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories (GPC), within one year or less The climate hazards faced by our city, within one year or less Our target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, within two years or less The climate vulnerabilities faced by our city, within two years or less Our plans to address climate change mitigation and adaptation within three years of less Yours Faithfully, <<Signature>> Karen Holman Mayor City of Palo Alto TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: GIL FRIEND, CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER DATE: SEPTEMBER 15, 2015 SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Sign, on Behalf of the City, Letters to the "Compact of Mayors" (Global) and the "Mayor’s National Climate Action Agenda" (Domestic), Committing to Climate-Related Actions the City has Already Undertaken or Set in Motion, and Calling on the President of the United States to Pursue the Strongest Possible Climate Agreement at the Upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris, France After further review of the above report Staff offers one clarification and one minor edit. 1. Page 2 of the staff report states The letter of intent (see Attachment A) includes commitments to: “2. Measure community emissions inventory using a consistent and robust standard,” but does not describe the “consistent and robust standard.” The Letter of Commitment to the Compact of Mayors pledges the City to “publicly report on the following within the next three years” including: The greenhouse gas emissions inventory for our city consistent with the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories (GPC), within one year or less The Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories (GPC) is a joint project by ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), the World Resources Institute (WRI) and C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40), with additional collaboration by the World Bank, UNEP, and UN-Habitat. As a global reporting standard, the GPC enables cities and communities to consistently measure and report GHG emissions and develop climate action plans and low-emission urban development strategies. The final version of the GPC was published in December 2014. (http://www.iclei.org/our-activities/our-agendas/low-carbon- city/gpc.html) 13 The City of Palo Alto currently reports its GHG emissions to The Climate Registry, a non-profit organization governed by U.S. states and Canadian provinces and territories. TCR designs and operates voluntary and compliance GHG reporting programs globally, and assist organizations in measuring, verifying and reporting the carbon in their operations so they can manage and reduce it. (http://www.theclimateregistry.org/) Staff’s understanding that these protocols—the North American focused TCR and the internationally focused GPC are about 95% congruent, and expects that our new sustainability dashboard software will streamline the reporting process to either protocol. 2. The Letter of Commitment to the Compact of Mayors pledges the City to report: Our plans to address climate change mitigation and adaptation within three years of less Which should read: Our plans to address climate change mitigation and adaptation within three years or less City of Palo Alto (ID # 6118) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: City Engagement with Neighborhoods Title: Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Initiate Neighborhood Engagement Activities by Conducting Town Hall Meetings, Adopting Changes to the Know Your Neighbors Grant Program, Referring the Co-Sponsorship Agreement and discussion of additional initiatives to Policy and Services Committee, and Transferring $35,000 from City Council Contingency to the City Manager's Office From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation The Policy & Services Committee recommends that the City Council: 1. Direct staff to begin ongoing town hall meetings rotating throughout the City, to engage neighborhood associations on specific and city-wide issues, with two meetings to occur in 2015, and to return to the Committee at the first meeting in 2016 with an update and assessment. a. Transfer $10,000 from the City Council contingency account to the City Manager’s Office to fund cost associated with these events. 2. Approve updates to the Know Your Neighbors Grant Program to provide associations resources to further develop their organization. a. Transfer $25,000 from the City Council contingency account to the City Manager’s Office to fund these requests for the remainder of the fiscal year. 3. Direct staff to return to Policy & Services by December 31, 2015 with an update to the Community Services Department’s Co-Sponsorship Agreement, to broaden the scope and allow for neighborhood groups to use city facilities for meetings at no charge, as well as options for waiving insurance fees for these meetings in city facilities. 4. Direct staff to return to Policy & Services Committee, at the first meeting of 2016, after meeting with neighborhood leaders, to further discuss development of the City’s Neighborhood Engagement initiative, including association definition, support models, communication, conflict resolution, ombudsman concept, City’s website and social media for neighborhoods. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background On April 20, 2015, the City Council discussed a Colleagues’ Memo from Mayor Holman, Council Members Burt, Schmid, and Wolbach regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods. The Colleagues’ Memo had seven recommendations. On June 9, 2015 the Policy & Services Committee discussed the items. Staff returned to the Committee on August 25, 2015 with recommendations for the Committee to consider. Those recommendations were modified and are being forward to the City Council for approval. Attached are staff reports associated with the meetings. Discussion On August 25, 2015, the Committee discussed town hall meetings and the grouping of neighborhoods, the cycle (quarterly or bi-monthly) of the meetings, agendas, and locations. The Committee recommended that staff conduct two town halls in 2015 and return to the Committee at the first meeting in 2016 with recommendations to right-size the meeting structure and schedule. They recommended keeping the agenda neighborhood focused with one consistent city-wide item being presented to all neighborhoods, followed by neighborhood specific items and a question and answer period. The Committee suggested that two Council members be scheduled for each meeting and that the meeting is open to all Council members. The meetings will be noticed according to the Brown Act. The Committee also reviewed changes to the Know Your Neighbor Grant guidelines and application. They accepted staff recommendation to broaden the scope to include a new criterion of “increasing governance or organizational development of neighborhood associations.” This action will give staff the ability to evaluate proposals and provide appropriate funding to strengthen neighborhood associations. The committee also recommended that associations be allowed to apply for up to two grants, not to exceed $1,000 each, for different purposes. The grants guidelines (attached) reflect this recommendation. Additionally, the Committee agreed to have the Community Services Department’s Co- Sponsorship Agreement return before December 31, 2015. The intent will be to broaden the scope and allow for neighborhood groups to use city facilities for meetings, at no charge, including options for waiving insurance fees for use of city facilities. Finally, the Committee recommended that a study session be scheduled at the first Committee meeting of 2016 to continue the conversation about the definition of an association, support models, conflict resolution, the ombudsman concept and further communication support for neighborhood associations. Resource Impact Council and staff time will be needed for preparation of the Town Hall meetings. Any outcome from the meetings could also potentially cause resource needs. The estimated cost for the town hall meetings is $10,000, primarily for non-City room rental fees. The Committee also recommends increasing funding for the Know Your Neighbor Grant program from $25,000 to City of Palo Alto Page 3 $50,000 to fund association development activities. The Committee recommends transferring funds from the City Council Contingency to cover these costs. This will leave a remaining Council contingency balance of $215,000. Additionally, as we redefine the Co-Sponsorship policy there may be financial impacts in waiving fees for facility use. Staff will present those impacts when the item returns to the Committee. Finally, as this overall initiative is further defined it could take significant Council and staff time, which may impact other Council and staff priorities. Environmental Review Adoption of neighborhood support initiatives is not a project requiring environmental review. Attachments: Attachment A: Grant Guidelines - Revised Version (DOCX) Attachment B: 4-20-15 Colleagues Memo (PDF) Attachment C: 6-9-15 Policy and Services Committee Staff Report (PDF) Attachment D: 8-25-15 Policy & Services Committee Staff Report (PDF) The “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program is designed to help neighbors better connect with each other while strengthening community and improving the quality of life and neighborhoods in Palo Alto. The goals of the Program are to: 1. Build sense of community. 2. Develop or renew neighborhood relationships. 3. Encourage interaction between generations and cultures. 4. Increase governance and organizational leadership of neighborhood associations. 5. Develop collaborative partnerships between Palo Alto neighborhoods and the City. "Know Your Neighbors Grants" are small grants intended to facilitate people getting together and getting to know one another. Citizens or neighborhood associations may apply for up to $1000 for activities such as block parties and picnics, event kick-off celebrations, ice cream socials, neighborhood crime prevention and safety activities, trainings or other functions and gatherings involving the building of connections between neighbors or increase organizational capacity. Know Your Neighbors Grants may be applied for at any time throughout the calendar year (at least one month prior to event date), and will be awarded on activities that meet eligibility requirements on a "first come, first served" basis until the allocated funding is depleted. Grant Guidelines & Eligibility Requirements 1. To be eligible for a Neighborhood Grant, the following criteria must be met: Applicants must be Palo Alto residents and may be representatives of a formal neighborhood association, neighborhood or community group, or informally associated neighbors. Activities must be neighborhood-focused, initiated and supported by residents living in the neighborhood, and have a well-developed plan. Activities must benefit the neighborhood. 2. Activities must focus on one or more of the following areas: a. Increase communication among neighbors. b. Enhance neighborhood pride and identity. c. Bring both longstanding and new neighbors (moved within last 5 years) together in their neighborhoods and seek to incorporate interaction between generations and cultures. d. Create new and innovative ideas for neighborhood events. e. Increase governance or organizational development of neighborhood association. City of Palo Alto “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program 2 3. To be eligible to apply, a group must not discriminate in membership decisions based on race, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation or any other status protected by law. 4. Events must be held within the Palo Alto City limits. 5. Grant-supported events must be open to everyone who is eligible, without regard to race, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation or any other status protected by law. 6. Groups may not charge admission to grant-supported events. 7. The following types of expenses ARE eligible for reimbursement with grant funds: food, beverages (non-alcoholic), entertainment, facility and equipment rentals, hard cost of materials and supplies, advertising, and permit fees. 8. The following expenses ARE NOT eligible for reimbursement with grant funds: salaries or stipends for members of the sponsoring group, tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, out of City travel expenses, or any lodging/hotel expenses, private transportation expenses including mileage, gas, insurance, car rentals, restaurant/catered/food truck meals, routine operating expenses and ongoing programs or services, supplies and materials that benefit an individual or homeowner verses a neighborhood, political campaigns, regular neighborhood association or homeowner meetings, items not specified in the grant application. 9. Projects may require permits depending upon the activity planned. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all applicable City permits that apply to the planned activity. 10. Applicants must submit a completed and signed Neighborhood Grant Application to be considered. Evaluation Criteria Grant applications will be evaluated on the criteria listed below: 1. Does the activity/event focus on one or more of the following five areas? a. Increase communication among neighbors. b. Enhance neighborhood pride and identity. c. Bring both longstanding and new neighbors (moved within last 5 years) together in their neighborhoods and seek to incorporate interaction between generations and cultures. d. Create new and innovative ideas for neighborhood events. e. Increase governance or organizational development of neighborhood association. 2. Does the activity/event meet the eligibility requirements outlined above? 3. Is the work plan well developed (clear tasks, adequate resources allocated, community or organization need addressed)? 4. If for neighborhood association training, how does training increase governance and organization leadership of your association? 3 Application Process To apply for a grant, complete the attached application and submit to the following address: Attention: City of Palo Alto, City Manager’s Office, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94302 or email: kyngrantscityofpaloalto.org. City Manager’s Office will review each application. Funding decisions will be made based on whether activities meet eligibility requirements and on a first come first serve basis. Each applicant will be notified of the result of the evaluation of their proposal. The Neighborhood Grant is reimbursable; meaning that any approved funds must first be spent by the grantee and receipts/invoices showing payment submitted to the City of Palo Alto within 30 days of the Activities/event conclusion. Upon review of eligible receipts/invoices, the City w i l l send a reimbursement to the grantee. Allowable expenses may be eligible for a cash advance at the discretion of the City Manager’s Office. Neighborhood Grant Program funding will be determined by City Council during the adoption of the budget each year. If Council approves the funding, each neighborhood association is eligible to apply for up to two grants, not to exceed $1,000 each for different purposes. The City reserves the right to suspend or cancel the Neighborhood Grant Program at any time, at the City Manager’s discretion, whether or not all allocated funds have been awarded or dispensed. Neighborhood groups must complete their activities/events within 6 months of receiving notification from the City of grant award. Activities may begin after grant approval and must be completed within twelve months. A follow up evaluation must be completed within 30 days of the activity/event conclusion providing photos and detailing how the activity helped strengthen the neighborhood, how many people were impacted, new ways neighbors worked to create a more connected community, if objectives were met, and if the project was successful. For more information, please contact the City Manager’s Office, at (650) 329-2452. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 20, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Colleagues' Memo From Mayor Holman, Council Members Burt, Schmid, and Wolbach Regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods (Continued from March 16, 2015) GOAL Palo Alto residents are engaged and care deeply about proposals that enhance or may harm our quality of life. To further support strong neighborhood participation in civic affairs, we propose initiating several actions to better integrate the understanding, consideration, and actions of our City government with neighborhoods’ interests and concerns. BACKGROUND The City has made great strides in making information available including the very informative Development Services Construction Updates and the Open Data Portal. Use of various social media channels such as Facebook, Twitter, and Next Door have enhanced City outreach and communication with citizens and neighborhoods. This memo seeks to build on those accomplishments with additional focus on communication with neighborhoods, adding much more face-to-face contact. Palo Alto is comprised of 37 neighborhoods, each impacted by decisions that are considered or made by City government. Whether the event is led or supported by City planners, Public Works, Utilities, the City Manager’s Office, outside agencies such as VTA, Caltrans, or even developments in another community, it is incumbent on the City to make best efforts to inform its citizens. Further, the neighborhoods often have very different characteristics and interests from one another as acknowledged in our Comprehensive Plan Goal L-3: "Safe, attractive residential neighborhoods, each with its own distinct character and within walking distance of shopping, services, schools and/or other gathering places". The current “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program provides grants for promoting neighbors getting to know one other. While this program has been very popular, frequent comments about the program include that the grant money is spent on permits for use of public facilities or street closure permits for block parties, leaving little funding for the event itself. The proposed programs below would be the City’s first comprehensive neighborhood engagement initiative. RECOMMENDATION Based on research of other cities’ programs and community members’ comments, we recommend that the following proposed City actions be referred to the Policy and Services Page 2 Committee: 1. Recognize neighborhood associations and provide placement on the City Community Partners webpage, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/partners with links to a map of the general neighborhood area and to the association website or other contact information. The City should review the process for recognition in consultation with neighborhoods and explore agreement on some basic standards and requirements regarding governance and association responsibilities for outreach and inclusion, as a recognized neighborhood association. 2. For recognized neighborhood associations, the City should explore guidelines and costs for providing periodic free use of available public facilities for public meetings and events as well as insurance coverage under the City’s policy. 3. Provide small, one-time start-up grants for neighborhood associations to be used to attend the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference and toward neighborhood association initiation activities. 4. Support neighborhood associations in distributing relevant City information to members, including information about upcoming community meetings or events, notification about proposed projects in their neighborhoods, City initiatives, emergency preparation events, County proposals, Public Works or Utilities projects, Caltrain, VTA or neighboring communities’ plans. 5. Each neighborhood association will be encouraged to identify a designated “Communications Officer” as information liaison with the City. 6. Hold annual town hall-style meetings with City Council representatives and appropriate City staff and focused on different regions of Palo Alto. The meetings shall encourage both individual and neighborhood association participation. 7. Evaluate creation of an Ombudsperson program with the neighborhoods to follow up on neighborhood or resident issues and facilitate conflict resolution when needed. DISCUSSION: Certain of these proposals may be adopted and implemented ahead of others. It is our intention that the town hall-style meetings would commence early this year, and the Ombudsman program would likely take more time and possibly need to be considered in the budget cycle. STAFF IMPACT: Staff impact and resources necessary to support this program may be significant, depending on the scope of the program components ultimately adopted. Research and discussion regarding impacts of the program will be necessary, including legal and risk implications along with staffing and funding aspects. These need not be deterrents to proceeding, just Page 3 acknowledgment that a more formal and interlinked relationship will also require some more explicit standards and monitoring and reporting. The most effective city neighborhood programs are formalized in this regard. Staff acknowledges that this discussion can first take place during the Policy and Services referral and discussion. Department Head: Beth Minor, Acting City Clerk Page 4 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5858) Policy and Services Committee Staff Report Report Type: Agenda Items Meeting Date: 6/9/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods Title: Referral of Colleagues Memo Regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends that the Policy & Services Committee discuss the seven actions outlined in the Colleagues Memo, provide further direction, and refer the item to the City Council. Background On April 20, 2015, the City Council took up a Colleagues’ Memo from Mayor Holman, Council Members Burt, Schmid, and Wolbach regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods. The Council referred to the Memo to the Policy & Services Committee. The memorandum seeks to build on existing engagement platforms and add more face-to-face contact with neighborhood organizations. The authors suggest seven actions to achieve this goal. Discussion The seven points, listed in bold, are outlined below accompanied by the staff response. Staff has provided recommendations, suggestions and some clarifying questions to further develop and address the various issues that have been raised. Potential Program Components: 1. Recognize neighborhood associations and provide placement on the City Community Partners webpage, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/partners with links to a map of the general neighborhood area and to the association website or other contact information. The City should review the process for recognition in consultation with neighborhoods and explore agreement on some basic standards and requirements regarding governance and association responsibilities for outreach and inclusion, as a recognized neighborhood association. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Staff acknowledges that the City’s Community Partners website lacks information and links to neighborhood associations, maps, and contact information. The City’s website does have a map of neighborhoods and it is attached for the Committee to review. The existing map identifies 30 neighborhoods (not 37 as indicated in the Colleagues Memo). Recognizing the potential for disagreements over the organization, boundaries, and other descriptions of a neighborhood, staff agrees that thought should be given to how neighborhood recognition is granted. Specifically, staff would like to research other municipalities as well as state and national neighborhood associations. Options for recognition could range from a laisse-faire approach to a formal process with specific criteria leading to City Council approval. In order to determine an approach that is likely to fit current Palo Alto needs, a small advisory group of existing neighborhood leaders could be formed to work with staff on identifying key requirements. Minimum standards should be developed, including a commitment to free and open membership, non-discrimination, and transparency of operations. 