Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-06-2001 City Council Agenda Packet AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2{ KEEP ONE YEAR OPEN SESSION - 4:30 P.M. .4~DMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM- 13777 FRUITv.~_,E A~"ENUE COMMISSION INTERVIEWS 4:30 p.m. Joshua 4:35 p.m. Jonathan Pwu 4:40 p.m. Elliott Onn 4:45 p.m. Joyce Liou 4:55 p.m. Andy Miller 5:00 p.m. Elise Schwartz 5:05 p.m. Michelle Lin 5:10 p.m. Chen Lin 5:15 p.m. Conway Teng 5:25 p.m. Phillip Baker 5:30 p.m. Anthony Gadd 5:35 p.m. Ross Levin 5:40 p.m. Aaron Blair 5:45 p.m. Kevin Bromage 5:50 p.m. Jill Hunter Youth Youth Youth Youth Youth Youth Youth Youth Commission Youth Commission Youth Commission Youth Commission Youth Commission Youth Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Youth Commission Planning Commission CALL MEETING TO ORDER- 6:05 P.M. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEMS ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION - 6:05 P.M. Conference With Labor Negotiator: Agency designated representative: Dave Anderson, CiD' Manager Employee organization: Saratoga Employees Association Conference With Labor Negotiator: Agency designated representative: Dave Anderson, City Manager Employee organization: Saratoga Management Association Conference With Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code section 54956.9(a)): Name of case: City of Saratoga v. Hinz (Santa Clara County Superior Court Doc. No. CV-784560) Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(b): (1 potential case.) REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 P.M. - CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBE~ AT 13777 FRLrITVALE AVENUE. MAYOR'S REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov't. Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on June 1, 2001) COMMUNICATIONS FROM COMMISSIONS & PUBLIC Oral Communications on Non-Agendized Items Any member of the public will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (39 minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from discussing or taking action on such .items. However, the Council ma), instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. Communications from Boards and Commissions None Written Communications None Oral Communications - Council Direction to Staff b~struction to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. CEREMONIAL ITEMS IA. Commendation for Tannaz Altafi, Youth Commission Recommended action: Present commendation. lB. Cormnendation for Lee Blair, Youth Commission Recommended action: Present commendation. lC. Commendation for Jen Levin, Youth Commission Recommended action: Present commendation. 2 ID. Commendation for Mieka Sywak, Youth Commission Recommended action: Present commendation. 1E. Commendation for Nicolette Kirk, Youth Commission Recommended action: Present commendation. CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar contains routine items of business. Items in this section will be acted in one motion, unless removed by' the Mayor or a Council member. Any member of the public ma3' speak to an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request t_he Mayor remove an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. 2A. Approve Council Meeting Minutes Adjourned Meeting - May 8, 2001 Adjourned Meeting - May 22, 2001 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 2B. Review of Check Register Recommended action: Approve check register. 2C. Authorization to City, Manager to award contract for Saratoga Public LibraD' Project - Temporary Facilities Recommended action: Approve authorization to execute contract. 2D. Authorization to City Manager to award contract to Able Septic Tank Sen'ice for Sanitary Sewer Connection. Recommended action: Approve authorization to execute contract. 2E. Authorization to Ci~, Manager to award contract to Kleinfelder, Inc. fo? Environmental Monitoring of Fuel Tanks Recommended action: Approve authorization to execute contract. 2F. Authorization to City Manager to award of contract to Noll & Tam .architects for Civic Center Master Plan Project Recommended action: Approve authorization to execute contract. 2G. Authorization to City Manager to execute contract with Allison Knapp for Planning Services Recommended action: Approve authorization to execute contract. 2H. Approve the Service Delivery Plan for Law Enforcement Contract and Authorization to City Manager to execute contract w/th County of Santa Clara for FY 2001-02 Recommended action: Approve Plan and authorization to executive contract. 21. Resolution upholding a Planning Commission denial of DR-00-036 (397-05-091) - San Filippo/Sobey Road Recommended action: Adopt resolution PUBLIC HEARINGS (Applicants/Appellants and their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the public may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a total of five minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested for continuance are subject to Council's approval ar the Council meeting) Approval of Engineer's Report and confirmation of Assessments for FY 2001-02 Landscape and Lio~hting Assessment District LLA-1 Recommended action: Adopt Resolution Ordering the Improvements and Confirming Dia~am and Assessments for FY 01-02. Appeal of Planning Commission denial of DR-00-054 & V-01-002 (517-14-087) - Martir~Rose, Kittridge Road Recommended action: Continue Public Heating at the request of City Staff. Resolutions adopting the CiD, Budget for Fiscal Year 2001-02 and 02-03. 1. Recommended action: Conduct the Public Hearing to receive input on the Fiscal Years 2001-02 and 2002-2003 budget; 2. Adopt A. the following resolutions: Resolution of the City Council of the CiD' of Saratoga amending the City's Classification Plan. B. Resolution of the City Council of the CiD, of Saratoga implementing staffing changes and author/zing positions in the City service for FY 2001-02. C. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga establishing the FY 2001-2002 Appropriation Limit. D. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga establishing a schedule of fees. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga adopting the budget for FT 2001-02 and 2002-03 making appropriations and authorizing carryovers thereto and expenditure tlxerefrom. 4 OLD BUSINESS Authorization to City Manager to award contract to Perma-Green Hydroseeding Inc. for Congress Springs Park Recommended action: Approve authorization to execute contract. Septic Abatement Program Status Report Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. NEW BUSINESS Fire Service Enhancement Options Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. Grant Writer Service Providers Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. 10. League of California Cities - Grassroots Network Coordinator Recommended action: Authorize Mayor to submit ballot on behalf of the Saratoga Cid, Council. COMMISSION ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Plannin~ Commission Baker Parks and Recreation Commission Streit Finance Commission Library Commission Mehaffey Bogosian Public Safetv Commission [ Bogosian Heritage Preservation Commission I Waltonsmith Youth Commission '~ Waltonsmith , Gateway Task Force ', Mehaffey : Library Expansion Committee i Bogosian i CITY COUNCIL ITEMS OTHER CITY M.&NAGER'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 5 June 20, 2001 July 4, 2001 July 18, 2001 August 1, 2001 Augustl5,2001 SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Regular Meeting/Council Chambers 13777 Fmitvale Avenue Saratoga, California Regular Meeting/Cancelled Legal Holiday Regular Meeting/Council Chambers 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California Regular Meeting/Cancelled Summer Recess Regular Meeting/Council Chambers 13777 Fmitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 6 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATIN~er AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Commission Interviews for Youth Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION: That Council conduct interviews. REPORT SUMMARY: The following people have been scheduled for interviews: 4:30 p.m. Joshua Pv~a~ 4:35 p.m. Jonathan Pwu 4:40 p.m. Elliott Onn Youth 4:45 p.m. Joyce Liou Youth 4:55 p.m. Andy Miller Youth 5:00 p.m. Elise Schwartz Youth 5:05 p.m. Michelle Lin Youth 5:10 p.m. Chen Lin Youth 5:15 p.m. Conway Teng Youth 5:25 p.m. Phillip Baker Youth 5:30 p.m. Anthony Gadd Youth 5:35 p.m. Ross Levin Youth 5:40 p.m. Aaron Blair Youth 5:45 p.m. Kevin Bromage Youth Youth Commission Youth Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission Commission There are nine (9) vacancies to be filled on the Youth Commission. Youth Commission incumbent Elliott Onn is seeking to be reappointed. The terms for the nine (9) vacancies will expire on July 1, 2003. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLO~qNG RECOMMENDED ACTION: Appointments will not be made to the Youth Commission. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Adopt resolutions and administer Oaths of Office at scheduled Council Meeting. .4DVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: NTA ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A- Applications of the above named applicants. 2 of 3 Memo To~ From: CC: Date: Re: City Council Joan Pisani, Recreation Director Dave Anderson,. City Manager Ma.v 18, 2001 Youth Commission Interviews The following is a breakdown of which youth commissioners w-ill remain on the commission at the end of this school year. The list shows the school they will represent and their grade level in the fall. Commissioner 01-02 School Attending 01-02 Grade Expiration Date James Ballingal Saratoga High School 9~ 7/02 Valerie Famum Saratoga High School 1 ffh 7/02 Christina Siadat Presemation High School 1 ffh 7/02 Ramy Ei-Diwany Prospect High School 1 ffh 7/02 Darrell Wu Lynbrook High School 12~h 7/02 In February 1994, the City Council approved the Youth Commission's recommendation that the commission be limited to 12 seats maximum. Fourteen students are on the current commission. The following commissioners are seeking reappointment: Commissioner 01-02 School Attending, 01-02 Grade Elliot Onn Saratoga High School 9~h Jackie Luskey Saratoga High School 10th Abhik Pramanik Lynbrook High School 11th James Atkin Saratoga High School 12'h · Page 1 The following students are seeking a first time appointment: Applicant Michael Byme Jonathan Pwu Lisa Chu Elise Schwartz 01-02 School .Attending Redwood Middle School Redwood Middle School Redwood Middle School Redwood Middle School 01-02 Grade 7th 8~h 8~h Andy Miller Sacred Heart Middle School 8th Samantha Ri77o Pinewood Middle School 8th Alexander Seroff Lynbrook High School 9th Phillip Baker Miller Middle School 7th Anthony C_radd Valley Christian High School lffh Conw~' Teng Nidhi Bhat Aaron Blair Marissa Byme Michelle Liu Michelle Mighdoll Stephanie Weng Kevin Bromage Saratoga High School Saratoga High School Saratoga High School Saratoga High School saratoga High School Saratoga High School Saratoga High School Saratoga High School 10t~ lffh 10· 10· 10· 11· · Page 2 Joyce Liou Saratoga High School ~ 11a, Chen Lin Saratoga High School 12'h Joshua Pwu Saratoga High School 12~ Ross l.evin Prospect High School 117 In interviewing the new applicants, the following questions might be helpful: 1. What fundraising projects would you suggest the youth commission use for youth services and the Warner Hutton House Teen Center? 2. How would you advertise a youth commission activity at your school? 3. How would you schedule your commission commitment of ten hours per month around your current activities? 4. What aspect of the commission interests you the most? For returning commissioners: 1. What contn'butions have you personally made to the youth commission this year? 2. Do you have an~v ideas for new- programs or fund-raisers for the commission? 3. ~q~.at are your goals in serving another term on the commission? If you have any questions, please feel flee to call me at 868-1250. Thank you. · Page 3 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATIN~ D~ager CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Commission Interviews for Planning Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION: That Council conduct interview. REPORT SUMI~ 'IARY: The following person has been scheduled for interxSews: 5:50 p.m. Jill Hunter Planning Commission There is one (1) vacancy to be filled on the Planning Commission. The terms for this vacancy will expire on April 2005. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Appointment will not be made to the Planning Commission. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Adopt resolutions and administer Oaths of Office at scheduled Council Meeting. .M)VERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Application of the above named applicant. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDAITEM: ORIGINATING ]~EPT: Cit~Ianager CITY I~AGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Commendation for Tannaz Altafi RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present Commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is a commendation for Tannaz Altafi, outgoing Youth Commissioner. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A .M)VERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting o£ the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Copy of commendation. CITY OF SARATOGA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENDING TANNAZ ALTAFI WHEREAS, Tannaz Altafi was first appointed to the Saratoga Youth Commission in June 1996; and WHEREAS, Tannaz has shown great leadership skills during her term as Vice Chair to the Youth Commission for the year of 1999-2000; and WHEREAS, Tannaz has given over 500 hours to the Youth Commission and has demonstrated commitment, dedication, and willingness to work on projects such as serving on the Warner Hutton House Committee, Special Events Committee, Public Relations Committee, High School Activities Committee, and Dance Committee; and WHEREAS, Tannaz has acted as a positive, caring, and supportive member to those newly appointed to the Youth Commission; and WHEREAS, Tannaz has also volunteered many hours with the Recreation Department with the summer day camp program and as a youth basketball coach for two years; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga is proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Tannaz Altafi is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Youth Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future at Santa Clara University. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 6th June 2001. John Mehaffey, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING D~EPT:~lanager CITY MANAGER: DEPT HE.M): SUBJECT: Commendation for Lee Blair RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present Commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is a commendation for Lee Blair, outgoing Youth Commissioner. FISC:~L I3-IPACTS: CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/~A .M)VERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Copy of commendation. CITY OF SARATOGA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENDING LEE BLAIR WHEREAS, Lee Blair was first appointed to the Saratoga Youth Commission in June 1999; and WHEREAS, Lee has demonstrated his leadership capabilities during his term as Secretary to the Youth Commission for the year of 1999-2000 and as Vice Chair to the Youth Commission for the year 2000-2001; and WHEREAS, Lee has given over 200 hours to the Youth Commission and has demonstrated commitment and willingness to work on projects whenever needed and has served on many committees; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga is proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Lee Blair is hereby commended and thanked for his hard work and dedication on the Youth Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish him well in the furore. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 6th June 2001. John Mehaffey, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING ~.EPT: C:~Manager CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Commendation for Jen Levin RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present Commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is a commendation for Jen Levin, outgoing Youth Commissioner. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A .aDVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Copy of commendation. CITY OF SARATOGA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENDING JEN LEVIN WHEREAS, Jen Levin was first appointed to the Saratoga Youth Commission in June 1999; and WHEREAS, Jen has demonstrated her leadership .skills and capabilities while being the Chairperson for the High School' Activities Committee for the years of 2000-2001 and has served on the Public Relations Committee; and WHEREAS, Jen has given over 200 hours to the Youth Commission and has demonstrated commitment and determination on projects such as involving and reaching out to as many Saratoga students as possible; and WHEREAS, Jen was a key element in involving and recruiting students from Prospect high School to participate in the Saratoga Youth Conference; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga is proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Jen Levin is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Youth Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future at Loyola Marymount. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 6th June 2001. John Mehaffey, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING I~PT: Cit3~Manager PREPPdlED BY~ --. _ CITY M.~NAGER: DEPT HE.SD: SUBJECT: Commendation for Mieka Sywak RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present Commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is a commendation for Mieka Ssrwak, outgoing Youth Commissioner. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTI(~N: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Copy of commendation. CITY OF SARATOGA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENI)ING MIEKA SY~VAK WHEREAS, Mieka Sywak was first appointed to the Saratoga Youth Commission in June 1999; and WHEREAS, Mieka has demonstrated her leadership skills and capabilities while being the Chairperson for the Dance Committee for the years of 2000-2001; and WHEREAS, Mieka has given over 200 hours to the Youth Commission and has demonstrated commitment and willingness to work on projects such as serving on the Warner Hutton House Committee and High School Activities Committee. WHEREAS, Mieka has devoted much of her time to bringing the Safe Ride program to Monte Vista High School and because of her commitment to teens in Saratoga, Monte Vista began its involvement in the Safe Ride program in April 2001; and WHEREAS, Mieka has also involved herself in many of the City's recreational programs and has been employed by the City since 1999. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga is proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, hereby commended and thanked for her hard work Youth Commission; and that Mieka Sywak is and dedication on the BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future at Santa Clara University. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 6th June 2001. John Mehaffey, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING I)~EPT: CiD' Manager PREPARED B~ CITY MANAGER: DEPT HE.M): SUBJECT: Commendation for Nicolette Kirk RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present Commendation. REPORT SUM~-L4~RY: Attached is a commendation for Nicolette Kirk, outgoing Youth Commissioner. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A .M)VERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Copy of commendation. CITY OF SARATOGA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENDING NICOLETTE KIRK WHEREAS, Nicolette Kirk was first appointed to the Saratoga Youth Commission in November 2000; and WHEREAS, Nicolette has given many hours to the Youth Commission and has demonstrated commitment and willingness to work on projects whenever needed; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Saratoga is proud of the citizens who contribute time and talent to our community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Nicolette Kirk is hereby commended and thanked for her hard work and dedication on the Youth Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we wish her well in the future at San Francisco State. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 6th June 2001. John Mehaffey, Mayor City of Saratoga SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATIN~ PREPARED BY~'~ [,LK.~~ --~--- AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: City Council Minutes RECOMMENDED ACTION: .Approve minutes as submitted for the following City Council Meeting: Adjourned Meeting- May 8, 2001 Adjourned Meeting - May 22, 2001 REPORT SUMMARY: N/A FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Retain minutes for legislative history. .ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Minutes/May 8, 2001 Attachment B - Minutes/May 22, 2001 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING JOINT SESSION YOUTH COMMISSION SARATOGA BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MAY 8, 2001 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned Council Meeting on May 8, 2001 ai the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Pro Tem Baker called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. and requested James Atkin, Chaff/Youth Commission, to lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENrr: ABSENry: .ad_.SO PRESENT: Councilmembers Ann Waltonsmith, Evan Baker, Start Bogosian Vice Mayor Nick Streit, Mayor John Mehaffey Dave Anderson, City Manager Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Joan Pisani, Director of Recreation Lauren Merriman, Staff Liaisor~?fouth Commission REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR IYLAY 8, 2001. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code agenda for the meeting of May 8, 2001 was properly posted on May 4, 2001. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC No one spoke at tonight's meeting. JOINT MEETING WITH YOUTH COMMISSION Section 54954.2, the Mayor Pro Tem Baker welcomed the Youth Commission. Joan Pisani, Director of Recreation thanked the Council for giving the Youth Commission the oppommit): to meet with them. The following Youth Commission members were present: IJames Atkin, Chair [ Saratoga High School I . Tannaz Altafi ] Saratoga High School ! iJames Ballingal Redwood Middle School I Darrell Wu Lvnbrook High School Director Council Ramy E1 Diwany Valerie Famum Nicolette Kirk Elliott Onn Jen Levin Christina Siadat Jackie Luskey Abhik Pramanik Mieka S?~'ak Lee Blair Saratoga High School Saratoga High School Archbishop Mitty High School Redwood Middle School Prospect High School Presentation High School Saratoga High School Prospect High School Monta Vista High School Saratoga High School Pisani noted that the Commissioners would like to take this opportunity to inform the City about their recent acti,dties and fund raising efforts. OVERVIEW OF THE YEAR- 2000-2001 James Atkin - Youth Conference Chair Atkin noted that on March 30, 2001 the Youth Commission held its first Youth Conference. Chair Atkin pointed out that Assemblymember Cohn was the keynote speaker. He explained that the surrounding schools were invited to discuss and brainstorm issues that might concern today's youth. Chair Atkin noted that the Youth Commission is planning another conference sometime in August. Tannaz Altafi - Warner Hutton House Commissioner Altafi reported that 65-80 students fi.om St 3mdrews, Sacred Heart, Redwood, and Rolling Hills -~4sit the Warner Hutton House after school. The average visit is approximately one hour. Commissioner Altafi reported that 20 teens stay at the Warner Hutton House until it closes at 5:30 p.m. Commissioner Altafi invited the City Council to the Warner Hutton House BBQ on June 13, 2001. James Ballingall - Attic Renovation Commissioner Ballingall reported that renovating the attic in the Warner Hutton House would add 1,000 sq. ft. of study area and 600 sq. fi. of extra storage space. Commissioner Ballingall explained that the proposed renovation would consist of converting the attic into one big study/computer room, and adding a few individual and goup study areas. Commissioner Ballingall noted that a few years ago Gilbane Construction donated a flee estimate of the proposed attic renovation. Commissioner Ballingall noted that at the time Gilbane Construction estimated the total cost of $170,000.00. Darrell Wu - Skateboard Park Commissioner Wu reported that the Youth Commission has had many discussions on the issue surrounding building a skateboard park in the City of Saratoga. Commissioner Wu noted that the Youth Commission feels a skateboard park is a necessity and if directed by the City Council, the Commission would do all the research for construction and possible sites. City Council Minutes 2 Ma)' 8, 2001 Ramy E1 Diwany- Safe Ride Commissioner E1 Diwany reported that Safe Ride was established in 1999. Commissioner E1 Diwany noted that Safe Ride provides approximately 10 rides per night. It is run by teens with one adult to supervise. All rides are confidential. Valerie Farnum - Street Dance Fundraiser Commissioner Famum reported that last year the Youth Commission made approximately $1,800.00 selling glow necklaces at Celebrate Saratoga. Commissioner Farnum noted that the Commission helped set up for Celebrate Saratoga and in return the Chamber of Commerce waived booth fees. Nicolette Kirk - Friends of the Warner Hutton House Commissioner Kirk noted that this year Friends of the Warner Hutton House received $9,600.00 during their annual appeal. Commisisoner Kirk stated that all donation are tax deductible. Commissioner Kirk informed the Council that some of the money that is received helps offset the cost of the Recreation Coordinator. Elliott Onn- Rotary_ Art Show Fundraiser Commissioner Onn reported that this year the Rotary Club offered the Youth Commission $10.00 per hour per person to help at their annual art show. Commissioner Onn reported that they had 22 volunteers including Youth Commissioners and various other friends and family members. The Commission made $1,200.00. Jen Levin - School Diversi[y of Commission Commissioner Levin reported that the Commission tries hard to communicate to all of the surrounding schools and include them in all of the events sponsored by the Youth Commission. Commissioner Levin reported that a recent dance several Miller students attended. Christina Siadat - Events (girls ovemight, concerts, etc.) Commissioner Siadat reported that the Youth Commission had a ~rls only sleepover at the Wamer Hutton House. The Youth Commission made $300.00. on this event. Commissioner Siadat noted that this year the Commission has had two concerts - both generating approximately $250.00. Commissioner Siadat announced that on May 16th the Youth Commission would receive 10% of the total eamings during the hours of 5-9 p.m. at McDonald's in the Westgate Shopping Mall. Jackie Leskey - Future Ideas Commissioner Leskey commented briefly on the follov~4ng ideas the Youth Commission would like to implement this year: · Skateboard park · Music Festival at Wildwood Park · Coffee House Night at the WHH, including poetry reading and music · %rHI-I open during finals week · Surv4val/Real World parties · Smoothie Booth once a week at the WHH · Fashion Show CiB' Council Minutes 3 May 8, 2001 Abhik Pramanik - Website Commissioner Pramanik noted that he designed the website to help communicate to the youth in this area. He noted that some schools do not allow the Youth Commission to advertise upcoming events. Commissioner Pramanik briefly demonstrated the website, located at v~x¥~'.saratoe, ayouth.com, he designed for the Youth Commission. Commissioner Pramanik explained that the site would include current information pertaining to the Youth Commission such as upcoming dances, concerts, trips, and positions available on the Commission. Councilmember Bogosian asked why some schools do not allow advertising, and if the. Commission cannot advertise how do the teens find out about upcoming events. Director Pisani responded that the Cupertino Union School District would allow the Commission to advertise their events only if the City of Saratoga provided fee waivers. Commissioner Pramanik noted that some teens find out about upcoming events by word of mouth. City Manager Anderson noted that the Youth Commission would like to have a link to their website on the City's site. Mieka Sywak- Dances Commissioner Sywak reported that the Youth Commission has sponsored six dances so far this school year. Commissioner Sywak noted that Ma3' 11,2001 would be the last dance. Commissioner Sywak noted that in December the Youth Commission sponsored it's first formal dance. Commissioner Sywak reported that after expenses, the Commission made $3,500.00 a profit fi:om that dance. Lee Blair- Dance Curfew Commissioner Blair reported that there is an ongoing problem with parents not picking up their teens after dances and other events sponsored by the Youth Commission.. Commissioner Blair noted that sometimes parents are up to two hours late. Commissioner Blair noted that usually someone fi-om the Commission would stay and wait for the teen's parents to arrive. Commissioner Blair stated that the Youth Commission feels it is not their responsibility to stay, but they do not want to leave a teen unattended. A discussion took place on the number of teens that are left after events are over and possible reasons why. Commissioner Blair explained that the Youth Commission Proposes an amendment to the curfew ordinance; perhaps if the parents do not arrive V2 hour after the event ends the teen should be turned over to the SherifFs Department. Mayor Pro Tem Baker requested that the Youth Commission agendize this issue at the Youth Commission's next meeting and report back to the City Council at a later time. Every member of the City Council expressed their appreciation for the hard work and effort demonstrated by the Youth Commission. City Council Minutgs ~. May 8, 2001 Mayor Pro Tem Baker adjourned the meeting with the Youth Commission and commenced the meeting with the Saratoga Business Development Committee at 7:50 p.m. JOINT MEETING WITH SBDC 2. OVERVIEW OF THE YEAR- 2000-2001 Marilyn White, President/SBDC, thanked the Council for allowing the SBDC to meet with them tonight. Ms. White explained the SBDC is made up of business owners and managers fi.om the Village, Gateway, Prospect, Quito, Argonaut, and home based businesses. The mission of SBDC "Is to act as a forum for businesses and residents to air problems and develop solutions". Ms. White noted that the SBDC has been active for over six years. Ms. White highlighted key issues discussed at the SBDC meetings since January 2001: · Economic Development Coordinator position · Village Renovation Project · Beautification Project on Big Basin · Tree Trimming schedule · Planting more low maintenance trees · Eagle Wing Theatre - search for a new venue · Ener~ conservation efforts Ms. White reported a few brainstorming ideas the SBDC have been discussing such as: · Generate mission statement Develop a Traffic Circulation Plan for Village · Identify, historic buildings in the downtown area · Retail/Commercial buildings v~-4th residential units above Ms. White noted that the SBDC would like to work more closely with the Chamber of Commerce. Ms. White noted that the SBDC hopes to attract more representatives fi.om home based businesses and other businesses that are not currently represented on the SBDC. Bill Cooper, SBDC/Owner, Bella Saratoga, noted that the directional signs for the wineries have been installed and they look great. Councilmember Bogosian asked how the SBDC views the current parking situation in the Village. Ms. White responded that the there seems to be inadequate parking during the day and sufficient parking at night. Ms. White noted that Village business owners have expressed that inadequate employee parking is their biggest concern. Ci~' Council Minutes 5 May 8, 2001 Mr. Cooper noted that there are more offices in the Village, which has caused part of the current parking problem. Councilmember Bogosian asked Ms. White how the dowxttown merchants reacted to the decorative lights being shut off. Ms. White responded that everyone