2. For recognized neighborhood associations, the City should explore guidelines and costs for providing periodic free use of available public facilities for public meetings and events as well as insurance coverage under the City’s policy. Staff recommends that a survey of existing neighborhood associations be conducted to determine the scale and scope of intended use. Factors such as number of uses per year, duration, types of events, fee or non-fee events, and whether alcohol is desired would impact the financial analysis of this action. Alternatively, the Committee could make recommendations that set boundaries for such free use and staff can conduct the analysis with those boundaries. Staff has also included the Fiscal Year 2015 Community Service Department’s (CSD) Municipal Fee Chapter to provide the Committee with facility rental fees. Additionally, as the Committee is aware, a pending item on the Committee’s schedule of items is the discussion about CSD facility rental fees. 3. Provide small, one-time start-up grants for neighborhood associations to be used to attend the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference and toward neighborhood association initiation activities. Staff believes that start-up support and/or governance training funds for neighborhood associations would be a nominal investment in starting and maintaining productive associations. Staff recommends that either as part of a survey or through the advisory group, association leaders be polled about the specific types of training needed for their nonprofit administration and governance. At the time of this report’s publication, details about the cost of attending the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference (UNSCC) was not available. Staff has contacted the organization to learn more about this particular City of Palo Alto Page 3 group and the conference costs. The UNSCC annual membership for each neighborhood association is $200 per the organization’s website. Additionally the City offers the Know Your Neighbors Grant Program which provides citizens, homeowner association’s or neighborhood association’s grants for up to $1,000. The Committee could look at expanding the scope and budget of this program. The program is currently funded annually with $25,000. 4. Support neighborhood associations in distributing relevant City information to members, including information about upcoming community meetings or events, notification about proposed projects in their neighborhoods, City initiatives, emergency preparation events, County proposals, Public Works or Utilities projects, Caltrain, VTA or neighboring communities’ plans. Staff is unclear about the specific nature of this request. It appears that neighborhood associations would be asked to distribute City information; however, existing channels are available to meet informal notification needs. For formal notification needs, such as for development proposals, it is unclear to what extent neighborhood associations could satisfy notification requirements. If the suggestion is that the City distributes literature and announcements through USPS mail for the associations, expectations of the magnitude of this service would be needed. Staff seeks further direction from the Committee with regard to this action. A primary existing neighborhood association resource is to utilize the social media site Nextdoor.com. Also, residents and other interested parties can sign up for the City’s numerous social media sites and email distribution lists: Social Media: www.cityofpaloalto.org/socialmedia Email Distribution List: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/cou. 5. Each neighborhood association will be encouraged to identify a designated “Communications Officer” as information liaison with the City. Staff believes that a Communication Officer within each association could add value to strengthen engagement with the City, if serving as a consistent means of connecting neighbors that are not currently reached. As mentioned in #4, the officer could assist the association leader by ensuring that citizens are connected to the City’s social media sites and email lists. Additionally the officer could email or post messages on neighborhood Nextdoor groups, potentially extending the reach of messages from the City. Further details about the duties of this volunteer position can be discussed vetted through the advisory group, if recommended by the Committee. 6. Hold annual town hall-style meetings with City Council representatives and appropriate City staff and focused on different regions of Palo Alto. The meetings shall encourage both individual and neighborhood association participation. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Staff seeks further direction from the Committee with regards to the town hall-style meetings. Specifically: how many regions does the Committee consider appropriate; would these be full Council meetings compliant with the Brown Act, or limited to less than a quorum of Council; would the meetings occur at community centers, citizen’s homes, school sites, parks, or churches; on weekends, weekdays, afternoons, or evenings; what is the ideal duration; and any specific scope. How do members see these as different as the outreach being conducted for Our Palo Alto? While a valuable means of communication with neighborhoods, this could also require significant resources to implement citywide. 7. Evaluate creation of an Ombudsperson program with the neighborhoods to follow up on neighborhood or resident issues and facilitate conflict resolution when needed. Staff recommends that in the short term, neighborhood association leaders begin to promote the use the PaloAlto311 app. The app allows residents to submit maintenance issues 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In the longer term, and as the Committee provides direction, staff believes the development of a Communications Liaison discussed in #5 could provide support in this area as well. Staff seeks direction from the Committee with regards to conflict resolution. Specifically, who is the conflict between, neighbors, citizens and the City? The City currently supports the Palo Alto Mediation Program annually with a $65,000 contribution. The organization provides services for neighbors, tenants, landlords, employers, co- workers, local businesses, or other persons or organizations in the community. This information can be shared with citizens immediately: www.paloaltomediation.com. The Committee may wish to advance some of these potential components ahead of others that will take more time to develop. Resource Impact As indicated in the memo, staff time and resources to support this program may be significant depending on scope and program components. At this stage, in forwarding the memo for initial discussion, staff is not ready to make a recommendation on staffing and budgetary needs. To conduct the basic scope of outreach necessary to solicit input and evaluate the elements described above, staff anticipates a work effort of 80 hours or more over a period of 30-60 days. This would be prioritized among other work plan elements. Staff would like to engage in a detailed discussion with the Committee to further understand the expectations and then build a work plan and budget for City Council review. Attachments: April 20, 2015 Colleagues Memorandum (PDF) Neighborhood Map from City Website (PDF) Fiscal Year 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule - Community Services Department (PDF) CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 20, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Colleagues' Memo From Mayor Holman, Council Members Burt, Schmid, and Wolbach Regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods (Continued from March 16, 2015) GOAL Palo Alto residents are engaged and care deeply about proposals that enhance or may harm our quality of life. To further support strong neighborhood participation in civic affairs, we propose initiating several actions to better integrate the understanding, consideration, and actions of our City government with neighborhoods’ interests and concerns. BACKGROUND The City has made great strides in making information available including the very informative Development Services Construction Updates and the Open Data Portal. Use of various social media channels such as Facebook, Twitter, and Next Door have enhanced City outreach and communication with citizens and neighborhoods. This memo seeks to build on those accomplishments with additional focus on communication with neighborhoods, adding much more face-to-face contact. Palo Alto is comprised of 37 neighborhoods, each impacted by decisions that are considered or made by City government. Whether the event is led or supported by City planners, Public Works, Utilities, the City Manager’s Office, outside agencies such as VTA, Caltrans, or even developments in another community, it is incumbent on the City to make best efforts to inform its citizens. Further, the neighborhoods often have very different characteristics and interests from one another as acknowledged in our Comprehensive Plan Goal L-3: "Safe, attractive residential neighborhoods, each with its own distinct character and within walking distance of shopping, services, schools and/or other gathering places". The current “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program provides grants for promoting neighbors getting to know one other. While this program has been very popular, frequent comments about the program include that the grant money is spent on permits for use of public facilities or street closure permits for block parties, leaving little funding for the event itself. The proposed programs below would be the City’s first comprehensive neighborhood engagement initiative. RECOMMENDATION Based on research of other cities’ programs and community members’ comments, we recommend that the following proposed City actions be referred to the Policy and Services Page 2 Committee: 1. Recognize neighborhood associations and provide placement on the City Community Partners webpage, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/partners with links to a map of the general neighborhood area and to the association website or other contact information. The City should review the process for recognition in consultation with neighborhoods and explore agreement on some basic standards and requirements regarding governance and association responsibilities for outreach and inclusion, as a recognized neighborhood association. 2. For recognized neighborhood associations, the City should explore guidelines and costs for providing periodic free use of available public facilities for public meetings and events as well as insurance coverage under the City’s policy. 3. Provide small, one-time start-up grants for neighborhood associations to be used to attend the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference and toward neighborhood association initiation activities. 4. Support neighborhood associations in distributing relevant City information to members, including information about upcoming community meetings or events, notification about proposed projects in their neighborhoods, City initiatives, emergency preparation events, County proposals, Public Works or Utilities projects, Caltrain, VTA or neighboring communities’ plans. 5. Each neighborhood association will be encouraged to identify a designated “Communications Officer” as information liaison with the City. 6. Hold annual town hall-style meetings with City Council representatives and appropriate City staff and focused on different regions of Palo Alto. The meetings shall encourage both individual and neighborhood association participation. 7. Evaluate creation of an Ombudsperson program with the neighborhoods to follow up on neighborhood or resident issues and facilitate conflict resolution when needed. DISCUSSION: Certain of these proposals may be adopted and implemented ahead of others. It is our intention that the town hall-style meetings would commence early this year, and the Ombudsman program would likely take more time and possibly need to be considered in the budget cycle. STAFF IMPACT: Staff impact and resources necessary to support this program may be significant, depending on the scope of the program components ultimately adopted. Research and discussion regarding impacts of the program will be necessary, including legal and risk implications along with staffing and funding aspects. These need not be deterrents to proceeding, just Page 3 acknowledgment that a more formal and interlinked relationship will also require some more explicit standards and monitoring and reporting. The most effective city neighborhood programs are formalized in this regard. Staff acknowledges that this discussion can first take place during the Policy and Services referral and discussion. Department Head: Beth Minor, Acting City Clerk Page 4 280 S A N ANTONIO ROAD A R A S T R A D E R O R O A D FOOTHILL EXPRESSWAY PAGE MI L L R O A D SAN FRANCIS Q U I TO C R E EK E M B A R C A D E R O R O A D E L C A M I N O R E A L ORE G O N E X P R E S S W A Y PAG E M I L L R O A D UNI V E R S I T Y A V E N U E AL M A S T R E E T EAST M E A D O W A V E . LOM A V E R D E A V E . C H A R L E S T O N R O A D MI D D L E F I E L D R O A D Crescent Park Downtown North Community Center Professorville Duveneck/St. Francis Leland Manor/Embarcadero Oaks/Garland Drive Triple El Old Palo Alto Barron Park GreenAcres GreaterMiranda EstherClarkPark Palo AltoHills PaloAltoOrchards Ventura Palo Verde St. ClaireGardens Evergreen Park Coll e g e T e r r a c e South-gate Midtown Fairmeadow South ofMidtown Greenmeadow CharlestonGardens TheGreenhouse Adobe Meadow/Meadow Park CharlestonMeadows MonroePark Uni v e r s i t y S o u t h Triple El Community Center Fiscal Year 2015 Community Services This page is intentionally left blank. City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 4-1 Patron Facility Use Fee for Community Theatre Children's Theatre Adults Special Workshops and Presentations (including Children’s Theatre workshop fees) Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Junior Museum Science Outreach Program $1,082.00- $54,075.00 per program Fee plus up to 50%$1,082.00- $54,075.00 per program Fee plus up to 50% Junior Museum Science Outreach Unit $55.00 - $1,082.00 per unit Fee plus up to 50% (if majority of participants are non-residents) $55.00 - $1,082.00 per unit Fee plus up to 50% (if majority of participants are non- residents) Junior Museum and Zoo Group Admission (for organized groups of 15 to 25, larger groups shall be subdivided with additional group admission fee) $55.00 - $135.00 Fee plus up to 50%$55.00 - $135.00 Fee plus up to 50% Junior Museum & Zoo birthday parties $297.00 - $541.00 Fee plus up to 50%$297.00 - $541.00 Fee plus up to 50% Children's Theatre birthday parties $297.00 - $541.00 Fee plus up to 50%$297.00 - $541.00 Fee plus up to 50% Children's Theatre per show production per participant fee***** $54.00 - $324.00 Fee plus up to 50%$54.00 - $324.00 Fee plus up to 50% Administrative fee per registration, additional Children's Theatre Enrichment $54.00-$270.00/day $108.00-$540.00/day $54.00- $270.00/day $108.00-$540.00/day Tours Palo Alto & Ravenswood School Districts, $3.00 - $5.00/student $81.00 - $135/group Palo Alto & Ravenswood School Districts, $3.00 - $5.00/student $81.00 - $135/group Instructional Classes and camps**&***$6.00 - $865.00 Fee plus up to 50%$6.00 - $865.00 Fee plus up to 50% Drop-in Activities*** & ****$4.00 - $53.00 $4.00 - $53.00 $4.00 - $53.00 $4.00 - $53.00 $2.00 Permits Ticket Processing Fee $5.00 - $22.00 $5.00 - $2,100.00 $0.00 - $4.00 FY 2015 FEE Admissions Visual and Performing Arts $0.00 - $27.00 $0.00 - $27.00 Permit to perform in Arts and Sciences sponsored concert series. (Interested parties must apply and be selected by Program Coordinator.) FY 2014 FEE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT $0.00 - $4.00 $10.00 - $22.00 Children's Theatre Children Arts and Sciences Performing Arts Registrations $10.00 - $22.00 Arts and Sciences Activities* $5.00 - $22.00 $2.00 $5.00 - $2,100.00 City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 4-2 FY 2015 FEEFY 2014 FEE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Arts and Sciences Workshop Supplies $0.50 - $79.00 $0.50 - $79.00 $0.50 - $79.00 $0.50 - $79.00 Cancellation Charge Locker Rental ***** Either fee or in-lieu funding agreement with Friends of Palo Alto Children's Theatre. **** For every 10 hours of time purchased in a Visual Arts Studio drop-in program, one hour is given free. ** Art Center Foundation members are eligible for a 20% discount on one (1) Studio class per Foundation membership year ($100.00 and above) to be reimbursed to the City from the Art Center Foundation. $21.00 - $26.00 per season *** A 25% or 50% fee discount through the Fee Reduction Program may be provided for low-income youth, seniors, and/or disabled adult residents. Income eligibility is determined using the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Low-Income Guidelines. The Low- Income Guidelines are established at 80% of the Santa Clara County median income level. The income level for disabled residents is established as 100% of the Santa Clara County Median Income. Each youth, senior, and/or disabled adult accepted into the program may receive an annual subsidy up to $300. Discount percentage will be based on income level. Discount may not be applied in conjunction with any other discount program. $15.00 (small) per season $26.00 (large) per season * The Director of Community Services is authorized to offer promotional fee discounts of up to 25% for purposes of promotion and marketing of programs. Such discounts are intended to maximize revenue and/or participation. Up to 100% of fees paid Up to 100% of fees paid City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 5-1 Golf Course-Special Fees** League Reservation Fee Tournament Reservation Fee Youth age 16 and under Daily Fee 9 Holes when available Mid-day Rate (1 hour before Twilight Rates) Senior (non-resident 60 and over) Senior (resident 60 and over) Student (21 and under) Junior (17 and under) after 1:00 pm Sept 1 through April 30 Northern California Golf Association Junior (NCGA Jr) Fee - must also be a member of NCGA after 2:00 p.m.Twilight Rates Nov 1 through Feb 28 after 12:00 pm March 1 through April 30 after 1:30 pm May 1 through August 31 after 2:30 pm Sept 1 through Oct 31 after 1:30 pm Super Twilight Rates Nov 1 through Feb 28 after 2:00 pm March 1 through April 30 after 3:30 pm May 1 through August 31 after 4:30 pm Sept 1 through Oct 31 after 3:30 pm Daily Fee 9 Holes when available Mid-day Rate 1 hour before Twilight Rates Student (21 and under) Junior (17 and under) after 1:00 pm Sept 1 through April 30 Northern California Golf Association Junior (NCGA Jr) Fee - must also be a member of NCGA after 2:00 p.m. Nov 1 through Feb 28 after 12:00pm March 1 through April 30 after 1:30pm May 1 through August 31 after 2:30pm Sept 1 through Oct 31 after 1:30pm Golf Services* COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT $26.00 - $29.00 $27.00 - $30.00 During special promotional periods only: Free Green Fee with paying adult. All other fees charged. $33.00 - $37.00 Twilight Rates $23.00 - $25.00 $26.00 - $29.00 $24.00 - $28.00 $12.00 - $16.00 July 1, 2014 - June 30, 2015 $250.00 - $450.00 per team $1.00 - $5.00 per player $10.00 - $12.00 $28.00 - $32.00 $12.00 - $16.00 $26.00 - $29.00 $23.00 - $25.00 $32.00 - $35.00 Resident: $37.00 - $42.00 Non-Res: $39.00 - $44.00 FY 2014 FEE $10.00 - $12.00 $10.00 - $12.00 July 1, 2013 - June 30, 2014 $250.00 - $450.00 per team $1.00 - $5.00 per player $42.00 - $46.00 $28.00 - $32.00 $24.00 - $28.00 FY 2015 FEE $32.00 - $35.00 During special promotional periods only: Free Green Fee with paying adult. All other fees charged. $32.00 - $35.00 Resident: $37.00 - $42.00 Non-Res: $39.00 - $44.00 Green Fee - Admissions WEEKDAYS (Daily fees unless otherwise noted) $26.00 - $29.00 Resident: $47.00 - $52.00 Non-Res: $49.00 - $54.00 $15.00 - $18.00 $10.00 - $12.00 WEEKEND/PRIME TIME RATES (Daily fees unless otherwise noted): New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day and the day after, Christmas Day $29.00 - $32.00 $33.00 - $37.00 $29.00 - $32.00 $32.00 - $35.00 $27.00 - $30.00 $15.00 - $18.00 Resident: $47.00 - $52.00 Non-Res: $49.00 - $54.00 $42.00 - $46.00 City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 5-2 Golf Services* COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT FY 2014 FEE FY 2015 FEE Nov 1 through Feb 28 after 2:00pm March 1 through April 30 after 3:30pm May 1 through August 31 after 4:30pm Sept 1 through Oct 31 after 3:30pm Senior Non-resident 10 play discount card – weekdays 10-play card – valid any time Student – weekdays only, unlimited play Student Annual Play Card - unlimited weekday play/after 11:00 am weekends and holidays Senior Resident discount cards are available only to verified residents, 60 years and older, in possession of a valid Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course Identification Card, and are valid for Weekday use only. Senior-Resident Monthly discount Play Card - Valid Monday through Friday Weekdays Weekends powercart, reservation fee, prize fund Power Cart – 18 Holes Power Cart – 9 Holes Power Cart 4-bagger Single Rider – 18 Holes Hand Cart – 18 Holes Hand Cart – 9 Holes Small Bucket Medium Bucket Large Bucket Jumbo Bucket Medium Bucket Card – 10 Large bucket Card – 10 Pro-line Clubs – 9 Holes Pro-line Clubs –18 Holes Off Premise Rental – 19 Holes * During Fiscal Year 2015, the Golf Course, except for the driving range, is scheduled to be closed for construction. 1) A $500.00 non-refundable deposit is due when the tournament is booked. 2) The balance of fees for the tournament contract is due 10 days prior to the tournament date. 3) Tee Off Times: 8:00 a.m. or 12:00 p.m., Standard time 7:00 a.m. or 1:00 p.m., Daylight Savings time 4) Minimum Number of Players: 120 Maximum Number of Players: 144 $3.00 - $5.00 $3.00 - $5.00 $30.00 - $34.00 $235.00 - $259.00 $125.00 - $135.00 ** The Director of Community Services is authorized to establish and use promotional fees in order to encourage optimum play and to maximize revenue generation for the municipal golf course. Weekday and weekend green fees may be adjusted to no more than 35% below the posted fees in the creation of promotional fees. $60.00 - $80.00 $90.00 - $110.00 $19.00 - $22.00 $28.00 - $32.00 Driving Range Fees $15.00 - $19.00 $4.00 - $8.00 $28.00 - $32.00 $10.00 - $14.00 Club Rentals $26.00 - $37.00 $2.00 - $5.00 $30.00 - $34.00 $2.00 - $5.00 $4.00 - $8.00 Cart Rental Fees $13.00 - $17.00 5) Fees apply rain or shine, no cancellations $26.00 - $30.00 $299.00 - $329.00 $15.00 - $19.00 $59.00 - $65.00 $70.00 - $85.00 $26.00 - $37.00 $13.00 - $17.00 $70.00 - $85.00 Shotgun Start Tournament Fees $6.00 - $9.00 $45.00 - $55.00 $60.00 - $80.00 $10.00 - $12.00 $10.00 - $14.00 $45.00 - $55.00 $90.00 - $110.00 $19.00 - $22.00 $10.00 - $12.00 $59.00 - $65.00 $105.00 - $115.00 $26.00 - $30.00 $6.00 - $9.00 $199.00 - $219.00 $299.00 - $329.00 Super Twilight Rates Available to Student 21 and under $199.00 - $219.00 $105.00 - $115.00 $999.00 - $1099.00 $125.00 - $135.00 $999.00 - $1099.00 $235.00 - $259.00 Seniors –Resident only– 10 play discount card-weekday only City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 6-1 Dance parties* Group rate* Individual entry rate* Special Events* Card replacement fee Resident Admission Daily Non-Resident Admission Daily Resident Admission Daily Non-Resident Admission Daily Infant (age 2 and under)$0.00-$3.00 $0.00-$4.00 $0.00-$3.00 $0.00-$4.00 Youth (17 and under)$3.00-$6.00 $4.00-$8.00 $3.00-$6.00 $4.00-$8.00 Adult (18 and over)$4.00-$6.00 $5.00-$9.00 $4.00-$6.00 $5.00-$9.00 Senior (60 and over) and Senior Lap $3.00-$5.00 $3.00-$5.00 $3.00-$5.00 $3.00-$5.00 Lap Swimming $4.00-$6.00 $4.00-$6.00 $4.00-$6.00 $4.00-$6.00Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Youth (17 and under)$2.50 - $5.00/admission $2.50 - $6.00/admission $2.50 - $5.00/admission $2.50 - $6.00/admission Adult (18 and over) $3.00 - $6.00/admission $3.00 - $8.00/admission $3.00 - $6.00/admission $3.00 - $8.00/admission Senior (60 and over)$2.00 - $4.00/admission $2.00 - $5.00/admission $2.00 - $4.00/admission $2.00 - $5.00/admission Resident Admission Daily Non-Resident Admission Daily Resident Admission Daily Non-Resident Admission Daily Drop-in Activities* Instructional Classes and Camps*$2.00 - $865.00 Fee plus up to 50%$2.00 - $865.00 Fee plus up to 50% Individual Youth Sport Registration* $162.00-$324.00 Fee plus up to 50%$162.00-$324.00 Fee plus up to 50% Sport Team Registration (Youth and Adult) $27.00 - $973.00 Fee plus up to 50% (if majority of participants are non-residents) $27.00 - $973.00 Fee plus up to 50% (if majority of participants are non-residents)Cancellation Charge Tennis Court Reservations for Tournaments and USTA League Play $5.00 - $16.00/hour $7.50 - $24.00/hour $5.00 - $16.00/hour $7.50 - $24.00/hour Tournament Entry Fees Workshop Fees Snack food at special events Merchandise (such as recreation t- shirts, sweat shirts, pens, mugs, etc.) $1.00 - $22.00 $1.00 - $5.00 Facility Admissions $1.00 - $11.00 Swimming Membership Card / Swim Pass* $1.00 - $11.00 $16.00 - $81.00 Up to 100% of fees paid General Recreation $0.50 - $11.00 Swimming Pools – Rinconada Complex and PAUSD pools when operated by the City $1.00 - $216.00 $3.00 - $433.00 $5.00 - $27.00 Registrations FY 2015 FEE $0.50 - $11.00 Concessions / Merchandise $1.00 to $108.00 * A 25% or 50% fee discount through the Fee Reduction Program may be provided for low-income youth (age 17 and under), senior (age 60 and over), and/or disabled adult residents. Income eligibility is determined using the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Low- Income Guidelines. The Low-Income Guidelines are established at 80% of the Santa Clara County median income level. The income level for disabled residents is established as 100% of the Santa Clara County Median Income. Each youth, senior, and/or disabled adult accepted into the program may receive an annual subsidy up to $300. Discount percentage will be based on income level. Discount may not be applied in conjunction with any other discount program. $1.00 - $108.00 Up to 100% of fees paid $3.00 - $433.00 $1.00 - $216.00 The Director of Community Services is authorized to offer promotional fee discounts of up to 25% for purposes of promotion and marketing of programs. Such discounts are intended to maximize revenue and/or participation. $1.00 to $108.00 $1.00 - $108.00 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Recreation Activities FY 2014 FEE $16.00 - $81.00 $5.00 - $27.00 $1.00 - $22.00 $1.00 - $5.00 City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 7-1 Open Space and Parks Special Use Permit Special Events Playground Inspection Fee Field Inspector Hourly Fee Organic Garden Plots* Senior Rate Garden Plot Clean-up/Security Deposit Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Cancellation Charge Drop-in Activities* Interpretive Programs, including Tours and Birthday Parties $2.00 - $757.00 $2.00 - $811.00 $2.00 - $757.00 $2.00 - $811.00 Instructional Classes and Camps*$2.00 - $865.00 Fee plus up to 50%$2.00 - $865.00 Fee plus up to 50% $162.00/inspection $83.00/hour $0.75/square foot/year $162.00/inspection $1.00-$108.00 Registrations * A 25% or 50% fee discount through the Fee Reduction Program may be provided for low-income youth (17 and under), seniors (60 and over), and/or disabled adult residents. Income eligibility is determined using the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Low-Income Guidelines. The Low-Income Guidelines are established at 80% of the Santa Clara County median income level. The income level for disabled residents is established as 100% of the Santa Clara County Median Income. Each youth (17 and under), senior (60 and over), and/or disabled adult accepted into the program may receive an annual subsidy up to $300. The discount percentage will be based on income level. The discount may not be applied in conjunction with any other discount program. Volunteer Garden Liaisons will have their garden fee waived in appreciation for their service to assist in managing the garden. (Approved by Parks and Recreation Commission on June 21, 2011.) COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Open Space and Parks FY 2015 FEE $324.00 - $2,163.00 $1.00 - $108.00 $0.75/square foot/year Up to 100% of fees paid FY 2014 FEE $324.00 - $2,163.00 $1.00 - $108.00 25% discount $100.00 - $200.00 per garden plot 25% discount Open Space Activities Up to 100% of fees paid $1.00-$108.00 $100.00 - $200.00 per garden plot Facility Admissions General Recreation Community Garden $83.00/hour City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 8-1 Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Resident Fee Non-Resident Fee Banner Space Rental $27.00 - $108.00/week $40.50 - $162.00/week $27.00 - $108.00/week $40.50 - $162.00/week Cancellation Fee One-third of total charges One-third of total charges Cleaning and Damage Deposit $300.00 - $1,000.00 $300.00 - $1,000.00 General Liability Insurance By Quote By Quote Special Use Permit $324.00 - $2163.00 $324.00 - $2163.00 Auditorium $119.00/hour $179.00/hour $119.00/hour $179.00/hour Historic Courtyard $77.00/hour $116.00/hour $77.00/hour $116.00/hour Green Room $50.00/hour $75.00/hour $50.00/hour $75.00/hour Kitchen / Preschool Classroom $34.00/hour $51.00/hour $34.00/hour $51.00/hour Lobby $77.00/hour $116.00/hour $77.00/hour $116.00/hour Meeting Room $77.00/hour $116.00/hour $77.00/hour $116.00/hour Sculpture Garden $102.00/hour $153.00/hour $102.00/hour $153.00/hour Studio A Not Available Not Available $50/hour $75/hour Studio B Not Available Not Available $50/hour $75/hour Ceramics Studio Not Available Not Available $50/hour $75/hour Project LOOK! Studio Not Available Not Available $50/hour $75/hour Children’s Clay Studio Not Available Not Available $50/hour $75/hour Children’s Outdoor Classroom Not Available Not Available $50/hour $75/hour Science Lab $60.00/hour $90.00/hour $60.00/hour $90.00/hourClay Room $92.00/hour $138/hour $92.00/hour $138/hour Exhibit Hall $216.00/hour $324.00/hour $216.00/hour $324.00/hour Other Rooms $60.00/hour $90.00/hour $60.00/hour $90.00/hour Zoo**$216.00/hour $324.00/hour $216.00/hour $324.00/hour Ballroom (Room S) $152.00/hour $228.00/hour $167.00/hour $249.00/hour Community Room (Room R) $110.00/hour $165.00/hour $125.00/hour $185.00/hour Fireside Room (Room D) $88.00/hour $132.00/hour $95.00/hour $145.00/hour Kitchen $32.00/hour $48.00/hour $35.00/hour $55.00/hour Patio $90.00/hour $135.00/hour $90.00/hour $135.00/hour Weddings (Saturdays & Sundays)See Package Rentals Class I - City Use and City-Sponsored Activities: No charge for facility rental for events or activities, however, fees for attendants, equipment rental, and special uses may apply. (Note: City facility use for City co-sponsored groups will be considered on a case by case basis.) Class II - 501(c)3 Non-Profit Organizations: IRS recognized non-profit 501(c)3 organizations may receive a 50% reduction on basic facility rental rates upon verification. Only facility rental rates may be reduced and all other fees, such as staffing and equipment, are charged at the full rate. Non- profit organizations charging or collecting fees or raising funds are not eligible for reduced rates and basic fees will apply. This does not apply to class registration fees. Class III - Individuals, Groups, Organizations, and Businesses not charging fees: Basic rental fees apply. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Rentals and Reservations Class IV - Business or Commercial Use: Individuals, groups, organizations, and businesses charging, collecting, or raising funds may rent facilities and equipment at the basic rate plus 75%. The Art Center is not available for CLASS IV usage. FY 2015 FEEFY 2014 FEE See Package Rentals Classifications of Use and Fees Individual Spaces Art Center* Junior Museum and Zoo Lucie Stern Community Center City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 8-2 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Rentals and Reservations El Palo Alto Room (Ballroom)$208.00/hour $312.00/hour $208.00/hour $312.00/hour El Palo Alto East or West only $104.00/hour $156.00/hour $104.00/hour $156.00/hour Adobe North Tech Lab $104.00/hour $156.00/hour $104.00/hour $156.00/hour Adobe South or Matadero Meeting/Class Room $82.00/hour $123.00/hour $82.00/hour $123.00/hour Catering Kitchen $60.00/hour $90.00/hour $60.00/hour $90.00/hour Weddings (Saturdays & Sundays) Auditorium and Stage (fee based on number of attendees) $158.00-$2,100.00/hour $237.00-$3,150.00/hour $158.00-$2,100.00/hour $237.00-$3,150.00/hour Dance Studio (fee based on number of attendees) $32.00-$1,050.00/hour $48.00-$1,575.00/hour $32.00-$1,050.00/hour $48.00-$1,575.00/hour Castle Stage and Secret Garden (fee based on number of attendees) $315.00-$2,625.00/hour $473.00-$3,938.00/hour $315.00-$2,625.00/hour $473.00-$3,938.00/hour Auditorium and Stage (fee based on number of attendees) $210.00-$3,150.00/hour $315.00-$4,725.00/hour $210.00-$3,150.00/hour $315.00-$4,725.00/hour Green Room and Dressing Rooms (fee based on number of attendees) $42.00 - $1,050.00/hour $63.00 - $1,575.00/hour $42.00 - $1,050.00/hour $63.00 - $1,575.00/hour Rehearsal Hall (fee based on number of attendees) $42.00 - $1,050.00/hour $63.00 - $1,575.00/hour $42.00 - $1,050.00/hour $63.00 - $1,575.00/hour Lawn Bowling Green's Kitchen and Meeting Facility $110.00/hour $165.00/hour $110.00/hour $165.00/hour Baylands Nature Interpretive Center- Meeting Room $83.00/hour $94.00/hour $83.00/hour $94.00/hour Arastradero Gateway Educational Facility*** $83.00/hour Not Available $83.00/hour Not Available Foothills Nature Interpretive Center Classroom- residents only $83.00/hour Not Available $83.00/hour Not Available Mitchell and Rinconada Parks - Bowl Areas $8.00-$81.00/hour $16.00-$162.00/hour $8.00-$81.00/hour $16.00-$162.00/hour Peers Park, Mitchell Park Field House- residents only $22.00/hour Not Available $22.00/hour Not Available Alma Plaza Community Room $110.00/hour $165.00/hour $110.00/hour $165.00/hour Palo Alto Swim Club and Palo Alto Masters Swim Club $4.00-$6.00/hour per lane or $55.00 - $75.00 for all swim lanes Not Available $4.00-$6.00/hour per lane or $55.00 - $75.00 for all swim lanes Not Available 1-25 people $75.00 - $100.00/hour $95.00 - $115.00/hour $75.00 - $100.00/hour $95.00 - $115.00/hour 26-50 people $95.00 - $115.00/hour $129.00 - $145.00/hour $95.00 - $115.00/hour $129.00 - $145.00/hour 51-75 people $125.00 - $140.00/hour $169.00 - $185.00/hour $125.00 - $140.00/hour $169.00 - $185.00/hour 76-100 people $155.00 - $175.00/hour $225.00 - $245.00/hour $155.00 - $175.00/hour $225.00 - $245.00/hour Children's Theatre Community Theatre Swimming Pool Rentals – Rinconada Competition Pool or Children’s Pool See Package Rentals Mitchell Park Community Center See Package Rentals City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 8-3 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Rentals and Reservations 1-15 people $11.00/group $16.00/group $15.00/group $19.00/group Arbor Group Site $43.00 Not Available $43.00 Not Available East Meadow Group Site $65.00 Not Available $65.00 Not Available Pine Grove Group Site $119.00 Not Available $119.00 Not Available Redwood Group Site $97.00 Not Available $97.00 Not Available Sequoia Group Site $54.00 Not Available $54.00 Not Available Oak Grove (150 people maximum), 1-25 people $76.00 Not Available $80.00 Not Available 26-100 people (Oak Grove only)$130.00 Not Available $135.00 Not Available 101-150 people (Oak Grove only)$173.00 Not Available $180.00 Not AvailableTowle Camp $30.00 per campsite Not Available $35.00 per campsite Not Available Auditorium and Green Room $119.00/hour $179.00/hour $119.00/hour $179.00/hour All Available Space and Zoo**$540.00/hour $810.00hour $540.00/hour $810.00hour All Available Space and Garden (fee based on number of attendees) $1,050.00 - $5,250.00/hour $1,575.00 - $7,875.00/hour $1,050.00 - $5,250.00/hour $1,575.00 - $7,875.00/hour Weddings (Saturdays & Sundays) - Includes facility attendant $330.00/hour $495.00/hour $360.00/hour $545.00/hour Exclusive Use Package - Includes facility attendant $300.00/hour $450.00/hour $330.00/hour $495.00/hour Fireside Room and Patio Package $116.00/hour $174.00/hour $129.00/hour $189.00/hour Community Room and Patio Package $138.00/hour $207.00/hour $149.00/hour $229.00/hour Weddings (Saturdays & Sundays) - Includes facility attendant $498.00/hour $747.00/hour $498.00/hour $747.00/hour Exclusive Use Package - Includes facility attendant $473.00/hour $709.00/hour $473.00/hour $709.00/hour El Palo Alto Room & Kitchen $254.00/hour $381.00/hour $254.00/hour $381.00/hour Adobe North Tech Lab and South Meeting/Classroom $177.00/hour $265.00/hour $177.00/hour $265.00/hour Birthday Package - Includes game room, basketball court, and party host $208.00/hour $312.00/hour $208.00/hour $312.00/hour 1-25 people $90.00 - $150.00/hour $115.00 - $160.00/hour $90.00 - $150.00/hour $115.00 - $160.00/hour 26-50 people $130.00 - $190.00/hour $140.00 - $200.00/hour $130.00 - $190.00/hour $140.00 - $200.00/hour 51-75 people $170.00 - $230.00/hour $180.00 - $240.00/hour $170.00 - $230.00/hour $180.00 - $240.00/hour 76-100 people $200.00 - $260.00/hour $210.00 - $270.00/hour $200.00 - $260.00/hour $210.00 - $270.00/hour 101 people or more $250.00 - $310.00/hour $260.00 - $320.00/hour $250.00 - $310.00/hour $260.00 - $320.00/hour Children's Theatre Swimming Pool Rentals – Rinconada Complex/Exclusive Use Package – 2 hour minimum Mitchell Park Community Center Picnic Area Reservations - Mitchell Park (Arbor, East Meadow, Pine Grove, Redwood); Rinconada Park Picnic Area Reservations - Mitchell Park (Arbor, East Meadow, Pine Grove, Redwood); Rinconada Park (Sequoia) Foothills Park Reservations Package Rentals Jr. Museum and Zoo Art Center* Lucie Stern Community Center City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 8-4 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Rentals and Reservations Athletic Field Use Deposit $25.00 - $500.00 $37.50 - $750.00 $25.00 - $500.00 $37.50 - $750.00 Lights (Only Baseball & Softball Fields at El Camino Park and Baylands Athletic Center) $27.00/use $27.00/use Tennis Courts (USTA and Palo Alto Tennis Club only) $5.00 - $16.00/hour $8.00 - $22.50/hour $5.00 - $16.00/hour $8.00 - $22.50/hour Grass Fields $46.00 - $81.00/hour $83.00 - $162.00/hour $46.00 - $81.00/hour $83.00 - $162.00/hourGrass Fields - Palo Alto Based Non- Profit Organizations $25.00 - $54.00/hour Not Applicable $25.00 - $54.00/hour Not Applicable Grass Fields - Palo Alto Based Youth Sports Organizations (When 51% or more of participants are Palo Alto residents.) $3.00 - $27.00/hour Not Applicable $3.00 - $27.00/hour Not Applicable Synthetic Turf Fields - Stanford Palo Alto Playing Fields and Cubberley Football Field $61.00 - $162.00/hour $138.00 - $216.00/hour $61.00 - $162.00/hour $138.00 - $216.00/hour Synthetic Turf Fields - Palo Alto Based Non-Profit Organizations $44.00 - $108.00/hour Not Applicable $44.00 - $108.00/hour Not Applicable Synthetic Turf Fields - Palo Alto Based Youth Sports Organizations (When 51% or more of participants are Palo Alto residents.) $33.00 - $54.00/hour Not Applicable $33.00 - $54.00/hour Not Applicable Facility Attendant and/or Assistant Facility Attendant and/or Assistant - overtime and holidays Custodial Services Custodial Services – overtime and holidaysDamage and Cleaning Deposit Lifeguard Lifeguard - overtime and holidays Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo Attendant Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo Attendant – overtime and holidays Park Ranger Athletic Fields $59.00/hour regular $59.00/hour regular 1) Facilities in this category include: Rental Facility Attendant Charges $30.00/hour $28.00/hour per attendant $45.00/hour $32.00/hour $48.00/hour $25.00 - $1,000.00 $20.00/hour $33.00/hour $42.00/hour per attendant $28.00/hour per attendant $42.00/hour per attendant $30.00/hour $45.00/hour $32.00/hour $48.00/hour $25.00 - $1,000.00 $20.00/hour $33.00/hour City of Palo Alto FY 2014 Municipal Fee Schedule 8-5 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Rentals and Reservations Coffee Urn $11.00/use $16.50/use $11.00/use $16.50/use Easel (wooden, 3-legged) at the Art Center $4.00 per day $5.00 per day $4.00 per day $5.00 per day Grand Piano $81.00/use $121.50/use $81.00/use $121.50/use Art Center Grand Piano $77.00/use $116.00/use $77.00/use $116.00/use Portable Movie Projector - 16mm $11.00/use $16.50/use $11.00/use $16.50/use Podium with Microphone $32.00/use $48.00/use $32.00/use $48.00/use Canoe (Foothills Park)$17.00 Not Applicable $20.00 Not Applicable Personal Floatation Device (Foothills) $2.00/use Not Applicable $2.00/use Not Applicable Portable Public Address System $11.00/use $16.50/use $11.00/use $16.50/use Portable Digital Projector $65.00/use $97.50/use $65.00/use $97.50/use Built in Digital Projection System $65.00/use $97.50/use $65.00/use $97.50/use At Cubberley Center: Tables - 6' or Round (when not part of a facility rental) $6.00/table $9.00/table $6.00/table $9.00/table At Cubberley Center: Chairs - Folding Metal (when not part of a facility rental) $1.00/chair $1.50/chair $1.00/chair $1.50/chair Upright Piano $11.00/use $16.50/use $11.00/use $16.50/use Television $29.00/use $43.50/use $29.00/use $43.50/use Facility Rental Liability Insurance An optional fee for required liability insurance is charged at a rate dictated by the City’s insurance vendor. An optional fee for required liability insurance is charged at a rate dictated by the City’s insurance vendor. An optional fee for required liability insurance is charged at a rate dictated by the City’s insurance vendor. An optional fee for required liability insurance is charged at a rate dictated by the City’s insurance vendor. Gymnastics Mats $27.00/use $40.50/use $27.00/use $40.50/use Gymnastics Equipment $5.00 per piece $7.50 per piece $5.00 per piece $7.50 per piece ***Arastradero Gateway Educational Facility rental limited to educational usage. * A 15% discount on the room fee is given to those booking a space at the Art Center for 5 or more hours. ** A two-hour minimum is required for Zoo rental. 1) Permittee is required to reimburse the City for any damage or loss to facilities or equipment. Special Equipment City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 9-1 Small (Less than 1,000 sq. ft.)$23.00/hr $29.00/hr $28.00/hr $35.00/hr $25.00/hr $32.00/hr $31.00/hr $39.00/hr Medium (1,000-2,000 sq. ft.)$29.00/hr $35.00/hr $38.00/hr $45.00/hr $32.00/hr $39.00/hr $42.00/hr $50.00/hr Large (2,000-4,000 sq. ft.)$36.00/hr $46.00/hr $45.00/hr $58.00/hr $40.00/hr $51.00/hr $50.00/hr $64.00/hr Other Amphitheater (Grass)$17.00/hr $22.00/hr $24.00/hr $32.00/hr $19.00/hr $24.00/hr $26.00/hr $35.00/hr Auditorium (includes kitchen)$52.00/hr $84.00/hr $86.00/hr $124.00/hr $57.00/hr $92.00/hr $95.00/hr $136.00/hr Dance Studio $32.00/hr $37.00/hr $40.00/hr $47.00/hr $35.00/hr $40.00/hr $44.00/hr $52.00/hr Gym A $49.00/hr $75.00/hr $61.00/hr $92.00/hr $54.00/hr $83.00/hr $67.00/hr $101.00/hr Gym B $55.00/hr $82.00/hr $72.00/hr $110.00/hr $61.00/hr $90.00/hr $79.00/hr $121.00/hr H-1 Lecture Room $38.00/hr $48.00/hr $47.00/hr $60.00/hr $42.00/hr $53.00/hr $52.00/hr $66.00/hr Pavilion $84.00/hr $107.00/hr $110.00/hr $134.00/hr $92.00/hr $118.00/hr $121.00/hr $147.00/hr Surcharge for Street Shoe Use $17.00/hr $17.00/hr $17.00/hr $17.00/hr $19.00/hr $19.00/hr $19.00/hr $19.00/hr Exclusive storage space (if available) Office/Program space (if available) $1.31/square foot/ month $1.58/square foot/ month Not Applicable Not Applicable $1.31/square foot/ month $1.58/square foot/ month Not Applicable Not Applicable Key security deposit Cleaning/damage deposits Late Payment Fee (if not paid by the scheduled due date) CUBBERLEY COMMUNITY CENTER Facility Rental Non-Profit Rates2 Basic Rates2 REGULAR WEEKLY RENTALS1 INFREQUENT RENTALS1 REGULAR WEEKLY RENTALS1 Basic Rates2 $1.00 per square foot, per month $68.00/month $55.00/key Additional Charges: Facility rental rates are subject to additional charges for personnel, equipment and set-up requirements, and administration. $55.00/key $150.00 - $2,000.00, depending upon size and type of event $150.00 - $2,000.00, depending upon size and type of event Non-Profit Rates2 INFREQUENT RENTALS1 1) Non-profit music/dance/theatre groups, in-residence at Cubberly, may receive a 25% discount on room rental fees when used for weekly rehearsals. FY 2014 FEE Non-Profit Rates2 $68.00/month Meeting/Activity Rooms FY 2015 FEE Basic Rates $1.00 per square foot, per month Non-Profit Rates2 Basic Rates City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 10-1 Regular Time Overtime and City Holidays Regular Time Overtime and City Holidays Custodial staff 3 $29.00 - $34.00/hr $44.00 - $51.00/hr $29.00 - $34.00/hr $44.00 - $51.00/hr Theatre Technician3 $29.00 - $34.00/hr $44.00 - $51.00/hr $29.00 - $34.00/hr $44.00 - $51.00/hr Theatre Ushers(3) (4)$23.00 - $27.00/hr $35.00 - $41.00/hr $23.00 - $27.00/hr $35.00 - $41.00/hr CUBBERLEY COMMUNITY CENTER Personnel Rates FY 2014 FEE FY 2015 FEE City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 11-1 Dressing Room, M-36 $18.00/hr $22.00/hr $18.00/hr $22.00/hr Dressing Room, M-26 $21.00/hr $25.00/hr $21.00/hr $25.00/hr Dressing Room, M-46 $21.00/hr $25.00/hr $21.00/hr $25.00/hr Performance Day Package (3)(4)(5)(8)(9)$924.00 $1,320.00 $924.00 $1,320.00 Additional Performance(8)(9)$224.00 $320.00 $224.00 $320.00 Additional performance hours past four per performance(8)(9)$77.00 $110.00 $77.00 $110.00 Additional performance hours past ten8 $133.00 $190.00/hr $133.00 $190.00/hr Production Day Package (3)(7)(8)(9)$770.00 $1,100.00 $770.00 $1,100.00 Additional production hours past ten8 $112.00/hr $160.00/hr $112.00/hr $160.00/hr Rehearsal Day Package (3) (8) (9) (1)$567.00 $810.00 $567.00 $810.00 Additional rehearsal hours past ten 8 $77.00.hr $110/hr $77.00.hr $110/hr Dark Day Package (10)$175.00 $250.00 $175.00 $250.00 Theatre Packages - Rentals Dressing Rooms - Rentals CUBBERLEY COMMUNITY CENTER Theatre - Rental Fee Schedule Non-Profit Rates2 Basic Rates Non-Profit Rates2 Basic Rates FY 2014 FEE FY 2015 FEE City of Palo Alto FY 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule 12-1 Piano (7' grand) Piano (upright concert) Public Address System w/ 2 cord microphones Additional Equipment: lighting, audio-visual, or staging Padded Chairs 6' Round tables Non-reusable Materials/Supplies Cubberley Banner Marquee 11 All other building use falls under this category, including rehearsals, load-in and restore days. 1 Reduced fees for regular weekly rentals, defined as groups or individuals who rent facilities one or more days per week on a consistent weekly basis for a minimum of three months. Infrequent rentals are all rentals other than regular weekly rentals. 2 To qualify for non-profit rates, groups must provide documentation of federal tax exempt status when facility use application is filed. Cubberly Community Center Notes: 3 Fee package includes event supervisor, the M-11 dressing room and all dedicated theatre equipment. Additional technical staff may be required. 4 Rental groups may use volunteers in ushering positions subject to approval by the theatre manager and in compliance with all rules and procedures. 5 Performance defined as activity on stage with a live audience present. Performance packages include one performance block up to four hours. 6 M-2, M-3 and M-4 dressing room fees assessed only when used as dressing rooms for theatre rentals. 7 Production is defined as videography of onstage activity without a live audience or similar usage. 8 A 20% discount is given for bookings on off-peak days (Monday through Thursday). 9 A 20% discount is given for half-day rentals (five or less hours either concluding before 2 p.m. or starting after 4 p.m.) or rentals of five hours or less booked before or after an existing rental on the same day. This discount will not apply to multi-day bookings where the client's technical setup does not allow for other clients to rent between bookings. 10 A Dark day is defined as no activity in the building. This is so clients may leave their setup in place between rental days. Peak days are not available as Dark Days. $24.00 per use plus moving and tuning costs $58.00 per use plus labor $5.00 - $158.00 per item plus labor $0.50 per item plus labor $7.00 per item plus labor $58.00 per use plus labor $0.50 per item plus labor FY 2014 FEE $42.00 per use plus moving and tuning costs FY 2015 FEE CUBBERLEY COMMUNITY CENTER Special Equipment and Service Fees $42.00 per use plus moving and tuning costs $0.50 - $105.00 per item $24.00 per use plus moving and tuning costs $7.00 per item plus labor $5.00 - $158.00 per item plus labor $11.00 - $53.00 per week $0.50 - $105.00 per item $11.00 - $53.00 per week City of Palo Alto (ID # 6040) Policy and Services Committee Staff Report Report Type: Agenda Items Meeting Date: 8/25/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: City Engagement with Neighborhoods Title: Discussion and Recommendations to City Council Regarding the Colleagues Memo on Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends the Policy & Services Committee discuss and provide direction on the following recommendations that begin to capture the intent of the Colleagues Memo and from discussions at the June 9, 2015 Committee meeting 1. Direct staff to begin ongoing town hall meetings on a quarterly basis, rotating throughout the City, to engage neighborhood associations on specific and city-wide issues, with two meetings to occur in 2015. (This recommendation would need to go to City Council straightaway to effectively schedule two meetings in 2015.) 