misses the lighting. Ms. White reminded everyone that the SBDC meets every 4th Wednesday at 8:00 a.m. in the Administrative Conference Room at City Hall. Mayor Pro Tem Baker thanked the SBDC for coming tonight. Mayor Pro Tem Baker adjourned the meeting with the SBDC and requested a ten-minute recess. Mayor Pro Tem Baker reconvened the meeting at 8:25 p.m. and commenced the meeting with the Chamber of Commerce. JOINT MEETING WITH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Patti O'Brien, Executive Director, thanked the Council for the oppommity to meet with the Chamber of Commerce. OVERVIEW OF THE YE.Mi- 2000-2001 Ms. O'Brien presented a brief overview of the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce: * Not-for-profit organization · Acts as a liaison be~veen the City and it's membership · Recognized as the voice of the business community · 21- member Board of Directors · 60-70 volunteers Ms. O'Brien noted that the Chamber provides direct sen, ices and pro,ams to help businesses and the community. One of the Chamber's main objectives is to enhance the quality of life through economic prosperity. Ms. O'Brien noted that the Chamber is made up of an Executive Board of Directors, an Advisory Board, and several committees. The Chamber of Commerce currently has 395 members. Ms. O'Brien explained that not only does the Chamber of Commerce provide resources and sen, ices for the business community; the Chamber also has become a tourist and information center. Ms. O'Brien noted that the Chamber of Commerce sponsors and offers financial support for the following community events and organizations: · 4th of July Celebration · Village Open House Ci~' Council Minutes 6 '- May 8, 2001 · West Valley Community College Events · Saratoga High School Music Boosters · The Saratoga Rotary Club · Hakone Gardens · Shakespeare in the Park Ms. O'Brien noted that Celebrate Saratoga is scheduled for September 15, 2001. Ms. O'Brien commented that tourist information and inquiries have doubled from the previqus year, which encouraged them to develop a'new website located at ~¥~v.saratoeachamber. org. Ms. O'Brien noted the followSng publications that the Chamber provides: · Saratoga map · Relocation package · Business Focus Newsletter · Economic and Development Profile · Director5, to Public Officials · Guide to Saratoga · Cal/OSHA Workplace Poster Set · Fact Sheets on Saratoga Ms. O'Brien noted that one of the most popular Chamber of Commerce products has been the Directory and Relocation Guide. Twelve thousand copies were published in 2000-2001. In February 2000, approximately 9,000 copies were delivered to Saratoga businesses and residences. Based upon popular demand 15,000 copies will be distributed for 2002-2003 Director'),. Ms. O'Brien explained that this year the Chamber xvould like the City to contribute $33,404.56 to help offset various costs to nm the Saratoga Chamber of Commerce. Ms. O'Brien explained that in return the City would receive a cover headliner on the 2002-2003 Directory, 25 pages of community promotions, updated map, and product delivered to 10,000 residents and businesses. Councilmember Bogosian questioned the current funds the City pays for the Chamber of Commerce. City Manager Anderson responded that the City covers: · Building lease agreement · City maintenance workers help xvith Celebrate Saratoga · Paid PG&E · Provides and installs decorative lighting in the Village. A discussion took place in regards to the current funds the City already allocates towards the Chamber of Commerce and the current lease value of the Chamber building. Councilmember Bogosian questioned if the Chamber Board has taken a stand in regards to the recent issues surrounding the proposed stadium at West Valley College. Ci~' Council Minutes 7 May 8, 2001 Ms. O'Brien responded that the Board has not taken a position on that issue and has no plans to do so in the future. Councilmember Waltonsmith commented that she was glad to see the Chamber taking a new direction and staying a'`x, ay from the political forum. Councilmember Bogosian noted that las[ year the Chamber was asked to provide the City Council with sales tax generated as a result from the Chamber's functions and historical trend on membership. Ms. O'Brien noted that she ,,,,,as-not aware of the request, but will see that a report is provided to the Council in a timely manner. Ms. O'Bfien noted that this year the Chamber's membership increased by 95 ne'`,,' members. Monica Bailey, Board of Director/Chamber of Commerce, requested that the City provide sales tax data on the City of Saratoga. City Manager Anderson noted that it is against state lax'`: to provide individual business records, but if formally requested he could provide the top ten. Judy Coulter, Board of Director/Chamber of Commerce, noted that the cost of the decorative lights and the PG&E bill has nothing to do with the Chamber of Commerce and should not be held against them. Mayor Pro Tem Baker thanked the Chamber of Commerce for coming tonight and reminded Ms. O'Brien to attend the May 16th City Council meeting when the expenditure side of the budget would be presented. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that there is a public meeting scheduled for June 7, 2001 to discuss the Trail Feasibility Study along the Union Pacific Railroad. OTHER None CITY M.AxNAGER'S REPORT None City Council Minutes 8 May 8, 2001 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Mayor Pro Tern Baker declared the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. - - Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk Cit).. Council Minutes 9 May 8.2001 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED MEETING JOINT SESSION SARATOGA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT MAY 22, 2001 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in open session in the Administrative Conference Room at 5:00 p.m. to inter~,iew applicants for the Finance Commission, Heritage Preservation Commission, and the Planning Commission. The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a scheduled Adjourned Council Meeting on May 22, 2001 at the Adult Care Center, 19655 Allendale Avenue. Mayor Mehaffey called the Adjourned City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and requested Mary Gardner, Superintendent/SUSD, to lead the Pledge of Alle~ance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Ann Waltonsmith, Evan Baker, Stan Bogosian Vice Mayor Nick Streit, Mayor John Mehaffey ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk Joan Pisani, Director of Recreation REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR MAY 22. 2001. Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of May 22, 2001 was properly posted on May 18, 2001. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC The following people spoke at tonigtht's meeting: David Dolloff, 20685 Sigal Drive, reported that the FACT Committee would be filing a citizen complaint with the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury in regards to the Saratoga Fire District. Mr. Dolloff distributed a copy of the citizen complaint form to the City Council requesting them to review the form. Mayor Mehaffey noted that the Saratoga Union School Board has a scheduled board meeting commencing at 8:00 p.m. and requested that the joint meeting v,4th the District begin and continue oral communications afterwards. Consensus of the City Council to continue Oral Communications after the joint meeting with the SUSD. Mayor Mehaffey welcomed Saratoga Union School District JOINT MEETING XVITH SARa. TOGA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT 2. Introduction Stephanie Petrossi, President~/SUSD, thanked the City Council for the oppommity to meet with them. Ms. Petrossi introduced the follov~Sng Board members: Cindy Ruby, Bonnie Yamaoka, Eileen Kao, and John Waite. Ms. Petrossi introduced Mary Gardner, Superintendent/SUSD. Status of MOU Ms. Gardner briefly explained the District's accomplishments of the MOU betSveen the District and the City of Saratoga. Ms. Gardner noted that in regards to Saratoga High School the District has satisfied the agreement with the City. In regards to Redwood Middle School the traffic study still needs to be produced and submitted to the City to improve traffic circulation and congestion. Traffic Issties Ms. Gardner noted in regards to the current traffic problems at Redwood Middle School the District recently contracted with Fehr Peers to evaluate the District's new traffic flow. The District is also consulting with ALTRANS to continue to investigate ways to implement bussing and carpool programs. Ms. Gardner noted that Fehr & Peers opposed the proposed idea of adding a separate turn lane on Fruitvale into the school parking lot. Fehr & Peers reported that an additional mm lane would not be safe. Vice Mayor Streit asked if and xvhen the SUSD implements a bussing program would the District be willing to extend the use to St. Andrews and Sacred Heart. Ci~' Council Minutes Ms. Gardner responded that she did not think those schools were interested in a bussing program. City Manager Anderson noted that St. Andrews and Sacred Heart have a representative on the School Transportation Task Force and suggested that at the next meeting Ms. Gardner should take that oppommity to discuss the bussing issue with them. School Construction Pro~ess Report Ms. Petrossi reported that construction is still active at Saratoga High School and Phase I of construction has been completed at Redwood Middle School. Ms. Petrossi noted that construction at Argonaut and Foothill School should be completed by 2002. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the current estimate for all of the construction is over $5 million and the bond that was passed was for only $2.2 million. Councilmember Bogosian asked ho'`'`: the District planned on making up the difference. Ms. Petrossi responded that there are three ways they could back fill the bond money: 1) developer fees 2) state bond money 3) extend current bond. Ms. Petrossi explained that when the Master Plan was adopted and the bond ,,,,:as passed the City's demographics increased tremendously. The increase in students requires the District to provide more classrooms than predicted in the Master Plan. Teacher Housing Cindy Ruby, Boardmember/SUSD, briefly explained some proactive initiatives that the Teachers Housing Committee were doing: Developed a website with house listings · Sponsors seminars on such topics as first time home buyers, individual financing, and equity sharing · Requested the City Council to allocate $2 million dollars to start a loan program Lisa Liu, 20291 Merrick Drive, noted that the Teachers Housing Committee has repeatedly requested the City Council to assist the Committee in finding ways to solve the affordable housing issue. Ms. Liu noted that the City Council has not provided any answers nor have they made any decisions on allocating any money for housing programs. Ms. Liu requested that the City Council express some opinion to let the Teachers Housing Committee know their position in regards to their proposals. CiB' Council Minutes 3 May 22, 2001 Mayor Mehaffey noted that the Council would address this issue in the Housing Element. Councilmember Waltonsmith noted that although the City Council has not verbally responded to the Teachers Housing Committee, it does not mean that the Council is not concerned about affordable housing. Councilmember Bogosian stated that he is unwilling to tie up $2 million dollars of the City's funds during a time of an unstable economy. Councilmember Bogosian suggested that the Saratoga Union School District reevaluate teacher salaries. Ms. Petrossi noted that the Board is aware of the fact that the District is loosing several teachers, but their salaries are benchmarked accordingly. Use of Park and Recreation Funds Ms. Petrossi questioned if Park Development funds would still be used to renovate the playfields at Foothill School. Vice Mayor Streit, Council liaison to the Parks and Recreation Commission, noted that Foothill School is no longer on the Parks and Recreation Commission's agenda. Vice Mayor Streit explained that the City staff has been preparing Redwood Middle School's fields for the AYSO season while the fields at Congress Springs are under construction. Vice Mayor Streit also reported that funds would be allocated to renovate Azule Park and upgrade the City's playground equipment. Vice Mayor Streit noted he would communicate the District's questions and concerns to Parks and Recreation Commission and request that this issue be agendized at a future meeting. Ms. Petrossi asked if Parks & Recreation funds could be used to install a bike path around the Redwood Middle School. Mayor Mehaffey requested that this issue also be agendized at a future Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Mayor Mehaffey thanked the SUSD for coming tonight. COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC The following people spoke at tonight's meeting: Bill Morrison, 20135 Chateau Drive, reported that on Mother's Day a Saratoga Fire District paramedic called in sick, and while the District tried to find a replacement, they eventually had to call County Fire and request the use of one of their paramedics for the day. Cit3.: Council Minutes 4 May 22, 2001 Gale Morrison, 20135 Chateau Drive, stated strongly that she feels the citizens of Saratoga would benefit more if Saratoga Fire District merged with the County. Mrs. Morrison noted as a wife of a Saratoga firefighter she is extremely worded of her husband's safety. Mrs. Mordson stated that her concern is that the District does not have enough manpower to properly protect her husband. Ed Farrell, 20877 Kittridge Road, noted that he recently received a newsletter published by the Saratoga Fire District. Mr. Fan'ell noted that the newsletter mentioned the ~:o reports on fire safety wTitten by the Public Safety Commission and DMG Maximus. Mr. Farrell explained that the District bragged about the adequacy of their ser~4ces. Mr. Farrell requested the City Council to make a decision to accept or reject the Public Safety Commission's report on fire protection sen'ices. Mayor Mehaffey noted that the report given to the City Council by the Public Safety Commission is, by default, accepted. Mayor Mehaffey noted that on June 6, 2001 staff would be presenting to the Council fire sen:ice options. Beverly Phipps, 15270 Norton Road, indicated he does not understand the conflicts of opinion in regards to a second access trail on Bohlman Road. Mr. Phipps noted that Chief Kraule of the Saratoga Fire District agreed that the proposed trail would benefit the residents, but unfortunately the Public Safety Commission said the existing road is unsafe and the grade is too steep to connect a second access trail. David Dolloff, 20685 Sigal Drive, commented that the proposed second access trail is a straight shot and is half the grade of the existing road - it is a straight shot. Mayor Mehaffey noted that staff is preparing a report to Council on the options and costs for a second access trail on Bohlman Road. NEW BUSINESS Friends of the Library - Fee Waiver Request Recommended action: Grant request. Joan Pisani, Director of Recreation, presented a brief staff report. Director Pisani pointed out that the library renovation project is scheduled to begin in August, thus creating a problem for the various groups who use the community rooms on a regular basis. Director Pisani pointed out that several of these groups would be displaced for approximately 18 months during the construction project. Director Pisani noted that several groups have found temporary facilities to use but there were still a few groups who have had difficulty finding alternative sites. Cit? Council Minutes 5 May 22, 2001 Director Pisani reported that several groups have recently requested the use of the Recreation Department for their monthly meetings, events, classes, etc. Director Pisani noted that recently the Friends of the Library have requested to use the Recreation Center for an upcoming book sale, free of charge. Director Pisani noted that a similar request has come from the library staff to use the patio room at the Recreation Center or use the Warner Hutton House to accommodate the children's story time program. Director Pisani noted that waiving the rental fee for any group is lost revenue to the Recreation Department's budget. Councilmember Waltonsmith-questioned that if the attic in the Warner Hutton House was renovated it could accommodate story time and other such programs. Director Pisani responded that the attic would be an ideal place to hold events such as story time. Councilmember Bogosian explained that the Friends of the Library hold a few book sales a year with profits up to $4,000.00. During the upcoming library construction project the Friends have nowhere to hold their book sales. Councilmember Bogosian explained that the Friends contribute a lot of money to the City for various purposes and would soon be contributing funds to purchase most of the new' furniture for the temporary library facilities. Councilmember Bogosian noted he fully supported the Friends request for a fee waiver. Mayor Mehaffey noted that non-profit groups are required to pay half the cost of the rental fee to use the Recreation Center. Mayor Mehaffey suggested that perhaps the same policy could be applied to the Friends of the Library. Councilmember Bogosian noted that the Friends cannot afford to pay the high hourly fee but perhaps Director Pisani and the Friends could negotiate a fair rental fee. Mayor Mehaffey requested that staffwxite a policy addressing the use of the Recreation Center during the library's construction project. BAKER/BOGOSIAN MOVED TO GRANT A FEE WAIVER TO THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY FOR THE USE OF THE RECREATION CENTER. MOTION PASSED 5-0. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Waltonsmith requested that the process to renovate the attic at the Warner Hutton House attic be expedited. Cit' Council Minutes {5 Ma)' 22, 2001 Councilmember Baker noted that one of the problems of renovating the attic is finding a place to construct a second stairway. Councilmember Bogosian requested thatthe Warner Hutton House be added to the CIP project list. Mayor Mehaffey noted that an elevator should also be included in the attic renovation, and noted that the use of CDBG funds could pay for it. Councilmember Waltonsmith suggested that the Council 10ok into purchasing the property currently ovmed by the US Post Office adjacent to the Sheriff Office. Councilmember Waltonsmith requested placing this item on a furore Council agenda. Councilmember Bogosian noted he supported Councilmember Waltonsmith's request. Councilmember Baker noted that he received a notice announcing the Strawberry Festival. The notice indicated that the event would be held at West Valley College on June 9-10, 2001. Councilmember Baker suggested staff contact the Sheriff's Department and request that the surrounding neighborhoods be noticed about this event. Mayor Mehaffey requested a status report on the email the Council received in regards to a cabana house being build at 21842 Via Regina Road. City Manager Anderson responded that that issue has been directed to the Community Development Department for further investigation. OTHER None CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager .Anderson announced that Lori Tinfow accepted the position as Assistant City Manager. Ms. Tinfow will start on June 25, 2001. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathleen Boyer, CMC City Clerk Ci~' Council Minutes 7 May 22, 2001 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY: DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Check Register RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Approve the Check Register. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is the Check Register. FISCAL IMPACTS: None CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): None ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Check Register Certification. Date Manual Void Total 5111101 Checks Checks IFund# Fund Name AP CHECKS A85092-85245 1 GENERAL 404,254.06 100 COPS-SLESF 110 Traffic Safety 150 Streets & Roads 30,627.96 160 Transit Dev 170 Hillside Repair 180 LLA Districts 2,462.70 250 Dev Services 36,535.45 260 Environmental 14,421.01 270 Housing & Comm 8,380.90 290 Recreation 12, 861.05 292 Facility Ops 315.00 293 Theatre Surcharge 1,508.90 300 State Park 310 Park Develpmt 578.85 320 Library Expansion 42,301.51 400 Library Debt 410 Civic Cntr COP 420 Leonard Creek 700 Quarry Creek 710 Heritage Prsvn 720 Cable TV 730 PD #2 740 PD #3 800 Deposit Agency 9,621.00 810 Deferred Comp 830 Payroll Agency 990 SPFA ISubtotal PAYROLL CHECKS: B26620-26653 11,881.79 17.28 563,868.39 11,899.07 TOTAL JPrepared by: Date: I^pproved by: I C~O o . ~~~oooooo ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~o ........... oooooooooo~o ~ ~o ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~o ~ooooooo ...... ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ............... ~ o o oo~° ~°o o ~o ~ z ~ ~ ~ ° ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ H~ ,~o 0 o ~0 o~ O0 o o o o o oo o o o o o oo o~o ~ ~ o ~ oo ~ ~ o ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~o o~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ mo~ ~ ~o Mo ~o ~o ~ ~oo o ~o oo ~o ~oo ~ o ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... § § o § o o o ~0 o o O~ g o ~ o g ..... o o o o o oooo ::~::::::o oooooo ...... ~o DO 0~- rj 0 ooooooocooooooooooooo DO O~ oo ~o ~o ~ ~ ~ ° ~o ~ oooo ~ ~ mo mo ~o o oooo ~o ~o ~o ~o ~ 0 ~E-, E-Z nO <° o u E-, ~0 O~ oo ~oooooooooo ~ ~ ~° ~ ~°° ~ o~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ o ~ z z ~ ~~ z z ~0 ~0 ;> ~°~ ~ ' , oo o Zo o o o g § o o o § o o o DE.-. C DO O~ '~-D v< ~0 ~g ~> o oo o oo o oooooo o ooooo o o oo o ~ ............ ~ ~ oo oo o oooooo oooo =oo § ~oo o gg§§§§ § ooooo ~0 o~ ~C 8= ~ ~ ~ o o o (~0 O~ oo o O~ ~0 0 :: oo 0 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY: Q 217 - DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Saratoga Public Library Project- Temporary Facilities,Award of Construction Contract RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): 1. Move to award a construction contract and lease agreement to William Scotsman Modular Buildings in the amount of 256,017.16, and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. 2. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $46,600. REPORT SUMMARY: Sealed bids for the Saratoga Public Library Project - Temporary Facilities were scheduled to open on May 31. Unfortunately, no bids were received on the project. Interviews with the plan holders suggested various reason for not submitting bids. They ranged from too many current projects to being uninterested in participating in the public bid process. However, staff was able to negotiate a construction contract and lease agreement with William Scotsman Modular Buildings of Vacaville in time to award a contract at tonight's Council Meeting. With the legal bid process completed, and no bids received, the City was able to legally negotiate with interested contractors in a less formal manner. William Scotsman was the only responsive bidder, who was interested in the work, willing to agree to the conditions and design requirements of the contract. The following is a breakdown of the construction contract, lease, and contingency amounts: • Furnish, erect, and dismantle temporary library: $140,881 (includes elec. opt.) • Lease for 16 months @ 7,196/month: 115,i16 Total $256,017 • Construction Contingency: $25,000 • Contingency for an additional 3 month lease period: ?1,600 Total $46,600 FISCAL IMPACTS: Funding for this work is programmed in the adopted budget in C.I.P. No. 0103 (Library Expansion) —Account No. 4010 (Contract Services). CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The contract would not be approved and the Temporary Library Project.would not go forward at this time. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): Re-bid the project. However, staff does not believe re-bidding the project will attract bids due to the comments received from the plan holders. Additionally, the timeline for the Library Expansion Project will be negatively affected if the project is re-bid. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): The construction contract and lease agreement will be executed and the contractor will be issued a Notice to Proceed. Work will begin as soon as possible and completed by August 10, 2001. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: None. 1 I BID PROPOSAL IFOR ICITY OF SARATOGA SARATOGA PUBLIC LIBRARY PROJECT - TEMPORARY FACILITIES IBASE BID SUMMARY W I L L I i tik SC..O-Mil JI-JU IITEM ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED UNIT TOTAL NO. QUANTITY PRICE I I 1. Furnish, erect, maintain and dismantle one LS 1 N/A Temporary Library Facility(Trailer Complex) for use as the Saratoga Library temporary I location during construction of the new Saratoga Public Library. I2. Lease Duration shall be between 16 and 19 Month 16 dependent on completion date of //S /3( /6 the new Saratoga Library(August 1, 2001 Ithrough November 30, 2002 or August 1, 2001 through February 28, 2003). I 7 . , 7 ���' i2V7?�� /‘ TOTAL BASE BID - iw,,,,L. �,,�,�,07,Mfr, v,c ;,�„ ,2/E nn ITEMS 1- 2 G¢L�`y I Bidders must provide bids for all Base Bid items for this bid proposal to be considered responsive. Partial bid proposals will be considered non-responsive and will be rejected. I The City will award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder complying with the instructions in the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids. The lowest bidder will be determined on the basis of the total of the Base Bid items alone. If the product of an estimated quantity and unit price for an individual bid I item does not equal the total amount bid for that bid item, the unit price shall govern and the corrected product shall be deemed to be the total amount bid for that bid item. If the sum of the individual item totals does not equal the total base bid, the individual item totals shall govern and I the corrected sum shall be deemed to be the total base bid. I i s 6-1'"?) 41-9--..1°'L/ - . Pti /?.17 - 4,zEte 1 4-11 Sal?-eJj_IA :f. c?5-C'''Lga e,:x.,4_, e:ex"..,v.,z e(e_e_. .21;4.4 4„ .r;,{2 't;:a4-4"--(A---',-17/ Alie_,&/, e_e„.6`,,,,„e_ irf‘.5-W t& / e-7„th - isyoz89, (y /3Y8Z2 --- £S"9 ///. 6 I CITY OF SARATOGA 01-Jun-C Temporary Library OPTIONS SCOTSMAI' 6,480 SQ FT ONE STORY BLDG. Mobile Offices and Mc SEC. DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL PER SQ DIV. 1 GENERAL CONDITIONS NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 2 SITEWORK NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 3 CONCRETE NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 4 MASONRY NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 5 METALS NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 6 WOOD& PLASTICS NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 7 THERMAL& MOISTURE PROTECTION NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 8 DOORS &WINDOWS NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 9 FINISHES NOT APPLICABLE DIV.10 SPECIALTIES NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 11 EQUIPMENT NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 12 FURNISHINGS NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 13 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 14 CONVEYING SYSTEMS NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 15 MECHANICAL NOT APPLICABLE DIV. 16 ELECTRICAL PLYWOOD BACKERBOARD $294.00 COMPUTER JACKS WIRED $4,235.00 PATCH PANELS [COMPUTER AND TELEPHONE $471.00 PUNCH DOWN TO PATCH PANELS $1,059.00 SUBTOTAL $6,059.00 $0.� SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6. 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY: Paula Reeve DEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: Sanitary Sewer Connection - Award of Contract to Able Septic Tank Sen'ice RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Move to award a contract to Able Septic Tank Service in the amount of $13,870.24, and Authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City. REPORT SUMMARY: The City Council allocated $87.270 of FY 99/00 Community Development Block Grant funds to assist low-income Saratoga residents to comply with the sanitary sewer connection ordinance. Staff is currently working with one qualified Saratoga resident who recently acquired a permit from the West Valley Sanitation District to start the project at his residence. Three proposals were received from construction companies specializing in connecting residences from the sanita~' sewer line to the properties, and abating current septic systems. Of the three, Able Septic Tank Sen:ice presented the most cost effective bid, and has a reliable and professional reputation for providing construction sen'ices of this nature to other Saratoga residents who were required to comply with the ordinance FISCAL IMPACTS: Funding for this work is programmed in _the adopted budget in Activity 7015 (HCDA Administration) - Account No. 4070 (Grants to Other Agencies). CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING: The Saratoga resident will be unable to comply with the requirement to abate his septic system and connect to the sanitary sewer. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing Additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Able Septic Tank Service Contract. "FOR ALL YOUR UNDERGROUND NEEDS" MARCH 27, 2001 RO. Box 24819 San Jose, CA 95154 (408) 377-9990 PROPOSAL/CONTRACT AC 00-081 NAME: ADDRESS: CITY~ZIP: SITE: HOME: INSTALLATION OF SANITARY SEW~ER/LATERAL/PROPERTY LINE C/O: SCOPE OF WORK AS FOLLOWS: 1. INSTALL 38'LINAEL FEET 4" VCP SANITARY SEWER LATERAL . 2. INSTALL ONE PROPERTY LINE CLEANOUT AS PER WVSD. 3. INSTALLATION OF APPROXIMIATLY 200'LINAEL FEET OF 4" ABS SCHEDULE 40 PIPE, (TO BE USED AS BUILDING SE~'"R) 4. INSTALL CLEANOUTS THROUGHOUT TRENCHLINE AS PER CITY OF SARATOGA BUiLDiNG DEPARTMENT. 5. INSTALL CL~.ANOUT BOXES TO GRADE . ( BOX TYPE = CHRISTY). 6. COFL~ACT ALL TRENCHES. METHOD OF COMPACTION TO BE MECHANICAL. 7. INSTALL BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE. 8. ROUGH GRADE ALL SOIL IN AT SITE. (ON SITE SOIL ONLY) 9. OFF HAUL SPOILS RELATED TO SEW~R LATERAL INSTALL ONLY ( ASPHALT ,DIRT ETC. }. 10.CO-ORDINATE WITH THE CITY~COUNTY INSPECTOR FOR ALL INSPECTIONS. II.ABLE TO PROVIDE CONNECTION AT MAIN. (NOTE ABLE INSTALLED STUB 1 YR. PRIOR) 12.ABLE TO REPLACE SECTION OF SIDEWALK REMOVED FOR LATERAL INSTALL. I3.ENSDq~E ASPHALT RESTORATION. INCLUDES 2'X 7' AREA OF DRIVET*'AY 14.$_~LE TO SUPPLY ALL NEEDED TRAFFIC CONTROL (FOOT TRAFFIC INC.)- IS.ABLE TO CALL USA 48 HOURS MIN. PRIOR TO EXCAVATION 16.ABA~NT OF ONE SEPTIC TANK AS PER CITY OF SARATOGA GUIDELINES. TOTAL COST PER ABOVE SCOPE OF WORK: $ 13,870.24 THIS BID EXCLUDES THE FOLLOWING: ALL ENGINEERING. ALL PERMITS. REPAIR OF ANY UNMARKED LINES (GAS, WATER, TELEPHONE, CABLE, ELECTRIC, ETC). ALL CONCRETE REPLAC'EMENT. ALL ASPHALT REPLAC'EMENT (OTHER THAN TRENCH LINE~STREET). SOIL'S ENGINEERING~SOIL 'S TESTING. BOND' S OR CD ' S. SEPTIC · SEWER · STOR.%I · V,:ATER · UTILITY TRENCHING · DE.%IOLITION · GRADING · PAVING · SEPTIC SYSTEMS - PU31PED · REPAIRED · INSTALLED · DESIGNED · INSPECTED · UPGRADED · REAL ESTATE WORK PAGE 2 ABLE SEPTIC TANK PROPOSA~ AC # 00-0079 ANY CHANGES OR' DEVIATION FROM THE BID, INVOLVING EXTRA MATE"RIAI~ 'S OR .LABOR WILL. BE EXECUTED ONLY ON WRITTEN ORDER AND WILL BECOFIE AN EXTRA CHARGE OVER THE ABOVE COST OF PROPOSAL. 10% DO~, 40% PROGRESS PA~T, BALANCE PAYABLE UPON COFIPLETION OF JOB. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL THE CONTRACT/PROPOSAL IS ACCEPTED, PAYMENT WILL BE MADEAS OUTLINED. CUSTOFIER SIGNATURE: CONTRACTOR'S SIGNATURE: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works PREPARED BY:. ~ O_~~-"~ SUBJECT: Proposal for Environmental Engineering Sen, ices for the Saratoga Corporation Yard Fuel Leak Mitigation Project. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S)' Approve proposal from Kleinfelder, Inc. in the amount of $14,500 for design and engineering services for the Saratoga Corporation Yard Fuel Leak Mitigation Project and authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Sen'ices Agreement for the same. REPORT SUMMARY: Back._oround Pursuant to a leaking UST (underground storage tank) at the Ci~, of Saratoga Corporation Yard, the City acted to perform repairs to the tank, and to restore the surrounding contaminated soil. The repair effort occurred during 1997, with final certification for the successful tank cleanup received in 1998. Following the tank repair, a fuel leak was found in the line bem:een the fuel island and the storage tank. The leak was promptly stopped. Upon investigating the soil around the pipe leak, small (2 PPM) amounts ofMTBE, a gasoline additive, were detected. This finding resulted in the Santa Clara Valley Water District opening an investigation of the site. To satis~, and close the investigation, the City, must show that no contamination is present in the surrounding soil. In order to comply with the SCVWD, a licensed consulting firm must perform an environmental investigation. Because of staff and organizational changes within the City, the project has been postponed for the past 4 years. The SCVWD has extended the work plan deadline until a City Council decision has been reached. In order to avoid penalties, and to ensure that the costs of the project will be reimbursed by the State, the City's compliance effort should begin immediately. Discussion Over the past 2 months, staff has been working on the retention of a qualified design consultant for the project. The City received four design proposals. The costs of the design proposals are summarized as follows: · Levine-Fricke: · Kleinfelder, Inc. ATC Associates, Inc. · Hoexter Consulting, Inc. $16,555.00 $14,500.00 $12,000.00(approximate) $8,284.00(10,333.00 contingency) Kleinfelder, Inc. provided the most thorough and well-researched proposal package of the four consultants, and has demonstrated extensive experience both in underground municipal storage tank projects within Santa Clara County, and working directly with the SCVWD to satisfy' their requirements. Additionally, the consultant will provide assistance in preparing the State application that will allow the City to recover project costs. Given the unpredictable nature of fuel leak cleanup projects, it is believed that Kleinfelder, Inc.'s experience overrides the cost advantage of the lox,,, bidder for this project. It is therefore recommended that Council approve a proposal from Kleinfelder, Inc. for design and en~neering services for the Corporation Yard Fuel Leak Mitigation Project, and authorize the City Manager execute a Professional Sen, ices Agreement for the same. Work will commence as soon as an agreement is executed and is scheduled to be complete by early October 2001. FISC.-M_, IMPACTS: Funding for this work is programmed in the adopted budget in Program 5015 (Storm Water Management), Account No. 4013 (En~neering Services). CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The proposal would not be approved and the project would not move forward at this time. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None in addition to the above. FOLLOVq UP ACTION(S): A professional services agreement will be prepared staff and executed by the City Manager. 2 of 3 ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Work Proposal for the Saratoga Corporation Yard Fuel Leak Mitigation Project 3 of 3 Proposal to Prepare Preliminary Site Assessment Workplan, ' Subsurface Investigation for Soil and Groundwater Sampling, and Write Final Report of Results. Presented by: ~ KLEINFELDER April 13,2001 KLEINFELDER April 13, 2001 File: 12-YP9672 Mr. Morgan Kessler City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 SUBJECT: Scope and Fee Estimate for Preliminao, Site Assessment Workplan, Subsurface Investigation, and Preparation of Final Report; City of Saratoga Corporation Yard, 19700 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga, California ' .O Dear Mr. Kessler:. Kleinfelder Inc. (Kleinfeider) is pleased to submit this scope and fee estimate in triplicate (3) to the City.' of Saratoga (Ci~') for a preliminaD, site assessment work plan, subsurface investi~oation, and preparation of a final report for the above referenced project. This information is submitted in response to the CiG"s Request For Proposals (RFP) dated April 4, 2001 No addenda have been received for this RFP. · Kleinfelder. and more specifically this project team, has relevant public corporation yard experience from several Bay Area projects including: - Milpitas- UST Investigations and Removals; Fremont- Corp. Yard Development; San Pablo - UST Investigation and Removal San Francisco MUNI - Hazardous Materials Assessments; Union SanitaD. District - UST Investigations; Ha3~vard Unified Schools - UST Removal and Replacement; and Dixon - UST Investigations and Remediation. From this experience, the Ci.ty of Saratoga benefits from a full knowledge not only of the technical aspects of the work, but the Corporation Yard's operation. ' Scope of Work and Schedule Kleinfelder has prepared a specific scope of services in response to the City's RFP. Our scope includes the three required tasks in the RFP. We have included an additional t~sk for supplemental work that may be necessary to bring the site to closure. Our scope of services is described in Section IB. Additional services to consider include assistance with the State of California's YP9-672(1211P073)dc 362 Ridder Park Drive. San Jose, CA 95131-1571 (408) 436-1155 '.408) 436-1771 fax Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (USTCF), which will reimburse the Cit3' for most of the costs of assessment and remediation. Kleinfelder is familiar with the USTCF and we are prepared to assist the CiD' staff in applying for reimbursement. We have included a draft schedule in Microsoft Project in Section I.D of the proposal. Fee Estimate Based on the current scope of services, Kleinfelder has developed a worksheet of estimated costs for each task (Section III). We will perform our services on a time and materials basis, not to exceed the total amount authorized. Task 4, titled Other Related Services, is intended to be used if additional ~vork is requested. For example, if significant groundwater impacts are found, additional site assessment or a risk based corrective action (RBCA) tier 1 risk evaluation may be necessaD' to bring the site to closure. Kleinfelder is committed to providing quali~ service to its clients, commensurate with their wants, needs and desired level of risk. If a portion of this proposal does not meet the needs of the CiD' of Saratoga, or if those needs have changed, Kleinfelder will consider appropriate modifications, subject to the standards of care to which we adhere as professionals. Modifications such as changes in scope, methodolog3', scheduling, and contract terms may result in changes to the risks assumed by the City, as well as adjustments to our fees. Sincerely. KLEI~TELDER, [NC. Project Manager Paul A. Baginski, P.E. Area Manager '- '- '- ::- .... rI2-~'Pg'6'/2'~t 2~'1P0"/3~)4c",. -- ...... ~ ...~...~'"-,.. San :~e CA "5~3~-':-': .. , :408 436-! 155 ~4,D8,-'26-i771_ [ax Cin' q~ Saratoga TABLE OF CO:'¥TENTS I. STATEMENT OF U~DERSTANDING AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ....................... 1 A. SCOPE OF SERVICES ..................................... ~ ....................................... -. ............... 2 Task 1: Preliminary Site Assessment Workplan ............................................................. 2 Task 2: Subsurface Investigation in the Source Area ..................................................... 3 Task 3: Preparation of Final Report ................................................................................ 5 Task 4: State Cleanup Fund Reimbursement Assistance ................................................ 5 B. LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................... 5 C. DtL~kFT PROJECT SCHEDULE ............................................................................... 6 II. STAIEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................ 7 mo B. C. III. FItLM DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................... 7 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS ...................................................................................... 9 KEY PERSO.~EL .................................................................................................. 16 PROPOSED FEE ........................................................................................................ 17 12-YPO-672(1211P0731dc k~21 K L E I N F E L D E R CiO' of Saratoga Quality solutions for environmental engineering projects come from well managed, focused efforts on the part of the design team, coupled with a clear vision of client needs and desires. Site Walk: Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder) has carefully reviewed the Request for Proposal. and discussed the scope of sen'ices with the City of Saratoga (CID') Public Works Department. Mr. Morgan Kessler, in a meeting and site walk-through on April 10, 2001 at the Corporation Yard site.. Based on the site walk, we see that the site is easily accessible for a drill rig. and no overhead utilities will be encountered during drilling. The site is currently equipped with an underground unleaded gasoline storage tank (UST), an above ground diesel storage tank (ASI) and a trailer storing compressed natural gas (CNG). The diesel tank has double-contained underground piping going to a fuel island. Ihe diesel and gasoline tanks share a dual dispenser at the fuel island (one dispenser for both diesel and gasoline). The CNG trailer dispenses from a separate system outside of the yard. Three monitoring well covers are installed within about 20 feet of the UST. One of these appears to be filled with dirt; the depths and screen intervals of the other two wells are not known. Telephone Conferences with RegulatoR' Agency: To become more familiar with the site histoD', Kleinfelder's project manager called Ms. Rita Chan of the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), the lead regulatory agency for the cleanup. We discussed, at length, the site histoD'. City scope of work, and various aspects of the upcoming work. By becoming more thmiliar with the site status. Kleinfelder will provide the City with a focused and competitive proposal. Based on our discussion, we now understand the following about the site: ,- Previous Investigations: Ihe SCVWD has little or no records of previous investigations at the site. They are requiring the current subsurface investigation for that reason. · - Direct Push Drilling Method: Kleinfelder plans to use direct push drilling, which generates less cuttings than ccnventional hollow-stem auger methods. Direct push drilling is limited in depth to about 40 to 50 feet, depending on soil types. Ihe SCVWD concurs with this approach for the City site. ,- Depth to Groundwater: The SCVWD does not have a nearby fuel leak site in their GIS system to ascertain local depth to groundwater. Ms. Chan anticipates that groundwater may be fairly deep (more than 40 feet). We can drill to 40 feet below ground surface (bgs): if we encounter groundwater, we will sample it. If we do not encounter groundwater, then we will use soil sampling results to evaluate site stratigraphy and possible barriers to vertical fuel migration. -- Determining Groundwater Flow Direction: If groundwater is not encountered in our investigation, the SCVWD will accept an estimate of groundwater flow direction based on topography, influences from the nearby creek, and regional groundwater flow. ,,- Permits: The drilling will require a permit from the SCVWD's Community Projects Review Unit. because drilling will occur within 50 feet of Wildcat Creek. ,- Analysis for Fuel Ox?'genates: The SCVWD will require at least one groundwater sample (if obtained) to be analyzed for fuel oxygenates. This test method is EPA Method 8260B, and was not mentioned in the City RFP. I:-YP9-672(I:llP073)dc 1 kqZl K L E I N F E L D E R City q/'Saratoga MTBE Analysis: MTBE was the only constituent detected in the sample collected from the sand backfill under the dispenser. Ihe analytical laboratory did not use mass spectrometer (MS) confirmation for MTBE in the analysis. It is well documented that false positives for MIBE can be reported when this confirmation is not used. It will be important therefore to use an analytical method that confirms presence (or absence) of MTBE in samples. Existing Wells: The two existing monitoring wells near the existing USI are probably vapor monitoring wells, and thus would not extend to groundwater. Therefore. it's likely that they cannot be used to assess the groundwater flow direction. A. SCOPE OF SERVICES Based on the above observations, review of the RFP, suggestions, and assumptions, we have developed the following scope of sen, ices for the subsurface investigation at the City' site. This scope of sen'ices may need to be modified based on data review, field observations, analytical testing results, etc. Kleinfelder has reviewed closely the RFP, including its attachments. We understand that the work plan (Task 1) is due on May 31, 2001. If we receive written authorization to proceed by May 24. we can complete the work plan by May 31. The scope of work, as stated in the RFP. includes the following three tasks: 1. Prepare a Preliminary Site Assessment Workplan, per SCVWD guidelines. 2. Perform a subsurface investigation at the source area to determine the horizontal and vertical extent of contamination, and if groundwater has been impacted. ,- Determine groundwater flow direction (see telephone notes above): .- 2 - 3 borings total; ,- Drill to groundwater: -- Sample for gasoline constituents eveW 5 feet: and ,- Sample groundwater for gasoline constituents. 3. Prepare a final report documenting the perlbrmance and results of the subsurface investigation, per SCVWD guidelines. Task 1: Preliminary Site Assessment Workplan The first activity will be to assemble and review all available information regarding the site, including as-built fueling system drawings, documentation of gasoline UST upgrade work previously' performed, site maps. operating records of USTs including documentation of all known leaks from existing UST systems, and pertinent fire/environmental agency files. Gathering and reviewing this information as a first step on the project will avoid "reinventing the wheel". After gathering the background information, Kleinfelder will prepare a preliminaD' site assessment work plan and submit it to the SCVWD for the City site under this task. An outline of the plan based on SCVWD's "General Guidelines for PreliminaD' Site Assessment Workplans" is included below. -- Cover page: Title, site name and address, responsible party name, date and consultant. 12-YP9-672;1211P0731dc 2 ~! K I. E I N F V I. D t R Ci~' q£ Saratoga Introduction: Objective, scope of work, site information, current and previous property owners/tank owners/operators, description of business activities (past and present) at the site, release history, including volume estimate, tank inventory (capacit3,' and contents), previous investigative work performed. -- Site Description: Vicinity, land use, topography, Wildcat Creek. detailed site map, site geology?aydrogeology, current and historical depth and elevation of groundwater (not known here), current and past groundwater flow gradient (not known here), onsite and adjacent offsite underground utilities. Sample Collection Plan:. Proposed soil sample locations and depths (for lithologic logging and chemical analysis), proposed groundwater sample collection and depth to water measurements, proposed analyses, EPA Method numbers of analyses proposed, discussion of sample collection methods and equipment, sample handling and shipment procedures. Schedule: Start and completion dates to achieve overall work plan objectives, start and completion dates for task milestones (drilling/sampling and reporting). proposed submittal date for report. PerjuD' Statement and Professional Signatures Schedule: Perjury statement. P.E. or R.G. signature and stamp, and other information specifically required by the District (none). Task 2: Subsurface Investigation in the Source Area The subsurface environmental investigation, sampling and analysis activities proposed by Kleinfelder under task 2 are detailed in this section. Kleinfelder proposes to use a direct-push sampling rig. We anticipate that this type of equipment will be capable of penetrating the on-site soils to a depth of about 40 feet to allow collection of soil and groundwater samples. Direct push sampling is more cost-effective than conventional hollow-stem auger drilling because it greatly reduces drill cuttingS. The depth to groundwater in the area is not immediately known, but may be deeper than 40 feet. The maximum boring depth is anticipated to be 40 feet bgs. If groundwater is encountered, it will be sampled. If groundwater is not encountered, then lithologic sampling and chemical analytical results will be Used to assess soil and possible groundwater impacts. The RFP stated that "2 - 3 borings total" would be drilled. In our experience, three borings should be achievable in one 8-hour day. The additional data from a third boring would be helpful in o_aininu site closure if minimal soil and groundwater impacts are found. Therefore we propose to drill three borings in our limited subsurface investigation. The proposed sampling locations will be presented in the work plan (Task 1). Generally the borings will be located near the fuel island and downhill from, but close to. the UST area. Prior to sampling, we recommend using a private utility locating service to identi~' utilities in the areas of planned boring locations. We w'ill utilize as-built drawings to the extent possible, but also recognize that as-builts do not always represent all underground utilities that may be present a~ the Corp. Yard. Soil samples will be collected ever).' five feet for lithologic logging purposes. Soil samples for chemical analysis will be collected (at a minimum) from 5 feet below ground surface (bgs), 10 feet bgs, and 1-2' above the ~oundwater table (if encountered). 