2. Accept changes to the Know Your Neighbors Grant Program to provide neighborhood associations with resources to further develop their organization, and transfer $25,000 from the City Council contingency account to the City Manager’s Office to fund these requests for the remainder of the fiscal year. 3. Direct staff to return to Policy & Services with an update to the Community Services Department’s Co-Sponsorship Agreement, to broaden the scope and allow for neighborhood associations to use city facilities for meetings at no charge, as well as options for waiving insurance fees for these meetings in City facilities. 4. Discuss the method of meeting with neighborhood leaders to further develop the City’s Neighborhood Engagement initiative -- association definition, support models, communication, conflict resolution, ombudsman concept, City’s website and social media for neighborhoods. Background On April 20, 2015, the City Council discussed a Colleagues’ Memo from Mayor Holman, Vice Mayor Schmid, and Council Members Burt and Wolbach regarding Strengthening City City of Palo Alto Page 2 Engagement with Neighborhoods. The Colleagues’ Memo had seven recommendations, listed below, which are narrowed into specific recommendations as mentioned above On June 9, 2015, the Policy & Services discussed these items. 1. Recognize neighborhood associations and provide placement on the City Community Partners webpage, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/partners with links to a map of the general neighborhood area and to the association website or other contact information. The City should review the process for recognition in consultation with neighborhoods and explore agreement on some basic standards and requirements regarding governance and association responsibilities for outreach and inclusion, as a recognized neighborhood association. 2. For recognized neighborhood associations, the City should explore guidelines and costs for providing periodic free use of available public facilities for public meetings and events as well as insurance coverage under the City’s policy. 3. Provide small, one-time start-up grants for neighborhood associations to be used to attend the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference and toward neighborhood association initiation activities. 4. Support neighborhood associations in distributing relevant City information to members, including information about upcoming community meetings or events, notification about proposed projects in their neighborhoods, City initiatives, emergency preparation events, County proposals, Public Works or Utilities projects, Caltrain, VTA or neighboring communities’ plans. 5. Each neighborhood association will be encouraged to identify a designated “Communications Officer” as information liaison with the City. 6. Hold annual town hall-style meetings with City Council representatives and appropriate City staff and focused on different regions of Palo Alto. The meetings shall encourage both individual and neighborhood association participation. 7. Evaluate creation of an Ombudsperson program with the neighborhoods to follow up on neighborhood or resident issues and facilitate conflict resolution when needed. The Committee asked staff to bring back specific recommendations to make to City Council which would advance the seven recommendations. Discussion At the June 9, 2015 Committee meeting, members highlighted that the most important element in engaging neighborhoods was to begin the town hall meetings. These meetings City of Palo Alto Page 3 would discuss items such as capital improvement projects, public safety, development, neighborhood trends, and city services. They would bring Council Members, Commissioners, neighborhood citizens, and city staff together for a brief presentation and a question and answer period. The Committee discussed grouping the neighborhoods together for town hall meetings: Downtown North University South Professorville Crescent Park Community Center Duveneck/St. Francis Old Palo Alto Leland Manor/Embarcadero Oaks/Garland Triple El South Gate Evergreen Park College Terrace Palo Alto Hills Esther Clark Park Greater Miranda Barron Park Green Acres Palo Alto Orchards Ventura Charleston Meadow Monroe Park Midtown Palo Verde St. Claire Gardens South of Midtown Adobe Meadow/Meadow Park Fair Meadow Greenmeadow Charleston Gardens The Greenhouse Staff encourages the Committee to discuss the groupings. With the proposed alignments and quarterly town hall meetings it would take 2.25 years to cycle through the City. Regarding Staff Recommendation No. 2 (Know Your Neighbor Grant Program Changes) attached are proposed revisions to the Know Your Neighbors Grant program guidelines. Staff believes that funding should not only target neighborhood association start-up costs but also enhance association governance structures as well as organizational development. Staff recommends the Committee review the proposed revisions and forward recommendations to City Council. Upon approval by Council, staff will publicize the new grant opportunities and can begin to accept requests from neighborhood associations. Regarding Staff Recommendation No. 3 (Free Use of City Facilities) the Community Services Department currently has a Co-Sponsorship Policy which is specific for the use of the department’s facilities. The policy currently allows neighborhood associations to use Community Service Department facilities without paying a rental fee, but it does not allow for the use of other City facilities such as libraries and City Hall. It also does not address the issue of insurance or custodial costs. Staff believes that broaden the scope of the policy would be the best vehicle to achieve the intent of the Colleagues Memo. Yet staff recommendation No. 4, specifically the definition of an association, should precede this item. (This recommendation is also related to the ‘City Facility Fee’ item pending on the Committee’s agenda and should address that matter). Regarding Staff Recommendation No. 4, the Committee recommended further dialogue with neighborhood leaders. This would result in more specific recommendations to address City of Palo Alto Page 4 Colleagues Memo items No. 1, 4, 5 and 7. Staff is not in a position to make a recommendation as to how to best proceed but support further discussion at the Committee meeting. Resource Impact Council and staff time will be needed for preparation of the Town Hall meetings. Any outcome from the meetings could also potentially cause resource needs. For Staff Recommendation No. 2, a transfer from City Council contingency would be needed to add additional funds to Know Your Neighbors Grant program. There is adequate funding in the contingency for this action. Additionally, there will be financial impacts as the City waives fees for facility use. Staff will return to the Committee with those impacts as we redefine the Co-Sponsorship policy. Finally, as Staff Recommendation No. 4 is defined this could take significant Council and staff time causing an open ended impact to priorities. Attachments: Attachment A - Neighborhood Map (PDF) Attachment B - Grant Guidelines - Revision Version (DOCX) Attachment C - Co-Sponsorship Agreement (PDF) Attachment D - 4-20-15 Colleagues Memo (PDF) Attachment E - 6-9-15 Staff Report (PDF) Attachment F - 9-23-14 Staff Report (PDF) Attachment G - 9-23-14 Minutes (PDF) 280 S A N ANTONIO ROAD A R A S T R A D E R O R O A D FOOTHILL EXPRESSWAY PAGE MI L L R O A D SAN FRANCIS Q U I TO C R E EK E M B A R C A D E R O R O A D E L C A M I N O R E A L ORE G O N E X P R E S S W A Y PAG E M I L L R O A D UNI V E R S I T Y A V E N U E AL M A S T R E E T EAST M E A D O W A V E . LOM A V E R D E A V E . C H A R L E S T O N R O A D MI D D L E F I E L D R O A D Crescent Park Downtown North Community Center Professorville Duveneck/St. Francis Leland Manor/Embarcadero Oaks/Garland Drive Triple El Old Palo Alto Barron Park GreenAcres GreaterMiranda EstherClarkPark Palo AltoHills PaloAltoOrchards Ventura Palo Verde St. ClaireGardens Evergreen Park Coll e g e T e r r a c e South-gate Midtown Fairmeadow South ofMidtown Greenmeadow CharlestonGardens TheGreenhouse Adobe Meadow/Meadow Park CharlestonMeadows MonroePark Uni v e r s i t y S o u t h Triple El Community Center “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program Do you know who lives next door or down the block? The “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program is designed to help neighbors better connect with each other while strengthening community and improving the quality of life and neighborhoods in Palo Alto. The goals of the Program are to: 1. Build sense of community. 2. Develop or renew neighborhood relationships. 3. Encourage interaction between generations and cultures. 3.4. Increase governance and organizational leadership of neighborhood associations. 4.5. Develop collaborative partnerships between Palo Alto neighborhoods and the City. "Know Your Neighbors Grants" are small grants intended to facilitate people getting together and getting to know one another. Neighbors Citizens may apply for up to $1000 grants for activities such as block parties and picnics, event kick-off celebrations, ice cream socials, neighborhood crime prevention and safety activities, or other functions and gatherings involving the building of connections between neighbors. Know Your Neighbors Grants may be applied for at any time throughout the 2013 calendar year (at least one month prior to event date), and will be awarded on activities that meet eligibility requirements on a "first come, first served" basis until the allocated funding is depleted. Grant Guidelines & Eligibility Requirements 1. To be eligible for a Neighborhood Grant, the following criteria must be met: Applicants must be Palo Alto residents and may be representatives of a formal neighborhood association, neighborhood or community group, or informally associated neighbors. Activities must be neighborhood-focused, initiated and supported by residents living in the neighborhood, and have a well-developed implementation plan. Activities must benefit the neighborhood. 2. Activities must focus on one or more of the following areas: a. Increase communication among neighbors. b. Enhance neighborhood pride and identity. c. Bring both longstanding and new neighbors (moved within last 5 years) together in their neighborhoods and seek to incorporate interaction between generations and cultures. d. Create new and innovative ideas for neighborhood events. d.e. Increase governance or organizational development of neighborhood association. City of Palo Alto “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program Formatted: Not Expanded by / Condensed by Formatted: Not Expanded by / Condensed by 2 3. To be eligible to apply, a group must not discriminate in membership decisions based on race, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation or any other status protected by law. 4. Events must be held within the Palo Alto City limits. E, except if request is for association training which is not within City limits. 5. Grant-supported events must be open to everyone who is eligible, without regard to race, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation or any other status protected by law. 6. Groups may not charge admission to grant-supported events. 7. The following types of expenses ARE eligible for reimbursement with grant funds: food, beverages (non-alcoholic), entertainment, facility and equipment rentals, hard cost of materials and supplies, advertising, and permit fees. 8. The following expenses ARE NOT eligible for reimbursement with grant funds: salaries or stipends for members of the sponsoring group, tobacco products, alcoholic beverages, out of City travel expenses, or any lodging/hotel expenses, private transportation expenses including mileage, gas, insurance, car rentals, restaurant/catered/food truck meals, routine operating expenses and ongoing programs or services, supplies and materials that benefit an individual or homeowner verses a neighborhood, political campaigns, regular neighborhood association or homeowner meetings, items not specified in the grant application. Exceptions to travel expenses may be made for grants associated with neighborhood association training. 9. Projects may require permits depending upon the activity planned. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all applicable City permits that apply to the planned activitityactivity. 10. Applicants must submit a completed and signed Neighborhood Grant Application to be considered. Evaluation Criteria Grant applications will be evaluated on the criteria listed below: 1. Does the activity/event focus on one or more of the following five four areas? a. Increase communication among neighbors. b. Enhance neighborhood pride and identity. c. Bring both longstanding and new neighbors (moved within last 5 years) together in their neighborhoods and seek to incorporate interaction between generations and cultures. d. Create new and innovative ideas for neighborhood events. d.e. Increase governance or organizational development of neighborhood association. 2. Does the activity/event meet the eligibility requirements outlined above? Formatted: Not Expanded by / Condensed by 3 3. Is the work plan well developed (clear tasks, adequate resources allocated, community or organization need addressed)? 3.4. If for neighborhood association training, how does training increase governance and organization leadership of your association? Formatted: Not Expanded by / Condensed by Formatted: List Paragraph, Right: 0", No bullets or numbering, Tab stops: Not at 0.32" 4 Application Process To apply for a grant, complete the attached application and submit to the following address: Attention: City of Palo Alto, City Manager’s Office, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94302 or email: kyngrantscityofpaloalto.org. Creative ideas for neighborhood Activities are highly encouraged! The City Manager’s Office will review each application. Funding decisions will be made based on whether activities meet eligibility requirements and on a first come first serve basis. Each applicant will be notified of the result of the evaluation of their proposal. The Neighborhood Grant is reimbursable; meaning that any approved funds must first be spent by the grantee and receipts/invoices showing payment submitted to the City of Palo Alto within 30 days of the Activities/event conclusion. Upon review of eligible receipts/invoices, the City willCity w i l l send a reimbursement to the grantee. Allowable expenses may be eligible for a cash advance at the discretion of the City Manager’s Office. Neighborhood Grant Program funding will be determined by City Council during the adoption of the budget each year. If Council approves the funding, each neighborhood group is eligible to apply for and receive a grant of up to $1,000. The City reserves the right to suspend or cancel the Neighborhood Grant Program at any time, at the City Manager’s discretion, whether or not all allocated funds have been awarded or dispensed. Neighborhood groups must complete their aActivities/events within 6 months of receiving notification from the City of grant award. Activities may begin after grant approval and must be completed within twelve months. A follow up evaluation must be completed within 30 days of the activity/event conclusion providing photos and detailing how the activity helped strengthen the neighborhood, how many people were impacted, new ways neighbors worked to create a more connected community, if objectives were met, and if the project was successful. For more information, please contact the City Manager’s Office, at (650) 329-2452. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1-29/CSD December 1995 Page 1 of 3 COMMUNITY SERVICES CO-SPONSORSHIP POLICY POLICY STATEMENT This policy institutes a process that will provide appropriate support for nonprofit organizations that provide community service programs similar or related to those provided by the City’s Department of Community Services for Palo Alto residents. The policy sets levels of support which the City will offer to groups seeking City co- sponsorship and establishes a process and criteria to be used by the Department of Community Services to identify when and how nonprofit groups are granted co- sponsorship for specific programs or events. Implementation of this procedure is the responsibility of the Director of Community Services. Any exceptions to this policy must be approved by the City Manager or his/her designee. PROCEDURE A. Definition of Cosponsored Organizations A group may request co-sponsorship by the City’s Department of Community Services if it meets the following criteria: 1. The group has state certification as a nonprofit organization. A group may be a subgroup of a state or national nonprofit organization, provided that services are provided in Palo Alto. 2. Goals of the organization are aligned with those of the City’s Department of Community Services, or with other City policies and objectives as stated in the City’s budget document or Municipal Code, or as otherwise determined by the City Council. 3. The group provides programs which are compatible with those provided by the Community Services Department. B. Requirements for All Cosponsored Organizations 1. The group must provide financial and all other applicable information documenting adherence to the co-sponsorship requirements on an annual basis. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1-29/CSD December 1995 Page 2 of 3 2. All cosponsored programs or events must be open to the public and provide services without discrimination against any individual. 3. The majority of the funds, if any, raised by the group in the cosponsored event(s) must be used to support specific programs and events for residents of Palo Alto. 4. The group must provide all insurance coverage required by the City’s Risk Manager. 5. In the use of City facilities and space in publications, cosponsored activities will not receive priority over those conducted by the City. C. Levels of City Co-sponsorship of Nonprofit Groups 1. “A” Level Co-sponsorship a. 75 percent or more of the group members and participants in specific programs and events are residents of the City of Palo Alto, or are enrolled in the Palo Alto Unified School District. b. Human Services contract agencies must currently receive funding either from the City’s General Fund or the Community Development Block Grant program. 2. “B” Level Co-sponsorship a. 50 percent or more of the group members and participants in specific programs and events are residents of Palo Alto, or are enrolled in the Palo Alto Unified School District. D. City Support Offered for Each Level of Co-sponsorship It is important to emphasize that co-sponsorship does not involve any waiver of Municipal Code requirements or any other City policies or procedures. Furthermore, co- sponsorship does not imply the free use of other City services not specifically addressed in this policy. 1. “A” Level Co-sponsorship a. The group’s name and contact person may be listed in City publications including the ENJOY! Catalogue and promotional fliers. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1-29/CSD December 1995 Page 3 of 3 b. The group may request assistance in publicizing program information. c. Use of City facilities without payment of rental fee may be provided subject to availability of space. d. A City staff liaison person may be assigned to consult on special projects and to maintain ongoing communications at the discretion of the Director of Community Services. 2. “B” Level Co-sponsorship a. The group may request that its name and contact person be listed in certain City publications at no charge. b. Use of City facilities may be provided subject to availability of space at free or reduced rates (pertains to rental fee only) on a third priority basis after City or paid rental use and “A” level co-sponsorship use. c. A City staff liaison person may be assigned to consult on special projects and to maintain ongoing communications at the discretion of the Director of Community Services. NOTE: Questions and/or clarification of this policy should be directed to the Community Services Department. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 20, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Colleagues' Memo From Mayor Holman, Council Members Burt, Schmid, and Wolbach Regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods (Continued from March 16, 2015) GOAL Palo Alto residents are engaged and care deeply about proposals that enhance or may harm our quality of life. To further support strong neighborhood participation in civic affairs, we propose initiating several actions to better integrate the understanding, consideration, and actions of our City government with neighborhoods’ interests and concerns. BACKGROUND The City has made great strides in making information available including the very informative Development Services Construction Updates and the Open Data Portal. Use of various social media channels such as Facebook, Twitter, and Next Door have enhanced City outreach and communication with citizens and neighborhoods. This memo seeks to build on those accomplishments with additional focus on communication with neighborhoods, adding much more face-to-face contact. Palo Alto is comprised of 37 neighborhoods, each impacted by decisions that are considered or made by City government. Whether the event is led or supported by City planners, Public Works, Utilities, the City Manager’s Office, outside agencies such as VTA, Caltrans, or even developments in another community, it is incumbent on the City to make best efforts to inform its citizens. Further, the neighborhoods often have very different characteristics and interests from one another as acknowledged in our Comprehensive Plan Goal L-3: "Safe, attractive residential neighborhoods, each with its own distinct character and within walking distance of shopping, services, schools and/or other gathering places". The current “Know Your Neighbors” Grant Program provides grants for promoting neighbors getting to know one other. While this program has been very popular, frequent comments about the program include that the grant money is spent on permits for use of public facilities or street closure permits for block parties, leaving little funding for the event itself. The proposed programs below would be the City’s first comprehensive neighborhood engagement initiative. RECOMMENDATION Based on research of other cities’ programs and community members’ comments, we recommend that the following proposed City actions be referred to the Policy and Services Page 2 Committee: 1. Recognize neighborhood associations and provide placement on the City Community Partners webpage, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/partners with links to a map of the general neighborhood area and to the association website or other contact information. The City should review the process for recognition in consultation with neighborhoods and explore agreement on some basic standards and requirements regarding governance and association responsibilities for outreach and inclusion, as a recognized neighborhood association. 2. For recognized neighborhood associations, the City should explore guidelines and costs for providing periodic free use of available public facilities for public meetings and events as well as insurance coverage under the City’s policy. 3. Provide small, one-time start-up grants for neighborhood associations to be used to attend the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference and toward neighborhood association initiation activities. 4. Support neighborhood associations in distributing relevant City information to members, including information about upcoming community meetings or events, notification about proposed projects in their neighborhoods, City initiatives, emergency preparation events, County proposals, Public Works or Utilities projects, Caltrain, VTA or neighboring communities’ plans. 5. Each neighborhood association will be encouraged to identify a designated “Communications Officer” as information liaison with the City. 6. Hold annual town hall-style meetings with City Council representatives and appropriate City staff and focused on different regions of Palo Alto. The meetings shall encourage both individual and neighborhood association participation. 7. Evaluate creation of an Ombudsperson program with the neighborhoods to follow up on neighborhood or resident issues and facilitate conflict resolution when needed. DISCUSSION: Certain of these proposals may be adopted and implemented ahead of others. It is our intention that the town hall-style meetings would commence early this year, and the Ombudsman program would likely take more time and possibly need to be considered in the budget cycle. STAFF IMPACT: Staff impact and resources necessary to support this program may be significant, depending on the scope of the program components ultimately adopted. Research and discussion regarding impacts of the program will be necessary, including legal and risk implications along with staffing and funding aspects. These need not be deterrents to proceeding, just Page 3 acknowledgment that a more formal and interlinked relationship will also require some more explicit standards and monitoring and reporting. The most effective city neighborhood programs are formalized in this regard. Staff acknowledges that this discussion can first take place during the Policy and Services referral and discussion. Department Head: Beth Minor, Acting City Clerk City of Palo Alto (ID # 5858) Policy and Services Committee Staff Report Report Type: Agenda Items Meeting Date: 6/9/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods Title: Referral of Colleagues Memo Regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends that the Policy & Services Committee discuss the seven actions outlined in the Colleagues Memo, provide further direction, and refer the item to the City Council. Background On April 20, 2015, the City Council took up a Colleagues’ Memo from Mayor Holman, Council Members Burt, Schmid, and Wolbach regarding Strengthening City Engagement with Neighborhoods. The Council referred to the Memo to the Policy & Services Committee. The memorandum seeks to build on existing engagement platforms and add more face-to-face contact with neighborhood organizations. The authors suggest seven actions to achieve this goal. Discussion The seven points, listed in bold, are outlined below accompanied by the staff response. Staff has provided recommendations, suggestions and some clarifying questions to further develop and address the various issues that have been raised. Potential Program Components: 1. Recognize neighborhood associations and provide placement on the City Community Partners webpage, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/partners with links to a map of the general neighborhood area and to the association website or other contact information. The City should review the process for recognition in consultation with neighborhoods and explore agreement on some basic standards and requirements regarding governance and association responsibilities for outreach and inclusion, as a recognized neighborhood association. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Staff acknowledges that the City’s Community Partners website lacks information and links to neighborhood associations, maps, and contact information. The City’s website does have a map of neighborhoods and it is attached for the Committee to review. The existing map identifies 30 neighborhoods (not 37 as indicated in the Colleagues Memo). Recognizing the potential for disagreements over the organization, boundaries, and other descriptions of a neighborhood, staff agrees that thought should be given to how neighborhood recognition is granted. Specifically, staff would like to research other municipalities as well as state and national neighborhood associations. Options for recognition could range from a laisse-faire approach to a formal process with specific criteria leading to City Council approval. In order to determine an approach that is likely to fit current Palo Alto needs, a small advisory group of existing neighborhood leaders could be formed to work with staff on identifying key requirements. Minimum standards should be developed, including a commitment to free and open membership, non-discrimination, and transparency of operations. 2. For recognized neighborhood associations, the City should explore guidelines and costs for providing periodic free use of available public facilities for public meetings and events as well as insurance coverage under the City’s policy. Staff recommends that a survey of existing neighborhood associations be conducted to determine the scale and scope of intended use. Factors such as number of uses per year, duration, types of events, fee or non-fee events, and whether alcohol is desired would impact the financial analysis of this action. Alternatively, the Committee could make recommendations that set boundaries for such free use and staff can conduct the analysis with those boundaries. Staff has also included the Fiscal Year 2015 Community Service Department’s (CSD) Municipal Fee Chapter to provide the Committee with facility rental fees. Additionally, as the Committee is aware, a pending item on the Committee’s schedule of items is the discussion about CSD facility rental fees. 3. Provide small, one-time start-up grants for neighborhood associations to be used to attend the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference and toward neighborhood association initiation activities. Staff believes that start-up support and/or governance training funds for neighborhood associations would be a nominal investment in starting and maintaining productive associations. Staff recommends that either as part of a survey or through the advisory group, association leaders be polled about the specific types of training needed for their nonprofit administration and governance. At the time of this report’s publication, details about the cost of attending the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County’s Annual Conference (UNSCC) was not available. Staff has contacted the organization to learn more about this particular City of Palo Alto Page 3 group and the conference costs. The UNSCC annual membership for each neighborhood association is $200 per the organization’s website. Additionally the City offers the Know Your Neighbors Grant Program which provides citizens, homeowner association’s or neighborhood association’s grants for up to $1,000. The Committee could look at expanding the scope and budget of this program. The program is currently funded annually with $25,000. 4. Support neighborhood associations in distributing relevant City information to members, including information about upcoming community meetings or events, notification about proposed projects in their neighborhoods, City initiatives, emergency preparation events, County proposals, Public Works or Utilities projects, Caltrain, VTA or neighboring communities’ plans. Staff is unclear about the specific nature of this request. It appears that neighborhood associations would be asked to distribute City information; however, existing channels are available to meet informal notification needs. For formal notification needs, such as for development proposals, it is unclear to what extent neighborhood associations could satisfy notification requirements. If the suggestion is that the City distributes literature and announcements through USPS mail for the associations, expectations of the magnitude of this service would be needed. Staff seeks further direction from the Committee with regard to this action. A primary existing neighborhood association resource is to utilize the social media site Nextdoor.com. Also, residents and other interested parties can sign up for the City’s numerous social media sites and email distribution lists: Social Media: www.cityofpaloalto.org/socialmedia Email Distribution List: www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/cou. 5. Each neighborhood association will be encouraged to identify a designated “Communications Officer” as information liaison with the City. Staff believes that a Communication Officer within each association could add value to strengthen engagement with the City, if serving as a consistent means of connecting neighbors that are not currently reached. As mentioned in #4, the officer could assist the association leader by ensuring that citizens are connected to the City’s social media sites and email lists. Additionally the officer could email or post messages on neighborhood Nextdoor groups, potentially extending the reach of messages from the City. Further details about the duties of this volunteer position can be discussed vetted through the advisory group, if recommended by the Committee. 6. Hold annual town hall-style meetings with City Council representatives and appropriate City staff and focused on different regions of Palo Alto. The meetings shall encourage both individual and neighborhood association participation. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Staff seeks further direction from the Committee with regards to the town hall-style meetings. Specifically: how many regions does the Committee consider appropriate; would these be full Council meetings compliant with the Brown Act, or limited to less than a quorum of Council; would the meetings occur at community centers, citizen’s homes, school sites, parks, or churches; on weekends, weekdays, afternoons, or evenings; what is the ideal duration; and any specific scope. How do members see these as different as the outreach being conducted for Our Palo Alto? While a valuable means of communication with neighborhoods, this could also require significant resources to implement citywide. 7. Evaluate creation of an Ombudsperson program with the neighborhoods to follow up on neighborhood or resident issues and facilitate conflict resolution when needed. Staff recommends that in the short term, neighborhood association leaders begin to promote the use the PaloAlto311 app. The app allows residents to submit maintenance issues 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. In the longer term, and as the Committee provides direction, staff believes the development of a Communications Liaison discussed in #5 could provide support in this area as well. Staff seeks direction from the Committee with regards to conflict resolution. Specifically, who is the conflict between, neighbors, citizens and the City? The City currently supports the Palo Alto Mediation Program annually with a $65,000 contribution. The organization provides services for neighbors, tenants, landlords, employers, co- workers, local businesses, or other persons or organizations in the community. This information can be shared with citizens immediately: www.paloaltomediation.com. The Committee may wish to advance some of these potential components ahead of others that will take more time to develop. Resource Impact As indicated in the memo, staff time and resources to support this program may be significant depending on scope and program components. At this stage, in forwarding the memo for initial discussion, staff is not ready to make a recommendation on staffing and budgetary needs. To conduct the basic scope of outreach necessary to solicit input and evaluate the elements described above, staff anticipates a work effort of 80 hours or more over a period of 30-60 days. This would be prioritized among other work plan elements. Staff would like to engage in a detailed discussion with the Committee to further understand the expectations and then build a work plan and budget for City Council review. Attachments: April 20, 2015 Colleagues Memorandum (PDF) Neighborhood Map from City Website (PDF) Fiscal Year 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule - Community Services Department (PDF) City of Palo Alto (ID # 5117) Policy and Services Committee Staff Report Report Type: Agenda Items Meeting Date: 9/23/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Alma Plaza Use Fees Title: Recommendation To Council On Fees and Fee Exemptions for the Alma Plaza Community Room and Other Community Services Department Facilities From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommended Motion The Policy and Services Committee recommends that Council consider the following motion: Retain current policies, procedures and fees related to the reservation and use of the Alma Plaza Community Room and other Community Services Department facilities, as per the Fiscal Year 2015 Adopted Municipal Fee Schedule. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Policy and Services Committee recommend to Council the retention of current policies, procedures and fees related to the reservation and use of the Alma Plaza Community Room and other Community Services Department facilities, as per the Fiscal Year 2015 Adopted Municipal Fee Schedule. This recommendation treats the Alma Plaza Community room exactly like other City facilities. Staff would think that any change in policy related to the Alma Plaza Community room would need to be applied to all City facilities, to be fair to all Palo Altans. Background On May 29, 2014, during the Finance Committee review of the draft Fiscal Year 2015 Budget and Municipal Fee Schedule (Attachment B; Minutes), Committee Member Karen Holman questioned the appropriateness of the rental fees for the Alma Plaza Community Room as listed in the Community Services Department, Rental and Reservations (Attachment A; Page 8-2). Council Member Holman said it was her understanding that since the Community Room was privately built and provided as a “public benefit” as a condition of the Alma Plaza development, the City should not charge fees for the use of this particular facility. Community Services Department Assistant Director Rob De Geus responded by saying the Community Services Department could and does provide room space for community City of Palo Alto Page 2 meetings and neighborhood groups through the City’s existing Co-Sponsorship Policy. The interested group needs to complete a form to have the fee waived by the Department Director. On Monday, June 9, 2014, during the Public Hearing on the City FY2015 budget, Council Member Holman again asked that charging fees for the Alma Plaza Community Room be further investigated. Community Services Department Director Greg Betts responded to the question and explained to Council that fees are charged for the reservation and management of the room for private and exclusive use activities. In accordance with the Classification of Use and Fees listed at the beginning of the Rental and Reservations section of the Municipal Fee Schedule (page 8-1), those activities and rentals that qualify as a “Class I – City Use and City-Sponsored Activities,” as per City Policy 1-29 (Community Services Co-Sponsorship Policy; Attachment D), “no charge for facility rental for events or activities, however, fees for attendants, equipment rental, and special use fees may apply. Note: City facility use for City co-sponsored groups will be considered on a case by case basis.” i Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid, that the matter of the utilization and associated fees for use of Alma Plaza Community Room, as public benefit of the PC [Planned Community], be sent to Policy and Services Committee for vetting. The motion (amendment to the Budget motion) passed 8-0; Scharff absent. Discussion Co-Sponsorship Policy: Through the application of the City’s Community Services Co-Sponsorship Policy (City Policy 1-29; Attachment D), the Department has the ability to provide neighborhood associations, partnership agencies, non-profits and civic associations with the free use of meeting rooms and other facilities for programs, classes and events that are open to the public without charge and that further the mission, services or programs of the City of Palo Alto. This policy applies to the Alma Plaza Community Room and most other rentable facilities at City community centers, museums, nature centers and at City Hall. For example, if the Midtown Residents Association wished to offer an educational presentation on emergency and disaster preparedness, and the program was advertised to the community without fee, the City could ‘co-sponsor” the event since emergency preparedness is consistent with goals of the City’s Office of Emergency Services. The neighborhood association would not pay a rental fee but may be asked to leave a refundable cleaning or security deposit, depending on the details of the proposed event. On the other hand, if the non-profit agency Acterra wanted to reserve the room for a private fundraising event for which a fee or ticket was required for entrance or participation, the agency would be required to pay regular Council-adopted rental fees City of Palo Alto Page 3 since the event is considered “exclusive” to those participants who paid the agency to participate. Use Agreement: Under the terms of the Alma Plaza Use Agreement Summary (Attachment C), which were negotiated by Planning Department staff and ratified by Council on October 29, 2009, the city is permitted to book classes, workshops and share the space with the public during the hours of 8:00 am and 1:00 pm on weekdays; between 1:00 pm and 4:00 pm for small classes and activities with fewer than 20 participants; and after 6:30 pm on weekdays. The City is permitted to use the room between the hours of 8:00 am and 11:00 am, and after 6:00 pm on weekends. During other hours of the day, and when the City does not have a reserved use of the room, the room is available to be used by the tenants and residents of the Alma Plaza development. Under the terms of Sections 4.2 (Operating Expenses) and 7.2 (City Obligations), the City is responsible for cleaning and maintaining the facility at its own expense. The agreement says: “Costs to operate, repair, replace and maintain the interior of the Premises in a neat, clean and good order and condition and to supply utility and telephone service to the Premises shall be paid by City.” Since the room at Alma Plaza does not have closet or storage space on-site, cleaning equipment, supplies, tables and special equipment for the class or activity must be transported to the Community Room from the Mitchell Park or Cubberley Community Center by City staff. The Agreement also presupposes the room would be sublet by the City to public and private groups for activities, events and parties. Section 12 of the Agreement (Assignment and Subletting) says, “…the Premises may be made available for the exclusive use of persons and groups consistent with city code and regulation requirements subject to the issuance of a permit by the City Director of Community Services and subject to the payment of fees therefor as provided in the Palo Alto Municipal Fee Schedule.” Facility Uses: The City is able to provide additional classes and programs in this area of Palo Alto by having this extra space for which the City does not need to pay for operational overhead. The City is able to offer classes and program space at high demand times when facilities at other community centers (Mitchell and Cubberley) are in use. This facility has also provided a public benefit by being available for programs and classes while the new Mitchell Park Community Center has been under construction. Revenue from exclusive use rentals (family events, birthday parties, private parties, sales events, etc.) supplements Recreation Division revenue while the auditoriums at Cubberley and the Art Center have been used as temporary branch libraries. Logistically, if a group wishes to use the Alma Plaza Community Room, a representative of the group would contact the City’s Recreation Division. Staff from the Mitchell Park City of Palo Alto Page 4 Community Center manages this satellite facility since there is no “office” at the Alma Plaza Center. A standard City Facility Use Reservation form is completed with details of the event, class or activity. Staff determines the nature of the event, whether the activity is open to the public, whether fees are to be charged by the group, how long the room is needed, and what special equipment or staffing is needed for the event. Staff uses the Municipal Fee Schedule to determine standard fees for the event. If the group wishes to seek a waiver of the standard fees as a City “co-sponsored” event, the representative is asked to complete an application for co-sponsorship, as per the guidelines of the City’s Co-sponsorship Policy (Attachment D). The application is reviewed by the Department Director and a determination is made within five business days whether the event qualifies as co-sponsored. If the group wishes to reserve multiple rooms, or multiple dates for a series of related events, only one co-sponsorship application is required. The co-sponsorship discount of fees would apply consistently at the Alma Plaza Center and other City facilities. During Fiscal year 2014, approximately 30 reservations City-wide at all of our available locations were provided for free or at significantly discounted fees under the terms of the City’s Co-sponsorship Policy. In the past, groups have included environmental organizations, scout groups, school clubs, neighborhood associations and non-profit agencies. Resource Impact Staff estimates that under the provisions of the City’s Co-sponsorship Policy, approximately $9,100 in rental and use fees were waived for qualifying groups and agencies in FY 2014. If fees were waived for all non-profit and Co-Sponsored group facility rentals, the cost for waived fees would conservatively be $82,000 annually. Policy Implications Free and discounted use of City facilities is consistent with the terms of the Municipal Fee Schedule, and City Policy 1-29 (Community Services Co-Sponsorship Policy). The sharing of City facilities for co-sponsored activities furthers Policy C-1.3 of the Community Services Element of the Draft Comprehensive Plan: “The City’s community services should be a catalyst in creating a culture of health, well-being, and active living in our community. It shall contribute to the intellectual physical and social health of the community by providing opportunities for learning, expression, and social interaction for all ages at our libraries, community facilities, parks, and cultural centers.” Environmental Review This report is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act; therefore, an environmental review is not required. Attachments Attachment A: Fiscal Year 2015 Municipal Fee Schedule – Adopted City of Palo Alto Page 5 Attachment B: Finance Committee Minutes; Municipal Fee Schedule Review – May 29, 2014 Attachment C: Alma Plaza Use Agreement Summary and Use Agreement Attachment D: City Police 1-29: Community Services Co-sponsorship Policy Attachments: Attachment A - Municipal Fee Schedule - Community Services Section (PDF) Attachment B - Finance Committee Minutes - May 29 (PDF) Attachment C - Alma Plaza Use Agreement (PDF) Attachment D -Policy 1-29 Co-sponsorship Policy (PDF) i In addition to Class I fees, the Fee Schedule also lists these three other Fee Class categories: Class II - 501(c)3 Non-Profit Organizations: IRS recognized non-profit 501(c)3 organizations may receive a 50% reduction on basic facility rental rates upon verification. Only facility rental rates may be reduced and all other fees, such as staffing and equipment, are charged at the full rate. Nonprofit organizations charging or collecting fees or raising funds are not eligible for reduced rates and basic fees will apply. This does not apply to class registration fees. Class III - Individuals, Groups, Organizations, and Businesses not charging fees: Basic rental fees apply. Class IV - Business or Commercial Use: Individuals, groups, organizations, and businesses charging, collecting, or raising funds may rent facilities and equipment at the basic rate plus 75%. The Art Center is not available for CLASS IV usage. MINUTES Page 7 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Ms. Richardson believed Audit Staff working directly with Departments along with the City Manager's encouragement for Departments to complete recommendations were responsible for the positive report. MOTION: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to recommend to the City Council acceptance of the Status of Audit Recommendations Report as of June 30, 2014. Council Member Schmid encouraged the City Auditor to continue including detailed actions taken in the report. Council Member Scharff could support the Motion if Item Number 14 was revised to explain actions to be taken in the update section or to modify the target date. Without that information, the report was not complete. Mr. Keene remarked that the City Auditor focused on practical recommendations and discerned recommendations that provided a greater return on investment. That would result in greater efficiency for completing recommendations and a more trusting relationship between the Audit Staff and Departments. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to take up Agenda Item Number 3 before Agenda Item Number 2. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 3. Recommendation to Council On Fees and Fee Exemptions for the Alma Plaza Community Room and Other Community Services Department Facilities. Greg Betts, Community Services Director, reported Council Member Holman questioned the reason for charging a fee for the Alma Plaza Community Room when the Community Room was provided as a public benefit of the development. Staff believed the Co-Sponsorship Policy was working well and allowed groups to utilize facilities. Staff recommended the Municipal Fee Schedule remain the same as passed by the Council in June 2014. Fees charged for use of a facility were divided into four classes as noted in Attachment A. Class 1 pertained to City use and City sponsored or co- sponsored activities. There was no charge for Class 1 activities. The Community Services Department recognized 100 co-sponsored activities. MINUTES Page 8 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Class 2 pertained to nonprofit organizations or 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Fees were reduced by 50 percent for Class 2 organizations. If the City co-sponsored an event with a nonprofit organization, no fee would be charged. Class 3 pertained to family events, commonly called exclusive use because the public was not invited. Full fees were charged for Class 3 activities. Class 4 pertained to activities for which fees were charged or which resulted in a profit for the user. The full fee plus 70 percent was charged for Class 4 activities. The City Council approved a use agreement for the Alma Plaza Community Room that included the City's right to charge fees for use of the Community Room. Use of the Community Room would incur charges as outlined in the four classes. Many uses of the Community Room fell into Class 1 or Class 2. The City charged fees for use of the Community Room because Staff scheduled events, provided a key, notified Alma Plaza for security, and cleaned the facility. Fees were based on square footage and intended to cover costs. Fees charged for the Alma Plaza Community Room were less than fees charged for the Jewish Community Center (JCC), the Elks Club, and the Women's Club of Palo Alto. Staff worked with City co-sponsors to provide publicity and to help in other ways. Council Member Scharff asked if events co-sponsored by the City were free. Mr. Betts replied yes. Council Member Scharff inquired whether a neighborhood association meeting would provide a community benefit. Mr. Betts answered yes. Sheri Furman of Midtown Residents questioned whether Midtown Residents could use the facility; Midtown Residents had previously utilized Community Services facilities at no charge. Council Member Scharff inquired whether a Boy Scout event open only to the Scout troop would fall under Class 2. Mr. Betts responded yes. Council Member Scharff asked if a lecture on climate change that was open to the public would be charged full price. Mr. Betts advised that the City partnered with the Bay Area Bird Photographers to offer a free photography class, and the City charged no fee for use of the Nature Center. The group used the Nature Center; the City received the group's expertise; the public received a good, professional class. MINUTES Page 9 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Council Member Scharff inquired whether pricing encouraged high use of facilities while covering costs. Mr. Betts indicated fees were reasonable and provided value to users of the facilities. Staff did not deny many applications. Use of community centers was approximately 80 percent. Council Member Scharff recalled Mr. Betts stated applications were submitted at Cubberley and asked if Staff was moving to online applications. Mr. Betts reported Staff was testing new software for online registration for five facilities. Council Member Schmid inquired about the frequency of use of the Alma Plaza Community Room. Mr. Betts remarked that use was somewhat limited because of the hours it could be utilized. The Homeowners Association utilized the room nights and early mornings. Community use was limited to afternoons and early evenings. In the last year, 30 classes and individual rentals occupied the Community Room. Council Member Schmid felt that was not frequent usage. Mr. Betts clarified that some of the classes were held weekly at the Community Room. Council Member Schmid noted the Community Room was somewhat isolated and parking was a problem. The developer provided the Community Room as a public benefit to offset the loss of a community center. Most public benefits were open to the public; yet, the City charged a fee for the Community Room. The Community Room was 20 percent more expensive than the Fireside Room at Lucie Stern. Mr. Betts advised that the Community Room contained 1,100 square feet. Council Member Schmid asked if there was a need for incentives to make the public aware of the Community Room. Mr. Betts commented that the new Mitchell Park Library would provide the public with one-stop shopping of all facilities. Council Member Schmid asked if alternative uses could increase the flow of people to the Community Room. Perhaps an afterschool tutoring or music program could use the facility. MINUTES Page 10 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Mr. Betts indicated a music program was held at the Community Room. He would consider possible uses and provide suggestions. Council Member Schmid suggested a community work space could be a possibility. Perhaps Staff could change fees, change uses, or obtain a partner to utilize the space regularly. Mr. Betts reported that those types of activities occurred at the Ventura auditorium. The only problem would be maintaining security during use of the Community Room. Council Member Schmid commented that volunteers with the user could provide security. Council Member Klein inquired about the number of hours per year the Community Room was utilized in comparison to other facilities. While 30 users appeared to be a small number, the actual number of meetings or classes was considerably larger. Mr. Betts would provide that information in the Staff Report to the Council. Council Member Klein did not believe the Community Room should be distinguished from other City facilities simply because it was provided through a public benefit. The goal was to maximize its use. He questioned whether pricing should be the same for all facilities. The City could charge reduced fees for underutilized facilities. The email from Norman Beamer appeared to contradict Mr. Betts' statements. Mr. Betts was reviewing Mr. Beamer's assertions. There had not been a change in policy. A neighborhood association was not required to have nonprofit status. Council Member Klein asked if Mr. Betts would respond to Mr. Beamer. Mr. Betts replied yes. Mark Weiss suggested Staff scrutinize use of the Community Room. The City should charge market rate for the facility. Council Member Scharff requested Staff also respond to Ms. Furman. Mr. Betts would do so. Council Member Scharff concurred with Council Member Klein that the Community Room should not be distinguished because it was a public benefit. He too was interested in utilization of all City facilities. MINUTES Page 11 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Fred Balin related the history of the development of Alma Plaza. The public benefit disappeared over time. Chair Price recalled that fees were charged to cover City costs. Mr. Betts reported direct and overhead costs determined the amount of fees charged. Chair Price remarked that lower fees would not recover costs related to administration and maintenance. Mr. Betts concurred. Chair Price assumed Staff would address marketing efforts if the Policy and Services Committee (Committee) recommended approval of the item. She inquired about the length of time the facility had been available. Mr. Betts recalled that the Council approved the use agreement with the developer in 2009. He seemed to recall the Community Room opened in 2010. He would confirm that information and provide it in the Staff Report. Chair Price asked if usage had increased over the past few years. Mr. Betts responded yes. Chair Price felt Staff should increase efforts to heighten community awareness of the facility. Council Member Scharff inquired whether it was necessary to forward the Item to the Council if the Committee recommended the policy remain the same. He wanted Staff to return to the Committee with additional information he and Council Member Klein discussed. James Keene, City Manager, believed an informational item could be presented to the Council if the Committee approved the Staff recommendation. Molly Stump, City Attorney, reported a response to the Council was not required unless the Council's Motion directed a response. She did not recall a direction for a response. Council Member Scharff indicated the referral was an Amendment to a Budget Ordinance. Chair Price understood the Committee's practice was to respond to the Council. MINUTES Page 12 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Mr. Keene advised that that was the usual procedure when the Council was required to act. The referral did not require the Item to return to the Council for authorization. Staff could share information with the Council in public. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to have Staff return to the Policy and Services Committee with utilization information, options to adjust fees based on usage, and costs associated with the room. Additionally, confirm that the City does not charge Neighborhood Associations, Community Services Use Fees, regardless of an Association's incorporation status. Council Member Klein wished to broaden the information requested. The Agenda Item included fees and fee exemptions for all Community Services Department facilities. That allowed the Committee to discuss market pricing for the Community Room and to calculate costs. Hopefully Staff could return the following month with requested information. Chair Price asked if the Municipal Fee Study included the basis for rental fees. Lam Do, Senior Management Analyst, reported the Cost of Services Study included rental fees for facilities as a group rather than individually. Council Member Schmid inquired whether the Motion directed Staff to provide the hours of use of the Community Room, utilization rates of other public spaces, and possible alternate pricing and uses of the Community Room. Mr. Keene asked if all facilities would be compared to the Community Room. Council Member Schmid answered no. Council Member Klein felt utilization rates could demonstrate one facility was operating at 105 percent capacity while other facilities were operating at 40 percent capacity. Mr. Keene understood the discussion concerned the overall policy related to all facilities. Information could demonstrate that a facility was performing worse than the Community Room. Council Member Scharff wanted to review all facilities. Council Member Klein wanted to review meeting rooms only. MINUTES Page 13 of 24 Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes 9/23/14 Chair Price noted different facilities had different markets which complicated matters. Mr. Betts advised that the new Palo Alto Room at the Mitchell Park Community Center was designed to be a large ballroom for use by 300-500 people. Council Member Klein suggested Staff include capacity information for each room. In analyzing the Community Room, he would consider facilities that were 500-1,500 square feet. Chair Price inquired whether Staff understood the information requested. Mr. Betts replied yes. Council Member Scharff wanted to know when the Boardwalk at the Baylands Interpretive Center would be repaired. Mr. Betts reported the Water Board had jurisdiction over those repairs. Repairs were located within the habitat of the endangered clapper rail. Ms. Stump suggested repairs to the Boardwalk be agendized for another meeting. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 2. Review and Recommend to City Council Changes to the Scheduled Release of Council Agenda Packets and Other Matters Related to Agendas, Reports and Minutes. Donna Grider, City Clerk, advised that for the past year the Executive Leadership Team had discussed an early release of Council packets. Currently packets were released on Wednesday for the following Monday's meeting. Staff proposed transitioning early release over the Winter Break and implementing it in January 2015 with packets issued two weeks prior to the Council meeting. Under the current schedule, Agenda development and report writing typically began four to six weeks in advance of the Council meeting. Notice of a Public Hearing was submitted to the newspaper four to five weeks prior to the Council meeting. The public could be confused by having two packets available concurrently. Council Members should resist changing or adding to the packet because of the perception of having time to do so. Council Member questions should be submitted the Friday prior to the Council meeting rather than the Monday of the meeting to allow Staff more time to respond. A survey of surrounding cities revealed that the majority utilized action minutes. City of Palo Alto (ID # 6116) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 Summary Title: Appointment of Julia Moran to CAC Title: Appointment of Julia Moran to the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Comprehensive Plan Update From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council appoint Julia Moran to the Comprehensive Plan Update Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), filling the vacancy created by the resignation of Mila Zelkha. Discussion On August 31, 2015, the City Council appointed five additional members to the Citizens !dvisory Committee (C!C) established to assist with completion of the City’s long-running Comprehensive Plan Update. The Council also indicated their intention to appoint Julia Moran to fill a vacancy created by the resignation of Mila Zelkha. With the appointment of Ms. Moran, appointed members of the CAC are listed below: Voting Members Len Filppu - Fairmeadow Daniel Garber – Old Palo Alto Annette Glanckopf – Midtown Jennifer Hetterly --Midtown Hamilton Hitchings – Duveneck Jared Jacobs – Evergreen Park Arthur Keller – Adobe Meadows Shani Kleinaus – Adobe Meadows Lydia Kou – Barron Park Steve Levy – Downtown South Don McDougall – Professorville Julia Moran – St. Claire Gardens/So. Midtown Mark Nadim – Palo Alto Hills Bonnie Packer – Palo Verde City of Palo Alto Page 1 Lisa Peschcke-Koedt – Crescent Park Amy Sung – Green Gable Doria Summa – College Terrace Jason Titus – Downtown North Elaine Uang – Downtown North Ellen Uhrbrock – University South Alex Van Riesen – Midtown Bob Wenzlau – Crescent Park Non-Voting Members Adrian Fine – Planning and Transportation Commission Heidi Emberling – Palo Alto Unified School District Whitney McNair – Stanford University City of Palo Alto Page 2 City of Palo Alto (ID # 6002) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Business Registry Phase 2 Title: Update to Council on Business Registry and Council Discussion and Direction Regarding Phase 2 From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends that the Council receive a status update on implementation of the Business Registry, including clarification on the handling of required and optional information. Staff further recommends direction to Staff regarding phase two of implementation, including: 1. Exempting very small businesses; 2. Exempting very small non-profits; 3. Exempting religious organizations with no ancillary businesses; 4. Continuing the exemption for home-based and transitory businesses; 5. Continuing to enhance reporting capabilities, improve user functionality and experience; 6. Further exploring integration with other permits and return to Council with a plan for implementation as phase three; and 7. Achieving increased compliance via additional outreach and enhanced enforcement. Executive Summary Six months into the launch of phase one of the City’s new Business Registry Certificate (BRC) program, 2173 businesses are fully registered. A complete listing is available on the City’s Open Data Portal at www.cityofpaloalto.org/registrylist, and an analysis of the data is discussed in detail below, and included as Attachment 1. The BRC program was launched with the intention of being an evolving process, and the expectation that additional changes, enhancements, and Council guidance would need to be made over time in regards to the software, policies, and program administration. The Council directed staff to return to Council with a plan for those changes to be incorporated as a second phase of the BRC. Within this report, staff recommends a number of programming changes which were outside of our scope for Phase 1, including refinements to the user interface and reporting capabilities City of Palo Alto Page 2 that will require contract amendments which will appear separately on the Council’s agenda at a later date. Staff is recommending that the Council discuss and provide direction related both to policy questions that have arisen in response to the launch of the BRC and to compliance and enforcement. Background In November 2014, the Council adopted Ordinance #5279 creating a business registry certificate (BRC) requirement. The Council’s intention was that the program be online, simple to use, and be hosted using the City’s existing permit management system (Accela) to pave the way for future integration with other city permits/ processes. The ordinance requires all businesses1 operating in a fixed place of business2 in the City to obtain a BRC. To obtain a certificate, businesses must complete a City questionnaire, which is available online through the City’s website, and pay a flat $50 fee. Home-based businesses and transitory businesses (such as general contractors whose corporate office is located outside of the city) are exempt from the ordinance. Based on Council direction, non- profit corporations (in fixed places of business within Palo Alto) are not exempted from the BRC. The related staff report (including Ordinance #5279) is available online at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/44100 In addition to launching the business registry, staff was directed to implement a marketing program to inform the community of the new requirement, and to develop initial enforcement strategies. As mentioned in the report, both the Council and the public noted that the City should prioritize implementing the basic structure of the program and over time make refinements as needed. Staff was further directed to return in the fall of 2015 with a plan for phase two which would include program/ cost refinements as well as a framework for potential integration with other processes (i.e. the Certificate of Use). The exploration of additional enforcement tools, techniques, and penalties was also anticipated. Over the winter of 2014-2015, Staff worked with vendors and consultants to build a working business registry online tool that would be ready as quickly as possible for the public launch. After an intensive internal development and testing phase, in March 2015, the City launched the Business Registry Website (https://registermybusiness.cityofpaloalto.org) and corresponding informational page: www.cityofpaloalto.org/businessregistry. 1 4.60.020 (a) “Business” means any commercial enterprise, trade, calling, vocation, profession, occupation, or means of livelihood, whether or not carried on for gain or profit. 2 4.60.020 (c) “Fixed place of business” means a place of business located in the city boundaries and occupied for the particular purpose of conducting business. City of Palo Alto Page 3 During the initial launch of the business registry, staff implemented an outreach campaign to educate the business community about the new registry requirement. Staff reached businesses via multiple methods including fliers, letters, emails, advertising, social media, online and print media, and in-person contacts with individual businesses and through the Chamber of Commerce and other business associations. A User’s Guide was made available which offered a page-by-page explanation of the website. A Frequently Asked Questions document was also made available. Both of these documents have been updated over time. Prior to the program launch, staff developed administrative guidelines to regulate the administration of the program, establishing the general rules and data management and reporting approach. As the program evolved, certain refinements were made to the guidelines, and it remains a “living” document. As the program evolved, staff continued to focus on education and outreach, sending multiple communications. The “grace period” was extended to ensure that each individual business was contacted through multiple means prior to any enforcement action taking place. As of August 31, 2173 businesses have fully registered. As a nascent program, and considering the nature of businesses starting, moving, and closing on a daily basis, establishing a list of businesses subject to the BRC (BRC Subject List) was difficult. As a result of a great deal of work, ultimately culminating in a physical survey, it has been culled from over 200,000 business listings to its current status of about 3150. Staff expects that this number will continue to be dynamic over time. This is due to several factors, including: 1. Many commercial addresses do not yet have an active business associated. This may be because it is vacant/ under construction/ otherwise not subject to the business registry 2. Some businesses have multiple entities essentially incorporating the same people (or operate under multiple names). Based on the ordinance, these businesses are be required to complete only one registration listing all of their business entities. 3. Some businesses currently on the list are not subject to the Business Registry 4. Some businesses currently on the list will close, or move 5. New/ relocating businesses are not currently on the list, but will need to be added. Preliminary Data Given the Council and public interest in the data from the BRC, data has been released via the city’s Open Data portal at www.cityofpaloalto.org/registrylist. As part of this report (and included as Attachment 1), staff is releasing a preliminary data analysis, including a breakout for downtown. As the report shows, 69% of the downtown businesses registered (801) representing 12833 employees. Other report highlights include: 69,136 Total Registered Employees 29,733,835 Square Feet of Commercial City of Palo Alto Page 4 Office: 382 Square Feet per Employee (SF/Emp)3 Office: 384 SF/Emp Downtown Retail: 296 SF/Emp Retail: 283 SF/Emp Downtown Restaurant: 139 SF/Emp Restaurant: 125 SF/Emp Downtown Although the data is interesting, several qualifiers must be noted. The data is based on self- reported figures that have been through only a very basic level of staff analysis/ quality control. Errors should naturally be expected in the data set. Although it represents over two thirds of businesses subject to the registry, it does not include those businesses that have not yet registered. Staff is also aware of a small number of companies who have registered twice. Business Concerns & Compliance Overall, 2173 businesses or 69% of the BRC subject list (3151) have registered. Of the unregistered, staff has made numerous contacts to attempt to establish whether they were unaware/ apathetic to the registry, or whether there was an ideological or programmatic opposition. Generally, the majority of concerns expressed were in these areas: 1. The idea of a business registry 2. The quantity and perceived intrusiveness of certain questions, especially: a. Federal Tax Identification Number (FEIN)4 b. Questions relating to parking spaces and permits provided by employers 3. The public nature of information being shared 4. The fact that religious institutions and non-profits are subject to the BRC 5. Issues with the online nature of the registry a. Request for check/ other types of payment b. Requests for paper forms/ invoices c. User experience issues 6. Opposition to a potential future business license tax/ revenue generator Staff worked to address as many of these concerns as possible through the policy framework set by Council, and within the agreements with software providers/ contract staff. Throughout the initial launch period, several changes were made to the administrative guidelines and the systems of the business registry. The most significant changes that were unanticipated included the size of the demand for paper-based forms. To address this demand, a paper form was developed (Attachment 3). Staff had anticipated a small number of back end data entries to occur, and developed a process as part of phase one by which data could be entered 3 Overall mean a of total gross square footage reported divided by total number of employees. The total range varied greatly, with about 80 companies overall under 100 square feet per employee (35 downtown). 