12-YP9-6'2~1211P073~dc 3 I~qE! K L E I N F E L D E R C:'n' q/'Sw'a.~oga The RFP states that samples are to be anal>zed ever2,,' five feet. In our professional opinion, sampling every five feet will not be required, but soil samples should be screened for impacts in the field. Soil samples collected for logging purposes (ever3' five feet) from the borings will be screened in the field using a photoionization detector (PID). If significant hydrocarbon impacts are indicated based on PID readings, odor. or visual inspection, then additional samples will be submitted for analysis. Additional soil samples can be held at the laboratoD' pending our receipt and review of analytical results. Our costs presented below include analysis of four samples (three soil and one ~oundwater) from each boring. Groundwater samples also will be collected from each boring for laborator3' analysis (if groundwater is encountered). Our subsurface investigation will focus on those concerns known at the time of the investigation..analysis of the soil and groundwater samples from borings will be analyzed for one or more of the following: ,- Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BI£X), and methyl tert-buD'l ether (MTBE) by EPA Method 5030/8015/8020: ,- Confirmation of elevated MTBE detections by EPA Method 8260 (recommended to avoid false positive M/BE results): and -- Fuel oxygenates by EPA Test Method 8260B (~oundwater samples only) as required bv the SCVWD based on our conversation with Rita Chan. Following groundwater sampling, temporar3' piezometers will be constructed in the three borings to allow for groundwater surface elevation measurements as follows. In each boring, a temporaD' 3A- inch slotted PVC casing and solid PVC riser b-ill be inserted. Ihe surface will be secured and sealed with bentonite. The tops of the casings will be surveyed and tied into a local datum. After approximately 3 to 7 days (after ~oundwater elevation stabilizes), groundwater surface elevations will be measured with a calibrated water level meter. Within a week following installation, the temporary piezometers will be removed and the borings grouted with a neat cement mixture {..one 94-pound bag of Portland cement to 5 gallons of water) from the bottom of the boring to the ground surface. The investigative-derived wastes (IDWs). including but not limited to soil cuttines and decontamination water (probably one drum of each) generated will be contained in Unitec~ States Department of Transportation (DOT)-approved 55-gallon drums. The drums will be left on site. lhe Client has the ultimate responsibility of disposing of the drums and their contents. Soil borings less than 45 feet deep generally do not require SCVWD permits. However. at the City site. drilling will take place within 50 feet of Wildcat Creek. The SCVWD will require approval from the Community Projects Review Unit for this activity. Also, the SCVWD may require a well completion permit (at their discretion) for the temporary piezometers. This permit would need to be obtained through the SCVWD's Well and Water Production Unit. We have assumed that no fees will be required for drilling permits. We have assumed that up to four hours of professional time will be needed for SCVWD permitting. 12-YP9-672{1211P073}dc 4 k~l K L E I N F E L D E R Ci0' of Saratoga '~ Task 3: Preparation of Final Report Kleinfelder will prepare a report of findings documenting the subsurface investigation activities. This report will be outlined in the work plan (Task 1). The report will follow SCVWD guidelines, and will contain, but may not be limited to, the following items: All background information from the work plan; ,- A description of the field activities associated with the investigation, including bofingsampling procedures, sampling intervals, and analyses conducted on soil and ~oundwater samples: Variations (if any) from the approved work plan; ,- A site plan showing the location of the soil borings; ,- Groundwater flow direction and elevation contours (if groundwater is encountered): ,- Tabulated analytical results for soil and ~oundwater sampling: ,- Soil boring logs; ,- Certified analytical laboratory reports, including chain-of-custody records; and ,- Conclusions and, if warranted, recommendations for additional investigative activities. Task 4: State Cleanup Fund Reimbursement Assistance Kleinfelder anticipates that other related sen'ices may be needed in the performance of work on this site that cannot be scoped at this time. Services under this task may include preparation of a Risk-Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Tier 1 Risk Evaluation to assess health risk from residual hvdrocarbons remaining in soil and groundwater: or drilling of groundwater monitoring wells (if significant groundwater impacts are detected or suspected). The City mav request assistance pursuing reimbursement from the California Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (USTCF) for site investigation and remediation costs. Kleinfelder has worked recently on over five hundred UST investigation and remediation projects in the USTCF. We are familiar with the Fund's administrative requirements and will assist the City in obtaining reimbursement for eligible costs. B. 1.1 \ll'I'.VYIONS The scope of services described here is not intended to be inclusive, to identify all potential concerns, or to eliminate the possibility of environmental problems. Within current technology, no level of assessment can show conclusively that a property or its structures are completely free of hazardous substances. Therefore, Kleinfelder cannot offer a certification that the property is clear of environmental liability. During the course of the performance of Kleinfelder's services, hazardous materials may be discovered. The Client will be solely responsible for notifying all governmental agencies, and the public at large, of the existence, release, treatment or disposal of any hazardous materials observed at the project site, either before or during performance of Kleinfelder's sen'ices. Kleinfelder will assume no responsibility or liability' whatsoever for any claim, loss of property 12-YP9-672(1211P07Mdc 5 k~ KLIr I N Fl: t D F R CiO' q!'Saratoga value, damage, or injury which results from pre-existing hazardous materials being encountered or present on the project site, or from the discovery of such hazardous materials. Kleinfelder offers a range of engineering sen'ices to suit the varying needs of our clients. Although risk can never be eliminated, more detailed and extensive engineering yields more information, which may help understand and manage the de~ee of risk. Because such detailed services involve greater expense, our clients participate in determining the level of service that provides adequate information for their purposes at an acceptable level of risk. Acceptance of this proposal will indicate that you have reviewed the scope of service and determined that it does not need or want more sen'ices than are being proposed at this time. Any exceptions should be noted and may result in a change in fees. Kleinfelder will perform its services in a manner consistent with the standards of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession practicing under similar conditions in the geographic vicinib' and at the time the sen, ices will be performed. No warranty or guarantee. express or implied, is part of the sen'ices offered by this proposal. We have assumed that this project does not require payment of prevailing wage to site workers. C. DRAFT PROJECT SCHEDULE I ID Task Name I Duration 1 !Notice to Proceed from City 0 days · Prepare Work Plan 4 days SCVWD Review 20 days : ~re-Field Acbvities (Permits) 15 days Dri!hng 1 day i Laboratory Anaiys~s 5 days RePot: ~reparation 15 days i City Review 10 days SCVWD Review 20 days Mar 2nd Quarter ,pr I Uayl Jun ~ 5/24 5128 II 5131 611 [ 6~28 6~22 [--~ 7/12 7~27 I 7~27 !7/30 ~ 813 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Ju [AuglSep Oct I Nov 1 I I 1 I 8/6 ~ 8/24 J 8/27 J~. ! ~/lO I '! lOl5 I 2-YPg-672:i211P073~dc 6 k~q=~ K L E I N F F L D E R Cin' qf Saratogu ~ A. FIRM DESCRIPTION Kleinfelder is an employee-owned, multi-disciplinaD: consulting firm with specialized expertise in environmental engineering and science as related to investigation, remediation and restoration of USTs, environmental compliance, health risk assessment, air quality, engineering design, water resources and solid waste. We are a leader in these fields, as evidenced by our ran-king in the "Top 100' in Engineering News Records' survey of the "Top 500 Engineering Firms" in the nation. Established in 1961, Kleinfelder has since expanded to its current size of over 1.400 employees in more than 55 offices and laboratories strategically located throughout the western United States. Kleinfelder's team of engineers and scientists has completed over 500 UST and ASI projects in just the past ten years. Our clients include public agencies, school districts, universities, airports, hospitals, federal facilities, national and state parks, prisons, Fortune 500 corporations, and small businesses. Sites have ranged fDm comer gas stations, transportation and maintenance yards to essential facilities such as fire and police stations and other emergency facilities where uninterrupted day-to-day operations are a design requirement. Our UST investigation and remediation experience includes site sur~'eys and investigations: remediation planning: permitting: plans, specifications and estimates: bid support: construction support: and cleanup option evaluation. We are also a licensed contractor for these sen-ices. In addition our team has designed and installed numerous UST and AST fueling systems manv with remote tank monitoring (telemetD'). card lock and fleet management systems. Kleinfelder is experienced with all federal and state regulatoD' requirements that could potentially apply to both above and below ground fuel system projects. These include RCIL&. CERCLA. OSHA. NFPA, UBC. UFC. NEC, NEPA, and California and Santa Clara County requirements for UST svstem upgrades, replacements, and closures. Kleinfelder is capable of producing high quality graphics. CAD. and technical publication materials for submission to clients. Our specifications, reports, and drawings frequently are used by public agencies for procurement of services. Kleinfelder's experience, regulator).' knowledge. and graphics capabilities enal:le UST/AST projects to run smoothly and without delay. What Separates Kleinfelder From Their Competition? Kleinfelder is a consulting firm with hands-on professional experience in the following areas: Environmental Engineering, Geotechnical Engineering, Materials Iesting, Construction Management and Air Quality Sen'ices. These sen'ices are provided in each of Kleinfelder's 10 San Francisco Bay .&rea regional offices. What does this mean to you? Because Kleinfelder can provide all aspects of a project's needs, it saves you time and reduces your costs. i2-YPO-672~i211P073)dc 7 ~1 K I. E I N I: I: I. D I: R CiO' ql'Saratoga Kleinfelder is a multi-disciplinary engineering firm that has been providing sen, ices for the public sector and privat~ clients since 1961 as a result we will be around tomorrow. Our local presence allows us rapid access to our clients' project sites. Kleinfelder's knowledge of local geologic and soil conditions is important in developing a suitable scope of sen'ices and a range of potential solutions. Furthermore, Kleinfelder's extensive knowledge of local regulations and familiarity with regulators maximizes project efficiency to minimize cost. Kleinfelder is an employee-owned business. The lon~evitv of the firm offers stability to employees. Kleinfelder enjoys a veD, low attrition rate, and as a consequence, benefits from the invaluable professional experience employees gain from a diverse client base. FEATURES )~\'D BENEFITS OF USING KLEINFELDER Engineering Set, ices DesignBuild Permming Plans & Specifications Construction Management Remedial Investigation & Design Operation and Maintenance Geotechnical Engineering E x perienced Professionals Remqter~d Engineers and Geoloeists Regulatoo' Experts I,~ulr~ ant Experience UST AST system design build UST Remoxal UST System Up,adc System Ex aiuation Lo~ Maintenance Contract ,~ith a single point of contact Complete Ser~ ices from start to finish Cost Effective project engineering ~ ith state-of-the-art products. "No Learning Curve" On-time delixerx of qnalib products ~ith ~ork performed right the first time 12-YP9-672t1211P073}dc 8 k~ KLEINFELDER Cin' of Saratooa B. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS The Kleinfelder team has prepared plans and specifications, site suv~'eys, site investigations, and provided oversight for over 500 UST removals and replacements. As a consultant to many major oil companies (e.g., Mobil Oil, Unocal, and Texaco), state and local agencies (Contra Costa Count..--', Ci~' of San Pablo, City. of Milpitas, Cib' of Santa Monica, and Ci~' of Dixon. etc.), and hundreds of private clients, we have extensive experience in all aspects of underground storage tank removal.; replacement, leak characterization, and corrective action. The following section describes ten featured projects relevant to the sen'ices 'required by the Ci~'. Below is a Project Experience Matrix that provides additional projects to reflect relevant team experience: Project Experience City of San ;~aD~o Ip'es~'t ! vt J;4'=~-;:i / / vt vt vt ,/ d d vt vt d ./ vt d !d ha~ard Unified Sch~; Distrim vt vt vt C~vof Mi!pr. as =.ese=t! vt vt vt vt C,'ty of Santa Momca ,'Design/Build) jzresen: vt vt vt vt v/ vt Lawrence Ber~(eley Labs Jc'~;:; vt / vt / vt Co,ornD;a A~rpo.'1. CItyof DixOn :~ ~'~J~: :' vt Contra Costa County ~995 vt Sacred hea.