4 These concerns were especially true for sole proprieters who in some cases use their Social Security Number as the FEIN. Given the concerns, staff has permitted businesses to omit this number from the application. City of Palo Alto Page 5 manually. However, given the unexpected number of companies requiring paper forms, staff was spread thin in handling other aspects of administering the BRC. In most cases, those expressing concerns did eventually register after staff contact. Staff is aware of a very small number of individuals who have expressed concerns and have not yet registered, or have expressed their opposition to registering. In some instances, staff received a check in the mail with no corresponding information. Staff was typically able to obtain the registry information through follow-up contact. If no contact could be made, the check was returned with a letter explaining that both payment and information is required for compliance with the ordinance. At the close of the outreach/ education campaign, a final letter was sent to all businesses on the subject list who had not yet registered. These letters were sent in waves with the final mailing occurring in late July. As of September 1st, the BRC program has entered the enforcement period, and staff has begun taking initial enforcement action by administering the late fees initially established in the ordinance. As of August 31, 31% of businesses have not yet complied. Under the current penalty resolution, fees up to a total of $50 ($25 for 30 days late and $25 for 60 days late) can be assessed. Staff has begun to invoice these fees as of September 1, and expect additional businesses to comply. It must be noted that compliance with the ordinance includes payment of the fee as well as providing the required information. As such, the City cannot accept payment that is not accompanied by the basic information. This complicates the collections aspect of enforcement. The instances of people sending in money only (with no corresponding information) is rare, but could increase during the “collections” phase. Staff has been focusing our BRC resources on making the registry as simple to comply with as possible. As noted above, in addition to the simple online tool, a PDF form (Attachment 3 and available at www.cityofpaloalto.org/brform), was developed which can be filled out and sent in with check payment. Staff has been as responsive as possible to questions at the Development Center, via the email (businessregistry@cityofpaloalto.org) and through the dedicated phone line (650) 329-2360. To obtain closer to 100% compliance, additional resources are likely needed. Comparison to Other Jurisdictions The City’s registry was further compared to business licenses/ taxes in other 23 Bay Area and California cities, especially as it relates to: 1. Number of questions required a. whether Federal Tax Identification Numbers (FEIN) was required 2. Whether home-based and transitory businesses are subject 3. Whether non-profit businesses are subject 4. Whether and how many staff are dedicated to the program City of Palo Alto Page 6 5. How penalties and enforcement work Staff has determined that Palo Alto’s registry is in the mid-low end in terms of number of required questions(23). In every other city surveyed, FEIN is a required field. Typically, home- based businesses are required to register their business, although they may have a modified form/ process of acknowledging the rules governing home businesses. In some other Cities, non-profit organizations are either altogether exempt from the business license programs, or required to fill out forms but not required to pay. Most other cities have some staff dedicated to the program. Although many cities forms include questions about square footage that the business functions within, very few ascertain information about parking spaces provided. Penalties ranged from fees and penalties to administrative action/ code enforcement actions. A summary of staff’s outreach to other cities is included as Attachment 2. Discussion The Council vision for the BRC has always been an iterative process. Given the demand for good data about the employers in town, the Council directed staff to create the basic software, program, and administration/ basic enforcement and launch in a first phase, and return with a plan for phase 2 to include options for enhanced enforcement, reporting, renewals, and a plan for integration with other business permits. Staff is requesting that the Council discuss and provide direction regarding several policy questions that have arisen since the launch of the BRC. These are mainly related to the question set, the types of businesses subject to the business registry, and additional enforcement tools/ techniques for non-compliance. Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) Staff is considering changing the questionniare to require FEIN only in reference to companies that are not Sole Proprietorships, or who would otherwise use their Social Security Number as FEIN. The FEIN is an important data point for the City to collect, especially as it relates to comparing companies across disparate data sets. It is included in the business license questionnaire in every other City that Staff surveyed. By making this change (and in conjunction with the next staff recommendation), staff will eliminate the City collecting any confidential personal information. Alternatively, staff could continue to keep the question as optional, or delete it altogether. Parking Questions The BRC currently requires businesses to answer 2 questions relating to parking: 1. Number of annual parking permits purchased from the City for your employees at this site 2. Number of parking spaces dedicated to your business on site City of Palo Alto Page 7 The intent of these questions is to attempt to quantify information that the City does not currently have regarding parking and permits made available to employees. Some feedback that Staff received indicates that these questions are too confusing for businesses, and that as such they are subject to erroneous entries. Although staff has attempted to clarify these questions with help text, staff does agree that these questions can be difficult to answer, especially where shared parking arrangements, parking districts, or other factors complicate matters. It is likely more effective to obtain this type of information on a per-building basis through other means than by including these questions in the BRC questionnaire. Therefore, staff intends to eliminate the parking questions from the BRC. Very Small Businesses/ Small Non Profits/ Religious Organizations Staff recommends that very small businesses, small non-profits, and religious organizations with no ancillary business on site be exempted from the Business Registry requirement. Although the Council originally directed staff to include non-profit organizations, the exemption of these types of businesses can be justified because they have a negligable effect on the overall density of workers present in the City during peak times. In this case, very small businesses could be defined as companies or non-profits with less than one full time employee (including the business owner) present on site. Religious organizations that do not have an ancillary business on site (such as a daycare or private school), could also be exempted with very limited impact to the BRC data. Based on the current data set, there are 511 Sole Proprietors, 87 Non Profit Administrative Offices, and 24 Religious Institutions currently registered with the City. Based on Council direction, staff would need to determine how fee revenue/ expenses would be impacted. Alternatively, the Council could decide to require these types of business to register, but not pay a fee. It must be noted that the operating costs associated with these exemptions must be borne by the general fund, and cannot be offset by the fee revenues5 Current Exemptions Although subject to Council direction, due to the current focus on commercial businesses operating in “fixed places of business”, staff recommends that home-based and transitory businesses continue to be exempted at this time. Compliance In addition to fees, a variety of other methods are available to ensure compliance with the 5 If Council decides to choose this alternative, staff would need to return with an estimate and a cost center with which to bear these costs, although they are expected to be nominal. City of Palo Alto Page 8 business registry. These can include responsive methods such as denial of some additional business permits (e.g. an active BRC is currently required in order for downtown businesses and employees to obtain Resiential Parking Permits), including planning and building permits. Proactive methods can also be employed such as the sending of notices, in-person visits by field officers, and assessment of additional fines, up to and including administrative citations and code enforcement. Staff seeks the Council’s direction on which additional methods to consider for Palo Alto. Based on any changes the Council directs, staff will make changes to the Administrative Regulations and/or return to the Council with updates to the Ordinance, a staffing plan, and any request for additional resources that may be necessary. Software Updates As noted above, the BRC was launched in anticipation of expected tweaks needing to be made in phase two. Many improvements are sought in phase two that should dramatically improve the customer experience as well as the program administration. Some technical enhancements were anticipated and will be made as part of our current vendor licenses. However, some changes will require additional resources. Staff has worked with our vendors (Accela and Open Counter) to create a plan for these enhancements, which will include faster processing times, the ability to accept online checks (ACH) and other types of credit cards, and more robust reporting capabilities. These updates are outlined below. Depending on Council additions, staff will return to Council with any contracts or amendments necessary. It is anticipated that as part of Phase two additional resources may be required for the three partners; Accela, Open Counter and TruePoint Solutions in order to make any adjustments and/or refinements as proposed in Phase two. Additionally, as we launch into Phase two and experience the renewal process it is expected that we will need to make additional enhancements and reports that will take all three partners. Meanwhile, as we study the integration of the other permits with the BRC their time and resources will be needed to chart a pathway to success. Staff will return to council with a detailed proposal to include any necessary amendments to existing contracts. Enhanced Reporting In the first year of the business registry, public data (including that released as Attachment 1 and at www.cityofpaloalto.org/brdata) was derived through a labor intensive process. To improve the reporting capabilities, and minimize Staff resources required, Staff has worked with our software vendors (Accela and Open Counter) to develop a plan for phase two that will include automating this type of reporting, so that reports and analysis need far less staff City of Palo Alto Page 9 interaction and can be made available more frequently over time. As part of this plan, data quality controls will be developed to assist in the identification of errant entries. Renewals Beginning in March 2016, the majority of businesses in Palo Alto will interact with the BRC system as a “renewal”. As part of our existing scope of work for Phase one, Staff is working with it’s vendors to finalize the testing for the automated renewal process. Essentially, a business will be notified via email and sent a link to the online tool where they can simply review their information, make any necessary changes, certify their answers, and pay the annual registration. Naturally, the City is preparing the system to handle numerous lost passwords, forgotten accounts, and no longer valid email addresses. As part of phase two discovery of new businesses, physical verifications, and additional business education/ outreach will largely mirror those develped in phase one. Based on the Council’s direction regarding enforcement techniques, there may be other processes that need to be planned. Integration with Other Permits Staff recommends that further exploration of permit integration be pursued as part of phase two, and that Council direct staff to return to Council with a plan for implementation as Phase three of the BRC. In the ideal scenario, the multiple permits any business might require from the City would be integrated. Fire inspections, Police alarm permits, BID fees, Planning (use and occupancy) permits, and Parking permits could all be managed under one “global” relationship. The path to integration is made extremely challenging by the complexity of various permits and the proprietary systems used to collect and track permits. However, the Business Registry was built on a platform that allows for additional functionality, and is already largely integrated with the City’s permit management system (Accela). As such, there is potential for additional permits to be integrated. For example, Staff explored what might be required for the Certificate of Use (known colloquially as the Use & Occupancy Certificate or U&O) process to be integrated with the business registry. By using the platform created by the Business Registry, The Certificate of Use process can be redesigned to improve the interface for staff approval by each department involved, and also dramatically improve the customer experience for those requiring it. At the same time, the integration of the data with the underlying business registry information can be better utilized by the City. However, the significant overhaul of this existing process will be a major effort City of Palo Alto Page 10 requiring key staff time from multiple departments, additional software and technical resources, and Council time. Staffing Besides technical support from the City’s consultant (True Point Solutions), Significant staff time from the City Managers office, Development Services, Planning & Community Environment, Administrative Services, and the City Attorneys Office were involved in the launch of the business registry. A limited hourly position in Development Services was largely dedicated to customer service, data entry, and data management. In order to provide continued support for the Business Registry program, some level of dedicated staffing is expected on an ongoing basis. With the exception of the needs created by any additional Council direction regarding additional enforcement methods, Staff recommends that the current levels of staffing be continued, including the dedication of a part time position in Development Services to the following: 1. Customer Service 2. Data Quality/ Data Entry/ Data Management 3. Renewal Plan 4. Marketing/ Outreach Staff estimates the FY part time staffing to cost approximately $70,000, depending on the call volumes spikes, especially within the next two months and prior to/ during the renewal period. SB 1186 Compliance On September 19, 2012 SB‐1186 was signed into law by Governor Brown which adds a state mandated fee of $1.00 on any application for a local business license or similar instrument or permit, or renewal thereof. At that time, Staff applied the fee and state payment to the Certificate of Use process, and it has been collected and remitted since. Staff has determined that it is more appropriate to collect and remit this additional fee through the BRC process, and will subsequently be making changes to the program as well as deleting this fee from the Certificate of Use requirements. Timeline Upon approval of the plan and contract administration, phase two is expected to launch immediately, and be completed by the Spring of 2016. The first renewals of the Business Registry will begin on March 1, 2016 and are due per the ordinance by March 31, 2016. Phase three, permit integration, is largely dependant on Council direction, but is expected late 2016. Resource Impact To support the successful launch fo the Business Registry program, in Fiscal Year 2015 Council approved a supplemental appropriation of $250,000 to supoprt Phase 1 which included start-up costs. Because the Business Registry spans across fiscal years, the amount was intended to cover calendar year expenses. Although Fiscal Year 2015 has not officially closed, staff City of Palo Alto Page 11 estimates current Phase 1 expenses to be approximately $140,000, offset by $83,0006 in Business Registry fee revenue. In addition, staff will bring forward a reappropiation request of $99,000 to City Council in the fall to continue with Phase 1 implementation. Any remaining balances will be used to support Phase 2 efforts. Further, the Fiscal Year 2016 adopted budget included $221,000 for additional expenses related to Phase 2 of the Business Registry program offset with assumed revenue of $221,000. As staff begins to streamline the program as part of the Fiscal Year 2017 budget process, Business Registry expenses and fees will be re-evaluated to ensure that the program aligns to the 100% cost recovery goal. Policy Implications Launching phase two of the Business Registry Program is consistent with Council direction. Data from the BRC is considered helpful in achieving programs outlined in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Environmental Review (If Applicable) Not applicable. Attachments: Attachment 1: BRC Preliminary Analysis_8-31-15 (PDF) Attachment 2: Similar Cities Outreach Notes (PDF) Attachment 3: BRC PDF Form (PDF) 6 This amount continues to grow as payments from the BRC program are officially captured in the City’s resource management system. Business Registry Data Analysis (as of August 31, 2015) Total Number of Employees (All Locations)69,136 Total Businesses Registered (All Locations)2,173 Total Business Locations (Registered)2,486 Total Businesses (Subject)3,151 % of Total Registered 69% Total Businesses Registered (Downtown)801 Total Businesses (Subject) (Downtown)1,167 % of Total Registered (Downtown)69% Total Employees/ Square Foot (All Locations) SQ FT EMPLOYEES SQ FT/EMP TOTAL 29,733,835 TOTAL 69,136 430 OFFICE/R&D 9,183,291 OFFICE 24,037 382 RETAIL 1,610,576 RETAIL 5,445 296 RESTAURANTS 482,702 RESTAURANTS 3,468 139 SERVICES 1,359,173 SERVICES 3,373 403 LODGING 1,208,651 LODGING 808 1,496 HEALTHCARE 4,260,677 HEALTHCARE 10,511 405 OTHER*11,628,764 OTHER 21,494 541 *Other includes Accessory Use, Agriculture, Auto Related, Manufacturing, Housing Offices, Public/ Assembly, and Storage Total off-street parking PROVIDED ON SITE (All Locations) TOTAL 65,278 OFFICE/R&D 17,386 RETAIL 3,533 RESTAURANTS 1,097 SERVICES 3,672 LODGING 1,560 HEALTHCARE 13,588 OTHER*24,442 65,278 8. Total Parking permits purchased (All Locations) TOTAL 3,367 OFFICE/R&D 2,397 RETAIL 156 RESTAURANTS 100 SERVICES 258 LODGING 50 HEALTHCARE 152 OTHER*254 3,367 ` 6. Total SQFT/EMPLOYEE (Downtown) SQ FT EMPLOYEES SQ FT/EMP TOTAL 5,680,687 TOTAL 12,833 443 OFFICE/R&D 2,273,464 OFFICE 5,921 384 RETAIL 308,176 RETAIL 1,088 283 RESTAURANTS 232,294 RESTAURANTS 1863 125 SERVICES 301,170 SERVICES 865 348 LODGING 558,547 LODGING 491 1,138 HEALTHCARE 1,257,986 HEALTHCARE 1,699 740 OTHER*749,050 OTHER*906 827 7. Total off-street parking PROVIDED ON SITE (Downtown) TOTAL 6,993 OFFICE/R&D 2,291 RETAIL 190 RESTAURANTS 209 SERVICES 419 LODGING 636 HEALTHCARE 2,090 OTHER*1,158 6,993 8. Total Parking permits purchased (Downtown) TOTAL 2,323 OFFICE/R&D 1,848 RETAIL 85 RESTAURANTS 56 SERVICES 40 LODGING 45 HEALTHCARE 84 OTHER*165 2,323 24036.5 5445 3468 3373 808 10511 21494 Employees Registered by Business Type OFFICE RETAIL RESTAURANTS SERVICES LODGING HEALTHCARE OTHERTotal = 69,136 Note: Data is based on BRC as of 08/31/15 City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Berkeley RG 26 Yes Yes • Penalty (on registration fee + tax): Add 10% (if paid 30 days after business start date) OR Add 50% (if paid 31 days after business start date) • Interest (on registration fee + tax + penalty): Add 1% per month from 30 days after business start date) Yes Yes (Some exceptions - speak to customer service desk for individual cases) Organizations operating wholly for the benefit of charitable purposes, and those exempt from filing information returns under 26 U.S.C. § 6033 (a) (2) are exempt from payment of business license taxes on gross receipts, but is required to pay the $26 fee per BMC 9.04.230 (c). A charitable organization must receive and maintain a current business license, and is subject to an annual renewal and statement affirming its status as a charitable organization by February 1st of each year. Department of Finance (Revenue Collection Division) BusLic@ ci.berkeley. ca.us, (510) 981-CITY Note: # is a general customer service number Alternatively: Rosario Riche, Revenue Collection Manager, rriche@ cityofberkeley. info Don’t have this data (but estimate it’s in the in the 85% to 90% range) Don’t have this data on-hand. Will get back with this data. FTE equivalent = 2 or 3 (have many different people across different departments working on BLT) • Revenue audit • Collection efforts (collectors calling) • Sometimes hire a consultant who access different business databases and match it up with Berkeley’s database to see who isn’t registered) • Lien properties (but can’t shut down because BLT is non-regulatory) • Check old gross receipts to see if they match up with new ones Burlingame RG 15 Home Occupation Permit (HOP): 24 Yes (if part- ner- ship or corpo- ration) Yes (Refer to Burlingame Municipal Code Title 6, Chapter 6.04, Section 6.04.070: Terms of licenses - delinquency) Yes Yes No (Refer to Burlingame Municipal Code 6.04.240 Exemptions for details) Finance Department (650) 558-7210 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. 1.5 • Registering: receive 3 notices. If still not paid, it goes to collections. • Renewal: Receive a letter every year reminding of renewal. If still not paid within 90 days, the account goes to collections. Business License/Tax Examples City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Emeryville RG • 20 • New Business Tax Return: 14 • Emergency Services Survey: 8 • Home Business Acknowledgement: 2 • Zoning Compliance: 17 Yes Yes • # Months x 5%, Max 25% Yes Yes Exempt from paying but must still maintain a current business license and are subject to annual renewal of charitable organization status Finance Department, Desiri Vink dvink@ emeryville. org, Business License Desk: (510) 596-4325 Don’t have this data Check City Manager’s Finance Progress Report (has open/close business data for every month) - online 2 (1 answering calls, questions, updating, etc. and 1 more during renewal season) • Give out citations • Send notices and if still not registered then send to collections Fremont RG • 34 • HOP: 3 Yes Yes • 5% per month of said business tax, including the registration tax, Max = 25% • Interest = one percent per month or fraction thereof until paid Yes Yes No Finance Department (Revenue Division) 510-494-4790, ext 2 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. 