-. Jesu:', Center Napa Ga,-Dage Service ='-ese'-t vtvt vt vt vt vt Texaco Morgan H;I Fm'f~e.:~-S~;:sun S~-mool Distr~ vt vt Monsanto-Cams~ :V vt vt · vt vt vtjvt / / / / v' / vt / ~ vt / : / vt / / / ,/ / ,/ vt ,/ / vt vt vt vt / vt Los Ga~os Gas Star,or J i 19c~;~ Santa C'uz Port g~;;~ l SCVW~-Guaca~u~e ~,ver J Deluxe Chec, Prm[ers Pr,~cm~-Santa C~ara San Jose Gas Sim:ohs (3) J ~ KLEI~FELDER ]2-YP9-672(]:] lP07$'~dc 9 k'~! K L E I N F E L D E R CiO' qf Sal'atoga Ci~' of San Pablo Pubic Works Department: Plans & Specifications - UST System Removal and Upgrade, Subsurface Investigation Date of Completion: 1998 Reference: Mr. Scott Christie, Ci~' of San Pabio Telephone Number: (510) 215-3057 Kleinfelder was retained by the City of San Pablo, California, to provide engineering sen'ices for the investigation, upgrade, removal and replacement of underground storage tanks' (UST) at the City's corporation yard located at 1500 Fols.om Avenue in the City of San Pablo. The City operates three USIs at the corporation yard. One UST contains diesel and has a capacity of 1.000 gallons, and two USIs contain gasoline with capacities of 2,000 and 3.000 gallons. respectively. The City requested that the design up~ades meet all current local, state and federal UST regulations, including new federal and state regulations for UST upgrades enforced in December 1998. The fueling system upgrades included: two double walled steel and fiberglass wrapped tanks (one 1.000-gallon diesel tank and one 5,000-gallon gasoline tank), doubled walled piping. modular automatic tank gauging system, fuel management system, and design of new fuel island and pad with overhead canopy. Kleinfelder's scope of work included a preliminaD' data review; subsurface investigation consisting of three soil borings and soil and groundwater sampling: preliminaD' design evaluation: development of a final design basis; preparation of 30%, 90% and 100°.4 design drawings for the removal: replacements and upgrade: preparation of engineer's construction cost estimate: preparation of plan and specification bid documents: bid support: permitting and environmental services. Based on existing data, Kleinfelder assumed that other related services max' be required in the performance of scope of work. Services under this task included the preparation of a Risk Based Corrective Action Tier 1 Risk Evaluation. to assess the potential health risks from fuel hydrocarbons that may remain in the soil and groundwater following construction, tour on-site monitoring well, soil sampling, groundwater well development, and four rounds of quarterly groundwater sampling per year. Havxvard Unified School District: Plans & Specifications - UST System Removal and Upgrade Date of Completion: 1998 Reference: Mr. Robert White. Hav~'ard Unified School District Telephone .Number: {510) 784-2666 Kleinfelder was retained by the Hayward Unified School District (Ha3xvard, California) to provide engineering services for the investigation, upgrade, removal and replacement of underground storage tanks (UST) at the District's maintenance facility located at 24400 Amador Street in the City of Ha.,,~'ard.. The District currently operates two 10,000-gallon USTs at the site. One UST. containing diesel, is a single walled steel tank, and one UST, containing gasoline, is a single walled fiberglass tank. All product piping is single walled. The District requested that the design upgrades meet all current local, state and federal UST regulations, including new federal and state regulations for UST upgrades enforced in December 1998. The fueling system upgrades included: double walled steel and fiberglass wrapped tanks :2-YPg-672(!211P073}dc 10 !~21 K [ I: I N I: I: I. D I: R (same capacity) and doubled walled piping, modular automatic tank gauging system with remote auto-dial fax and modem capabilities, re-installation of the existing card reader fuel management system and design of a neb' fuel island collection.sump to meet the requirements of Best Management Practices for the CiB' of Hayxvard and Alameda County. Kleinfelder's scope of work included a preliminary data review; subsurface investigation at each of the tb'O tank locations to assess the potential for soil and ~oundwater contamination from UST and piping releases; evaluation of existing UST systems and development of a final design basis; preparation of 30%, 90% and 100% design drawings for the removal: replacements and upgrade: preparation of engineer's construction cost estimate; preparation of plan and specification bid documents;, bid support; permit acquisition; construction management and testing sen'ices; and system start-up. Based on existing data, Kleinfelder assumed that other related services may be required in the performance of scope of work. Services under this task included the preparation of a Risk-Based Corrective Action Tier 1 Risk Evaluation. to assess the potential health risks from fuel hydrocarbons that may remain in the soil and groundwater following construction, drilling and installation of monitoring wells, post-construction assistance with new monitoring systems, etc. CiD' of Milpitas Public Works Department: Subsurface Investigations, Plans Specifications for UST and AST System Upgrades and Removals Date of Completion: 1998 Reference: Ms. Carol Randisi, City of Miipitas Telephone .Number: (408) 586-2601 and Kleinfelder was retained by the City of Milpitas, California to provide engineering services for the investigation, upgrade, removal and replacement of USI svstems at seven sites within the City. /he sites included two fire stations, two well sites and three pump stations. The USIs ranged in volume from 550 gallons to 2,500 gallons. The planned activities at each site included the following: Pi,tewood II'ell Site: Removal of the existing 1.500-gallon UST and replacement with a 1.000- gallon US/and a new 25-gallon day tank to fuel diesel pump motors. Ma~a'/inn ti'ell Site: Removal of the 550-gallon USI and backfill and compaction of excavation. Fire Station No. 2: Removal of the 550-gallon UST and replacement with a 1.000-gallon ASI for fire-truck fueling and new 25-gallon day tank to fuel an emergency generator. Fire Station No. 3: Removal of the 550-gallon UST and replacement with a 550-gallon ASI and new 25-gallon day tank to fuel emergency generator. Bern'essa Pump Station: Removal of the 1,000-gallon UST and replacement with a 1,000-gallon UST and neb' 50-gallon day tank to fuel diesel pump motors. Bellew Pump Station: Upgrade existing 2,500-gallon US/ with overfill and overspill protection and strike plates. 12-YPg-672(1211P073~dc II k~l K[I:I N Fl:ID I: R Cin' q/'Saratoga Penitencia Pump Station: Upgrade existing 1,000-gallon UST with overfill and overspill protection, new vent pipe, and strike plates. Kleinfelder's scope of work included a preliminary' subsurface investigation at each site to assess the potential for soil and groundwater contamination from UST of piping releases: evaluation of each existing UST systems and development of a final design basis; preparation of 30%, 90% and 100% design drawing for the removal, replacements and upgrade; preparation of plan and specification for bidding; and QA/QC oversight during construction. CiD' of Santa Monica Municipal Bus Lines/ Fuel System Design and Upgrade Date of Completion: 1997 Reference: Mr. Allen Sheth, City of Santa Nlonica Telephone Number: (310) 458-8732 Kleinfelder conducted an $800,000 desigwbuild project for the City of Santa Monica Municipal Bus Lines. The site is located in downtown Santa Monica, California. /he site will provide diesel fuel, gasoline, motor oil, lubricants, and transmission fluid for more than 200 buses. Kleinfelder competed in a "qualifications based" selection process against many Los Angeles basin A-E firms to win this contract. Initial project cost estimates were over $1.2 million, which exceeded the City's budget of 5700.000. Kleinfelder worked closely with City engineers and officials, and by applying value engineering principles, were able to reduce total project costs enabling the City to do more for less. Examples of cost saving recommendations include: · Reuse of existing pumps and hardware, where applicable: · City Kieinfelder team approach to minimize expected plan revision on 30%. 60%. and 90% reviews: · Innovative tank sizing and multi-compartment tanks reduced the required number of USTs and costs: · Use of City labor, where possible: and · Reducing excavation shoring cost through relocation of USTs. Kleinfelder was responsible for the detailed design and construction management for the installation of over 120.000 gallons of sen'ice capacity including two 50,000 gallon diesel USTs. one 10.000 gallon gasoline UST, and one multi-compartment UST. Also, Kleinfelder submitted design specifications for excavation shoring, water run-off controls, existing USTs removals demolition, and re-routing of underground utilities and redesign. !z-YPg-6721121 !P073~dc 12 i~! K t [ I N F I~ L D £ R Cin' or'Saratoga Lawrence Berkeley Labs, Geotechnical Services and UST Removal Design, Berkeley California Date of Completion: 1998 Reference: Max Ostas. Lawrence Berkeley Labs Telephone number: (510)486-6524 Kleinfelder prepared design plans, specifications, cost estimates, and provided geotechnical support services for the removal of USTs at three different on-site locations.. Designs included shoring, handling of petroleum and chlorinated solvent impacted soil and ground water, and disposal of waste materials. Kleinfelder provided construction support, geotechnical field and materials laboratoD' services during construction activities. Columbia .Mrport: Fueling System Design Date of Completion: 1998 Reference: Mr. Mike Shutt, Shutt Moen Associates Telephone Number: (707) 526-5010 As a subconsultant to Shutt Moen Associates, Kleinfelder designed a new underground fueling system for the Columbia Airport, Tuolumne County, California. Kleinfelder developed a ranking system to aid the Count3' in their evaluation of AST versus USTs. The scoring system considered over two dozen evaluation criteria, including fire risk, insurance costs, vandalism risk, construction cost, and regulatoD' acceptance. The County used this scoring system in their decision process, and selected underground tanks for the facility. Prior to design, Kleinfelder conducted a geotechnical investigation in the area of piping trenches and underground tan'l'l'lcs. Bedrock was encountered at depths ranging from three to eight feet below ground surface which influence the design and cost estimates. This information was included in design documents. Kleinfelder's design team developed plans, specifications and construction cost estimates at 30%. 90%, and 100% design levels for the fueling facility. The 30% design included a design basis report that outlined important owner preferences regarding facility layout, airplane traffic flows, and other issues. The design included fuel islands, card activated security:dispensing system, lighting, a concrete fueling apron, oil water separator tied to existing storm drains, electronic leak detection, above ground and underground piping systems. A credit card reader and modem on the fueling pad will allow unattended AvGas dispensing. CiD' of Dixon: Site Investigation, Monitoring, Remediation Planning and Design Date of Completion: Ongoing Reference: :Ms. Janet Koster, City of Dixon Telephone Number: (916) 678-7030 This site in the City of Dixon, California, is in close proximity to a residence (within 15 feet of the UST) with concerns regarding public exposure to vapors emanating from shallow groundwater. Kleinfelder's work on the site has included two phases of site investigation:testing (in 1993 and 1995) to delineate soil and groundwater contamination, and extensive regulator5' negotiations with the regulatoD, agencies. Ongoing quarterly groundwater monitoring and reporting at the site, started in 1994 to the present. In 1995, Kleinfelder conducted a soil gas survey under and around the residence, and collected air samples from inside the house. Results indicated that gasoline compounds did not pose a health threat. Our team worked hard to obtain Cin' qf Sarawga agency approval of the remediation workplan. We subsequently designed and oversaw construction of a air stripping/soil vapor extraction system with thermol/catalytic destruction of vapors. Our engineering team now is working with the Cit3' to operate and maintain the remedial system to focus on site closure. Contra Costa Count', Byron Airport and Maintenance Yard: Remedial Action Plan and Aviation Fueling System Date of Completion: 1996 Reference: Mike Shutt, Shutt Moen Associates Telephone Number: (707) 526-5010 Kleinfelder recently worked on two sites for Contra Costa County, California. The first site. a maintenance yard in Richmnond, experienced a gasoline leak from a UST. Mr. Dan Carroll developed a cleanup option evaluation and remedial action plan in 1993 involving excavation of 2.000 cubic yards of soil and above ground biotreatment. Since the LLNL report on passive bioremediation in October 1995 and ASTM's Risk-Based Corrective Action standard, cleanup standards are becoming more readily achievable. Mr. Carroll and Mr. Paul Baginski encouraged the County to withdraw their agency-approved cleanup plan, and reduce the size of the planned excavation. Mr. Carroll and Mr. Baginski then obtained agency approval and client authorization to proceed with design and implementation of the reduced remediation effort. The second site at which we performed environmental engineering services is a remote airport in Concord. Mr. Carroll and Mr. Kent Zenobia designed an unattended self-service fueling system in late 1995 for light aircraft at the airport. We integrated our fueling facility design with general civil improvements improved by others, including taxiway and apron and drainage system design, layout and design of stormwater collection and treatment systems, and a fueFwater separator. The fueling facility design included a 12.000 gallon underground storage tank (UST) and associated piping for storing aviation fuel complete with ballast and hold-down, double wall construction, corrosion protection and leak detection to meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's iEPA's) 1998 UST requirements. The design included a water paniculate filtration system meeting the Federal Aviation Administration (F.&&'s) stringent requirements for aviation fuel filtration and dispensing. The dispenser includes a one-inch overwing nozzle, electric hose reel with 50 feet of hose. and grounding clamp. Mr. Carroll and Mr. Zenobis's fueling system design was innovative in that it was intended for remote management (about 30 miles away). The county will access fuel inventoo' and customer information remotely via computer and dedicated modem. The dispensing system we designed will be operated by the customer (self- service), and will accept major credit cards througha bank network with immediate validation of credit cards before fueling. Mr. Carroll and Mr. Zenobia worked closel~ with the Fire Protection District and county environmental health agencies to integrate their requirements into the overall system design. By providing open communication early, several potential sticking points were resolved early in the design process. Allowing us to proceed with full regulatoD' approval of the design. !2-YP9-672~'l:llP073)dc 14 ~.~21 K L E I N F E L D £ R Cin' of Saratoga Sacred Heart Jesuit Center: UST Removals, AST Fueling System Design and Installation Date of Completion: August 1996 Reference: Father Robert St. Clair, Sacred Heart Jesuit Center Telephone Number: (408)354-8886 The Jesuit Center site in the hills of Los Gatos, California contained seven aging single-walled USIs. Kleinfelder began working for the Jesuits in early 1996. Groundwater monitoring was conducted along with working on the required Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan for the site. In June 1996, the design team prepared plans, specifications, and cost estimates for: (i) Removal of six of the seven USIs, with one USI being closed in place: (ii) Installation of one new above ground storage tank (AST) to dispense gasoline including 'overhead canopy; and (iii) Seismic retrofitting and secondary containment of an existing diesel fuel tank. Geotechnical considerations were assessed in June and August of 1996, to evaluate site condition backfill and structures both before and during UST removal. One client requirement on this project was the need for a continuous fuel supply. We devised a work sequence keeping one UST operating while the others were removed. Once the new AST was installed and operating the final UST was removed. Napa Garbage Sen'ice: Leaking Underground Storage Tank/Truck Maintenance Yard Date of Completion: 1997 Reference: Jim Vaughn, Napa Garbage Service Telephone .Number: (707)224-3104 In 1986 a fuel teak from a flood damaged, 550 gallon UST that had contained kerosene and gasoline, was discovered by Napa Garbage Service at their former site on Clay and Juarez Streets in the Citv of Napa. California. Between 1990 and 1994, Kleinfelder completed three soil and groundwater investigations at the site. As part of these investigations, 8 groundwater monitoring wells were installed and 9 soil borings were drilled. Some of the wells were monitored for over two years. The Napa Countv Department of Environmental Management required soil and groundwater remediation. In July 1994, Napa Garbage moved to their new facility, allowing remediations to begin at the old site. In May 1995. two 10,000 gallon USTs were removed from the site. In May and June 1995. approximately 6.000 cubic yards of soil were excavated, approximately of which 2785 cubic yards were impacted by kerosene. In June and July 1995. a simple groundwater treatment svstem CGWTS) was installed and the excavation was backfilled. The GWTS is projected to run through September. 