9 Send reminder/notices. Send account a citation if business still doesn’t register. Send to collections if the business STILL doesn’t register. Huntington Beach RG • 46 (14 additional questions for mobile vendors) • Home Based Business License: 29 Yes Yes • Penalty = 10% of the license tax on the first day of each month after the due date thereof Yes Yes No Finance Department (714) 536-5267 Corrine (Direct): (714) 536-5450 • Don’t have this data • Currently have 2100 active licenses • Use audits (e.g. Franchise Review Board) • Estimation: in the 1000’s (mostly home based businesses) • Don’t have this data • 3088 new licenses in 2014; still tracking how many closed out 5 (1 Field officers, 2 office staff, 1 Senior, 1 Supervisor) • Administrative citations (1st citation = $250 fine, 2nd citation = $500 fine, 3rd citation = $1000 fine); municipal code allows cities to cite every day a business is out of compliance • Citations done by field officer – lots of revenue generated • Field officer also given a delinquent list (typically contains licensed but not renewed businesses) and goes out to figure out why business has not renewed City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Millbrae RG • 50 • HOP: 15 Yes Yes • Penalties A. Impose a 30% pen- alty on the tax payment due and owing; and B. Impose an additional 15% penalty per month of the license tax payment, or fraction thereof, that remains unpaid; and C. Impose an interest charge at the rate of 1.5% per month, or fraction thereof, on the amount of the license tax and pen- alties from the date on which the license tax was delinquent. Yes Yes Business License Department (650) 259-2352 Milpitas RG • 17 • Milpitas-based Businesses Supplement: 8 • Home-based Businesses Questionnaire: Requires Signature Yes Yes • Penalty of 10% of said license tax on the last day of each month after the due date thereof, providing that the amount of such penalty to be added shall not exceed 100% of the amount of the license tax due. Yes Yes Yes (no tax but need to pay $5 application fee) Finance Department (408) 586-3100 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. (Chamber of Commerce may have this data). • 0, Some people work on it when they have time (mostly people in the Billing Department) • if the city gets a notice that there is a business operating in the city without a license, they send a letter. If the business still doesn’t register, the fire department goes there and asks to see a license and advises of penalties if the business doesn’t register Mountain View CR 14 Yes or SSN Yes • 10% of the fee amount for each month of delinquency to a maximum of 50%, plus reasonable collection and legal costs Yes Yes No Finance & Administra- tive Services Department finance@ mountainview. gov Don’ t have this data About 5 to 7% difference annually 1 • Code Enforcement Division • Police (typically for street vendors) • Use outside auditors City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Redondo Beach RG 26 • Home Occupation Supplement: 4 Yes or SSN Yes • Commencement of business without a license: 20% of the prescribed license tax, and an additional 20% percent penalty shall be added each 30 days, Max = 60% • Delinquent renewal: 20% of the amount of such tax for each 30 days, Max = 60% Yes License & Collections Division blmail@redon- do.org, (310) 318-0603 Redwood City RG 32 Yes Yes •10% per month, Max = 100% Yes Yes Yes (but not required to pay) Finance Department (Revenue Services Division) Luis Bertelsen lbertelsen@ redwoodcity. org, (650) 780- 7214 Don’t have this data (but do know that there are approximately 7,000 businesses registered) Don’t have this data. 1 person 100% of the time; depends on time of year; additional staff at some times; two staff on average Outsource to auditing company San Jose RG 36 Yes Yes • Each subsequent annual business tax payment is due and payable on the 15th day of the calendar month in which the business began. Should the tax remain unpaid by the due date, a penalty = 25% . Should the tax remain unpaid for a period exceeding one month beyond the due date, an additional 25% penalty is assessed. The interest rate of 1.5% a month will also be assessed on unpaid tax and penalties Yes No tax Yes pay for cost of printing business certificate No tax, Yes pay for cost of printing business certificate City of San Jose Finance businesstax@ sanjoseca.gov, (408) 535-7055 Don’t have this data (but know that there are approximately 85,000 businesses registered) Around 10,000 who leave and 10,000 that come so it kind of evens out 11 Outsource to a Collections Agency and submit to Small Claims as well City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions San Mateo RG • Flat Fee Form: 10 • Gross Receipts Form: 13 • Home Occupation Form: 21 Yes or SSN Yes • Penalty = 1/4 of the fee Yes Yes register, No pay Yes register, No pay Business Tax Division (650) 522-7113 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. 3 (but not full time) • Send out inspectors to see if businesses have up- to-date licenses • Send out delinquent notices • Send noncompliant businesses to collections • Use code enforcement team Santa Clara RG 18 Yes Yes • Any person that fails to apply for a tax certificate within 30 days of commencing business or occupying space in the business community, is subject to 100% penalty of total amount due Yes Municipal Services (Business Tax & License) businessli- cense@santa- claraca.gov, (408) 615-2310 Santa Monica • 26 • Zoning Review Form: 34 • Waste Water Per- mit: 9 • Credit Card Authorization Form: 9 Yes Yes • Renewals with full payment are due on July 1 of each year. A penalty equivalent to 20% of the tax due applies to all delinquent accounts unpaid after August 31, additional penalty of 10% levied on the original license fee for each month or portion thereof that the payment remains outstanding. Max = 100% Yes Yes (exempt from tax but must still submit license application) Business & Revenue Operations Division business.li- cense@smgov. net, (310) 458- 8745 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. 8 (1 supervisor, 7 staff) Can’t get planning department approvals unless you have business license; co- compliance department; bill collector who physically goes to sites Saratoga RG 32 Yes Yes • 10% of fee per month, penalties won’t exceed original license fee Yes Yes No Community Develop- ment De- partment (408) 868-1260 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data (but do know that it ends up pretty even with about 2,000 businesses registered each year) 1/2 (o Not one full time person; one person does business licensing as about 50% as his/her job) Use a contract company, Muni Services, that will discover unlicensed businesses and send letters City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Sunnyvale RG • 48 • Home Occupation: 8 Yes Yes • Penalty = 10% of the amount of the license tax on the last day of each month after the due date thereof until paid, Max = 100% • In addition to the penalties imposed, pay interest at the rate of 1% per month, or fraction thereof, on the amount of the tax exclusive of penalties, from the date on which the tax first became delinquent until paid. Yes No Department of Finance/ Business Licensing (408) 730-7620 Walnut Creek RG Many different applications forms depending on business: http:// www.walnut-creek. org/services/ business/licenseapp. asp Yes Yes • For failure to pay a license tax when due, penalty = 25% of the license tax on the last day of each month after the due date thereof, providing that the amount of such penalty to be added shall in no event 50% of the amount of the license tax due. Yes Yes Yes Business License Division businessli- cense@walnut- creek.org, (925) 943-5821 Any balance not paid by within 90 days of its due date may be sent to a third party collection agency, and all costs incurred for the collection of any outstanding debt will be added to the balance due. City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Menlo Park RG • General Application: 25 • Transitory Business Application: 10 • Home Occupation Permit (need to submit with general permit): 6 Yes Yes • Applications submitted after the first 30 days of operation are subject to late charge of 15% for each month of unlicensed operations to a maximum late charge of 60% Yes Yes Yes (But city grants exemption from paying the tax if non-profit provides proof of 501(c)(3) status. Still must have license and still must pay the $1 SB1186 state fee.) Note: Banks and insurance companies are also exempt from paying the taxes due to state law; city requests they get a business license but can’t make them because license is non-regulatory) Business License Department (650) 330-6642 Don’t have this data (But in 2015 had about 5000 businesses registered - 600 home-based, 1600 in-town businesses, 1500 transitory businesses, 1200 venture capital businesses, 88 misc. such as mobile food vendors; estimate of unregistered is from 200 to 300.) Estimations: in-town businesses about 5% change and out-of-town contractors about 40% to 50%) Full time equivalent: 75%. (John McGirr, Revenue & Claims Management Coordinator as the supervisor and one clerk; both don’t work on business licensing full time) 1. Send letter 2. Send another letter or follow up with phone calls 3. Make an estimate of their gross receipts and send business a bill for this amount; if business disagrees with amount, can go to city hall for a hearing 4. Code Enforcement team and citations 5. Small Claims Court San Carlos RG • 11 with 4 addi- tional questions for home-based busi- nesses • Contractor’s Application: 9 Yes (if part- ner- ship, corpo- ration, or con- tractor Yes • 20% of the business registration fee applied every month being late until 100% Yes Yes Yes register, No fee with proof of non- profit status Finance Department (650) 802- 4213, Business- Reg@cityof- sancarlos.org Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. Soon to be 1 but currently, have multiple people working on it as a side part of their job • Send letters • Send out Code Enforcement officers or people from Economic Development . Foster City RG • 46 • Tax Worksheet: 10 Yes Yes • Taxes are payable in advance of the first day of business. Penalty is based on 10% of the license tax at 5:00 p.m. on the 60th day after the due date thereof, and an additional 10% at 5:00 p.m. on the last day of each month thereafter. • Cumulative penalty max = 100% of license tax due Yes Yes Yes have business license, No pay business license tax; must have proof of nonprofit status Financial Services Department (Business License Division) (650) 286- 3258, busi- nesslicense@ fostercity.org City RG or CR # Questions Federal Tax ID # Req? Penalties Home- Based Busi- nesses Transitory Businesses Non-profits Department/ Contact Contact Information Subject/ Registered (%) Yearly Turnover Rate # Staff Enforcement Actions Los Altos RG • 21 • Contractor/ SubContractor Application: 16 Yes Yes • 25% of base fee, past 30 days due = 50% of base fee Yes Yes Yes Finance Department (650) 947- 2760; Falene Moya (Direct): (650) 947-2618 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. 1 (Falene); some back ups • Send letters • Sometimes Building Department goes out and stop construction work if there’s no license • Sometimes police goes out and stop unlicensed home-based businesses from operating Cupertino RG • 13 • Home Business Questionnaire: 16 Yes Yes • 20% of amount due fine per month plus 1% interest per month. Maximum fine capped at 100% of original amount due. Yes Yes Yes register, Fill out tax exemption form Finance Division (408) 777-3221 Don’t have this data. Don’t have this data. 1 Send letters Los Gatos RG Many different ap- plications depending on business type: http://www.losgatos- ca.gov/421/Business- Licenses Yes or SSN or State Em- ployer ID # Yes • Penalty = 25% of such license tax on the last day of each month after the due date thereof; Max = 100% of the amount of the license tax due Yes Yes Finance Department (Business License Tax Division) 408-354-6835, businessli- cense@losgato- sca.gov BASIC INFORMATION Business Name _____________________________________________________________________ Date ____________ Business Type ______________________________________________________________________________________ (For example: Bar, Church, Daycare, Hair/Nail Salon, Hotel, Medical, Non-Profit, Office, Restaurant, Retail, Private School) BUSINESS DETAILS Address____________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name Suite or Bldg # Zip Code Main telephone number ______________________________________ Business Structure ___ Sole Proprietorship ___ General Partnership ___ Limited Liability ___ Limited Liability Partnership ___ Limited Liability Company ___ Corporation ___ Trust ___ Joint Venture ___ Other (select if no business structure) Business Inception Date Month ______________________ Day _______ Year ___________ Brief Business Description ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT INFORMATION First Name ____________________________________ Last Name ___________________________________________ Email Address ___________________________________________ Phone number ______________________________ Mailing Address _____________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name (or PO Box) Zip Code Applicant Role ___ Owner or Principal ___ Employee ___ Administrative or Operational ___ Other Note: If you selected Employee, Administrative/Operational, or Other, complete the information below for Owner/Principal. PRINCIPAL OR OWNER First Name ____________________________________ Last Name____________________________________________ Email Address ___________________________________________ Phone number ______________________________ Mailing Address _____________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name (or PO Box) Zip Code *Highlights indicate required field 2 PRIMARY ADDRESS (where the business is located) Address____________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name Suite or Bldg # Zip Code Floor business is located _______ Square Footage________________ # of Employees at this location_______________ Number of annual parking permits purchased from the City for your employees at this site ________________________ Number of parking spaces dedicated to your business on site ________________________ Is this your primary mailing address? _______ (If N, go to page 3 and provide a different address than the site you’re using for your primary address.) (Y/N) Do you have any other registered businesses or entities on site? _____ (If Y, go to page 3 and provide the names of all entities.) (Y/N) Does your business have additional locations in the City of Palo Alto? _____ (If Y, go to page 3 and provide information for all locations.) (Y/N) HOURS OF OPERATION Please estimate your opening and closing times to the nearest 30 minute increment. If you’re closed on a particular day, enter “Closed.” Monday ____________ to ____________ Tuesday ____________ to ____________ Wednesday ____________ to ____________ Thursday ____________ to ____________ Friday ____________ to ____________ Saturday ____________ to ____________ Sunday ____________ to ____________ BUSINESS REGISTRATIONS If you have any Federal or State registration numbers for your business, please report them below. Federal Employer Identification Number (EIN) _______________________________________________________ Reseller's license number__________________________________ State of incorporation____________________ COMMUTER BENEFITS Does the business provide any of the following benefits for employees? ____ Flexible work hours ____ Shuttle service ____ Car or bike share program for employees ____ Subsidized public transit ____ Pre-tax payroll deduction for transit passes COMMUTER PROGRAMS Let us know if you are interested in learning more about commuter programs sponsored by the City of Palo Alto. ____ SamTrans ____ Bike Boulevards ____ Bay Area Bike Share ____ Zipcar ____ Caltrain ____ VTA ____ Palo Alto Free Shuttle 3 MAILING ADDRESS Let us know if you'd prefer correspondence sent to a different address than the site for your primary physical address _____________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name (or PO Box) _____________________________________________________________________________________ City and State Zip Code ADDITIONAL BUSINESS ENTITIES Many business locations contain more than one entity, particularly in the case of commercial real estate offices, financial or investment services and medical uses. Please share the legal names of the other associated entities on site. Associated Business Name 1 ___________________________________________________________________________ Associated Business Name 2 ___________________________________________________________________________ Associated Business Name 3 ___________________________________________________________________________ Associated Business Name 4 ___________________________________________________________________________ Associated Business Name 5 ___________________________________________________________________________ Associated Business Name 6 ___________________________________________________________________________ SECONDARY LOCATION 1 Address____________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name Suite or Bldg # Zip Code Floor business is located _______ Square Footage________________ # of Employees at this location_______________ Number of annual parking permits purchased from the City for your employees at this site ________________________ Number of parking spaces dedicated to your business on site ________________________ SECONDARY LOCATION 2 Address____________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name Suite or Bldg # Zip Code Floor business is located _______ Square Footage________________ # of Employees at this location_______________ Number of annual parking permits purchased from the City for your employees at this site ________________________ Number of parking spaces dedicated to your business on site ________________________ SECONDARY LOCATION 3 Address____________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name Suite or Bldg # Zip Code Floor business is located _______ Square Footage________________ # of Employees at this location_______________ Number of annual parking permits purchased from the City for your employees at this site ________________________ Number of parking spaces dedicated to your business on site ________________________ SECONDARY LOCATION 4 Address____________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Number and Name Suite or Bldg # Zip Code Floor business is located _______ Square Footage________________ # of Employees at this location_______________ Number of annual parking permits purchased from the City for your employees at this site ________________________ Number of parking spaces dedicated to your business on site ________________________ 4 ___ I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this Application is true and correct as per the BRC Terms and Conditions. ___ I understand that payment of this business fee does NOT represent approval of my use/business with respect to zoning, County Health Department approval, hazardous materials use or storage, wastewater discharge, or any other requirement. Further, I recognize that it is my responsibility to secure appropriate clearances and that it is advisable for me to secure such requisite approvals prior to establishing this business and paying this business registry fee. Payment with a Check Please make check payable to City of Palo Alto in the amount of $50.00 and send with application form to: City of Palo Alto Business Registry 250 Hamilton Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 Next Step After receiving your form and $50 fee, we will send your Business Registry Certificate and payment receipt by US Postal Service (or by e-mail if an email address is furnished). Questions? Call (650) 329-2360 or send email to BusinessRegistry@cityofpaloalto.org TERMS AND CONDITIONS NOTE: Payment of a business registry fee and issuance of a business registry certificate do not necessarily entitle you to conduct business in the City of Palo Alto. As the owner or operator of a business, you must comply with all applicable zoning and public safety regulations and obtain all required permits. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT A COMPLETE LISTING OF CLEARANCES THAT MIGHT BE REQUIRED 1. If you intend to alter, remodel, relocate, or install any structural, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical portions of the building, you will need to obtain building permits from the Development Services Department at (650) 329-2496 2. Businesses involving any use changes, exterior building changes, or sign changes are advised to secure Department of Planning and Community Environment approval prior to lease execution or purchase. Contact the Planning and Community Environment Department at (650) 329-2442 3. Businesses operated out of the home must comply with Home Occupation Regulations (Section 18.42.060 of the Municipal Code). 4. If you intend to serve food or beverages on the premises, you must obtain approval from the Santa Clara County Health Department. For information, call (408) 737-1018. 5. If your business uses or stores hazardous materials (including paints, thinners, solvents, acids, compressed gases, etc.), you may be required to obtain a Hazardous Materials Permit from the Fire Department. NOTE: Certain hazardous materials and processes such as spray-painting, welding, etc., are NOT ALLOWED in certain buildings. Contact the Fire Department at (650) 329-2184for information on permitted uses within the City. 6. Industries discharging processed wastewater down the sewer, such as machining fluid, water from glass washing, chemical neutralization, etc., may be required to obtain an Industrial Waste Discharge Permit from the Public Works Department. For more information, call (650) 329-2122. 7. Police Department approval is required for live entertainment, gaming, massage establishments, and outcall massage services. For more information, call (650) 329-2147. 8. If there is a change of ownership, business name, or location, you are required to obtain a new business registration certificate and are subject to any associated fees and approvals. City of Palo Alto (ID # 6130) City Council Staff Report City of Palo Alto Page 1 Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/15/2015 Summary Title: 2011 League of California Cities Resolutions Title: Approval of the Recommended City Positions for the 2015 League of California Cities Resolutions From: City Manager Lead Department: City Clerk Recommendation Authorize the City’s voting delegate to vote on the four (4) resolutions to be considered at the annual League of California Cities (LOCC) conference to be held in San Jose, XCA from September 30 to October 2, 2015 and approve the general guidance provided below. Background Each year, the LOCC accepts resolutions from member cities and elected officials to be voted on at its annual conference. This year four resolutions have been introduced for consideration at the conference and referred to appropriate LOCC Policy Committees. The voting delegates at the annual business meeting make the final determination on the resolutions. The four resolutions to be considered by the League’s Policy Committees are subject to change in their current form. By approving the recommendations for the resolutions, our City LOCC representatives, Council Member Burt (delegate) and Council Members DuBois and Wolbach (alternates), will have the Council's general guidance for votes to be taken on each resolution and are authorized to vote on amended resolutions in the manner they deem to be in the best interest of the City. Attached for your review is the 2015 LOCC Annual Conference Resolutions Packet. The packet contains the original language of each of the four resolutions in their current form along with LOCC analysis and letters of support. Below for your convenience are tables containing each resolution title, the recommended City position, and the impacted City department(s). AGENDA ITEM 17 City of Palo Alto Page 2 Resolution # 1 Title Resolution Relating to League Bylaws Amendments Regarding Succession of League Offices to Fill Vacancies Recommended Vote Yes Impacted City Departments None Resolution # 2 Title A Resolution of the League of California Cities Calling for Legislation to Preserve Therapeutic Environments for Group Homes and Avoid Impacts of Overconcentration of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Recovery and Treatment Facilities in Residential Neighborhoods Recommended Vote Yes Impacted City Departments Planning & Community Environment Resolution # 3 Title A Resolution of the League of California Cities Supporting SB 593 (McGuire) and Continued Local Flexibility for Cities as they Address Neighborhood and Fiscal Impacts of Temporary Rentals of Residential Units Recommended Vote Yes Impacted City Departments Administrative Services Planning & Community Environment City of Palo Alto Page 3 Resolution # 4 Title Resolution Calling Upon the Governor and the Legislature to Work with League of California Cities to Enact Legislation or to Otherwise Compel Southern California Edison to Create a Program to Automatically Provide Direct Compensation to its Customers Affected by prolonged Electrical Power Outages Under Specified Circumstances. Recommended Vote Abstain Impacted City Departments Utilities Attachments: Attachment: Attachment A: 2015 League Resolutions (PDF)