1996. Treated waters are being discharged into the Napa County sanitation district sewer system. Impacted soil was transported to the new Napa Garbage Sen'ice site. Soil remediation options are currently being evaluated. 12-YPO-672t1211P073}dc 15 l~21 K [ E I N F E t D E R Cio' qf Saratoga C. KEY PERSONNEL Kleinfelder has selected a solutions-oriented project team to provide the City with efficient_ subsurface investigation services. A brief description of professional experience for key personnel is provided on the following pages. The Project Organization Chart (at the end of this section) illustrates the proposed project organization and key personnel. Combined, the project team has extensive previous experience with all aspects of the project scope of work at literally hundreds of UST sites. DAN C4RROLL, P.E. Project Manager For this project, our proposed project manager, Dan Carroll, P.E., will be operating out of our San Jose office. Dan Carroll is a registered chemical engineer with over 15 years of engineering design, construction support and regulatory compliance experience. For four years, he was the primary instructor at the University of California Davis' annual Underground and Aboveground Storage Tank Regulator),, Update Course. He has performed and prepared over 50 cleanup option evaluations and remedial action plans for soil and groundwater sites. He is one of Kleinfelder's most knowledgeable professionals in the areas of UST regulations, feasibility studies, remediation technologies, engineering desig-n, and waste disposal and was the project manager for our City of Milpitas and Columbus Airport projects. Highlighting this, one of Mr. Carroll's previous cleanup option evaluation;/remedial action plan reports has been used as a model remedial action plan by the Santa Clara Valley Water District because of its highly organized and thorough content. PAUL BAGINSKI. P.E. Mr. Baginski has over 16 years of engineering design and management experience. He has designed and managed construction of over 100 remedial and UST/AST projects ranging from groundxvater pump stations to complex hazardous waste incineration projects. Mr. Baginski also has extensive experience in civil design: soil and groundwater remediation, investigation, and design: and regulator).' expertise. He is the engineer of record on UST-AST projects performed bx' Klein/elder for the Bay Area including Lawrence Berkeley Labs, Milpitas, Jesuit Center, Columbus Airport and Dixon. Mr. Baginski is a registered civil engineer in California with a reputation as a hands-on, solutions oriented leader. He currently manages Kleinfelder's San Jose office. .IHCHAEL KILLOtE4A: R.G.. R.E.A. Mr. Michael Killoran. R.G.. R.E.A. brings to the project team over 12 years of experience and expertise in the areas of geology and hydrogeology. He has performed over 200 site assessments and soil and groundwater investigations in the San Francisco Bay area. As a geologist-hydrogeologist, Mr. Killoran has been project manager for manv water resources projects for the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), where he utilized his extensive experience in project management, permitting and planning, geologic, hydrogeologic and chemical data interpretation: development and implementation of soil and eroundwater sampling regimes: Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs); a~d report preparation. Mr. Killoran has also been involved in removal and installation of underground storage tanks (USTs). and remediation of soil and groundwater by various methods, including "pump and treat," excavation and disposal, air sparging, and soil venting.. 12-YP9-672(1211P073~dc 16 k~2~ K I. E I N F E k D E R ~in' o!'Sara~o~a Based on the updated scope of sen'ices, Kleinfelder has developed a worksheet of estimated costs for each task. We will perform our services on a time and materials basis, not to exceed the total amount authorized. Subcontractors and expendible supplies will be billed at cost plus 20 percent. With input from the City of Saratoga, Kleinfelder will provide a suitable invoice format that meet the City's needs. The attached worksheet and summary table provide a detailed cost breakdown for Task 1 through 3. Task 4. titled Other Related Sen'ices, is intended to be used for additional out of scope work as requested by the City. For example, if groundwater contamination is detected, monitoring wells mav be required or other investigation and remediation sen'ices may be needed. Task 4 could be hsed for a site investigation, risk based corrective action (RBCA) tier 1 risk evaluation. and corrective action plan for site remediation. Costs for individual Task 4 work scopes can be requested on an "as needed" basis, and handled as a change order request. Kleinfelder is committed to providing quality service to its clients, commensurate with their wants, needs and desired level of risk. If a portion of this proposal does not meet the needs of the Cit.x of El Cerrito. or if those needs have changed, Kleinfelder will consider appropriate modifications, subject to the standards of care to which we adhere as professionals. Modifications such as changes in scope, methodology, scheduling, and contract terms may result in changes to the risks assumed by the City, as well as adjustments to our fees. 12-YPO-6r2(1211P073}dc 17 l~k~l K I. E I N I: g l D E R Summao' of Estimated Project Costs Civ., of Saratoga Subsurface Investigation Task Name Total Labor Other Total Task 1 File Review and Work Plan $2,500 $0 $2.500 Task 2 Permits, Subsurface Investigation $2,900 $5,100 $8;000 Task 3 Final Report S3,900 $0 53.900 Task 4 Other Related Services $0 $0 $0 Totals $9.300 S5,100 S14.400 NOTE: Please refer to attached sheets for breakdown of estimated costs by task. L DSC proposals ]21 lp073 Page 1 ~ 2000. Kleinfelder Inc. Cost Estimate Task 1 File Review and Work Plan Position Wage Rate Proposed Total Dollars (hourly) Hours Senior Consultant. $202 $0.00 Principal Professional $185 $0.00 Senior Project Manager $165 2 5330.00 Senior Professional $155 $0.00 Project Manager $145 $0.00 Project Professional $135 8 $1,080.00 Staff Professional $110 8 5880.00 Assistant Professional $95 $0.00 Senior Tech S85 50.00 Technician $70 50.00 Draftsman $87 1 S87.00 Clerical $65 2 $130.00 TOTAL 21 Auto Use: 1 Other Costs: Trips of 30 miles Total Direct Salary Overhead Factor TOT:aL LABOR COST l 50.60 per mile Units Cost'lJnit S2,507.00 1.00 $2.507.00 $18.00 50 $0 SO SO TOTAL OTHER COSTS I $0.00 Date of Cost Estimate: Apr. 13, 2001 TOTAL COST [ $2,525.00 U DSC Proposais:!2! ip073 Page 2 g 2000, Klemfelder Inc Cost Estimate Task 2 Permits, Subsurface Investigation Position Wage Rate Proposed Total Dollars (hourly) Hours Senior Consultant $202 $0.00 Prinicpal Professional $185 $0.00 Senior Project Manager $165 4 $660.00 Senior Professional' $155 $0.00 Project Manager $145 $0.00 Project Professional $135 S0.00 Staff Professional $110.00 20 $2,200.00 Assistant Professional $95.00 $0.00 Senior Tech $85.00 S0.00 Technician $70.00 S0.00 Draftsman $87 $0.00 Clerical $65.00 S0.00 TOTAL 24 Total Direct Salary Overhead Factor TOTAL LABOR COST Auto Use: .......... Trips of 0 miles @ S0.60 per mile Other Costs: Units Cost'Unit $2,860.00 1.00 S2.860.00 $0.00 Driller (T&M Bid) 1.00 52,640 $2.640 _T_P_H-~g B T EX:MTB E 12.00 $60 S720 MTBE Confirmation by 8260 3.00 $96 $288 F~-0'~('eenates by 8260B 3.00 $108 $324 Surveying 1.00 5;600 S600 ~;ii~i~' kocatine (est.) 1.0 5500.00 $500.00 TOTAL OTHER COSTS [ S5,072.00 Date of Cost Estimate: Apr. 13.2001 TOTAL COST I $7,932.00 U dsc Proposals 12l 1p073 Page 3 ~ 2000. Kleinfelder Inc Cost Estimate Task Final Report Position Wage Rate Proposed (hourly) Hours Total Dollars Senior Consultant Prinicpal Professional Senior Project Manager l Senior Professional ~ Project Manager Project Professional ~ Staff Professional Assistant Professional Senior Tech Technician Draftsman Clerical: $2O2 $0.00 $185 S0.00 $165 8 S1,320.00 $155 $0.00 $145 $0.00 $135 8 $1,080.00 $110.00 8 $880.00 $95.00 $0.00 $85.00 $0.00 $70.00 $0.00 $87 4 $348.00 $65.00 4 S260.00 TOTAL: 32 Auto Use: Other Costs: Trips of 0 miles Total Direct Salary Overhead Factor TOT.aL LABOR COST S0.60 per mile [ Units Cost/Tlnit $3,888.00 1.00 $3.888.00 $0.00 SO $0 SO $0 SO TOT.aL OTHER COSTS [ $0.00 Date of Cost Estimate: Apr. 13, 2001 TOT.aL COST I $3,888.00 U DSC Proposa!s 12! lp073 Page 4 ¢ 2000. Kleinfelder Inc. Cost Estimate Task 4 Other Related Services Position WageiRate Proposed (hourly) Hours Total Dollars Senior Consultant Prinicpal Professional Senior Project Manager Senior Professional Project Manager Project Professional Staff Professional Assistant Professional Senior Tech Technician Draftsman Clerical $202 S0.00 $185 $0.00 $165 50.00 $155 50.00 $145 $0.00 $135 $0.00 $110.00 $0.00 $95.00 $0.00 $85.00 50.00 $7O.OO 50.00 $87 $0.00 $65.00 $0.00 TOTAL 0 Auto Use: Other Costs: Total Direct Salary $0.00 Overhead Factor 1.00 TOTAL. LABOR COST I $0.00 Trips of 0 miles ~ 50.60 per mile I $o.oo Units CosvUnit S0 : 50 $0 50 ........ $0 TOTAL OTHER COSTS [ $0.00 Date of Cost Estimate: Apr. 13, 2001 i TOTAL COST [ $0.00 U DSC Proposals 12i Ip073 Page 5 2000. Kleinfelder Inc. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Recreation PREPARE. BY: AGENDA iTEM: ¢~ ~~''~ CITY MANAGER: ~7~._~ ~ SUBJECT: Approval of a Professional Services Agreement with Noll and Tam Architects for Architectural Services for the Civic Center Master Plan Project RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Approve proposal from Noll and Tam Architects in the amount of $30,790 for architectural services and a not to exceed $1,500 for normal reimbursable expenses for the Civic Center Master Plan Project; and authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement for the same; and approve resolution making adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2000/01 budget. REPORT SUMMARY: In October 2000, the City received three bids from qualified firms for providing architectural services to develop site layout plans and the estimated costs for the City's Civic Center complex. Shortly thereat~er, this project was put on hold because of the City's staffing shortage. On May 5, 2001, the City Council directed staffto move forward with this project and the three architectural firms were contacted to see if they were still interested in this project. All three firms resubmitted bids and the fees are listed below. *Anderson Brule Architects *George Meiers and Associates *Noll and Tam Architects $45,000 $28,53O $30,79O Two firms, George Meiers and Associates and Noll and Tam Architects, submitted proposals that were very similar and their fees very close. In checking references, Noll and Tam rated much higher. Laurie Tinfow, Saratoga's new Assistant City Manager, has worked with both firms and said the City of Walnut Creek was extremely happy with Noll and Tam Architects. Tom Sullivan, Community Development Director, has also worked on a project with them in Moraga and highly recommended their firm for this project in Saratoga. FISCAL IMPACTS: The fee for architectural design services and reimbursable expenses will not exceed $32,290. Funds have not been appropriated for this project. It is recommended that the General Fund contingency be used to fund this project CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The proposal would not be approved and the project would not move forward at this time ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None. FOLLOW LrP ACTION(S): A Professional Services Agreement will be prepared by staff and executed by the City Manager. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENT Noll and Tam Architects Project Schedule Architectural Services Proposal from Noll and Tam Professional Services Agreemem RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA MAKING ADJUSTMENTS TO THE 2000-2001 BUDGET WHEREAS, the city council adopted Resolution No. 00-038, adopting the budget for Fiscal Year. 2000/01 and 2001/02 on June 21, 2000 and WHEREAS, subsequent to the adoption of said Resolution, the City Manager has recommended further changes to the City's budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the recommendation of the City Manager and believes that implementing these further changes will be in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves to increase contract services in the Civic Center Master Plan project, representing the estimated cost of architectural services for the Civic Center Master Plan. There are sufficient funds in the General Fund balance to support this cost. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the above adjustments to the City of Saratoga's Fiscal Year 2000/01 budget will be made using the following entries: 001-9010-622-40.10-01'09 001-1010-511-50.02 Civic Center Master Plan-Contract Services General Fund Contingency Increase Decrease $32,290 $32,290 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 6th day of June, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENrI': ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk NEW CIVIC CENTER MASTER PLAN City. of Saratoga PROJECT SCHEDULE Tasks 1. Kick-off meeting 2. Program Confirmation 3. Master Planning a. 50% Presentation 4. Cost Estimate 5. Phasing Plans 6. 100% Presentation architects and planners 7. Summary Report !2001 [ ~ lune i July !August i September 9/19 '/29 Heinz Berkeley CA 94710 510.649.829~ fax 510.649.30C SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Communi~' Development PREPARED BY: Thomas Sullivan, AICP AGENDA ITEM: ~---~ CITY MANAGER: .~~ DEPT HEAD: ~ SUBJECT: Communit?' Development Department Employment Contract RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the following: 1. Agreement with AlliSon Knapp, Senior Planner REPORT SUMMARY: Allison Knapp, Senior Planner Ms Knapp began working for the City on a part time basis, Tuesdays and Thursdays, on August 1, 2000. Until recently, Ms. Knapp's time and cost remained under the $10,000 cap provided for the City's Purchasing Ordinance. This contract is needed to authorize going over the cap. Ms. Knapp~s services are still needed to assist in cleating the backlog of projects. There are over 70 projects in queue. Even with the new' Associate Planners coming on board, the back log is sufficient enough to warrant Allison staying on board. Other contract planners are cutting their time due to prior commitments. In July most of the contract planners will no longer be required. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are sufficient funds in the Community Development Department budget to fund this contract, using appropriations from both previous salary, savings and contract services. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): If this contract is not approved, the Community Development Department will not be able to move the more than 70 individual projects through the review process in a timely fashion consistent with the Permit Streamlining Act. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): 1. Continue the item to the June 20, 2001 meeting, requesting additional information. 2. Direct Staff to discontinue the use of this Contract Position FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Execute contracts and distribute. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENT(S): Agreement with Allison Knapp, Senior Planner 2 CITY OF SARATOGA STANDARD INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made at Saratoga, California by and between the CITY OF SA1L~TOGA, a municipal corporation ("City"), and Allison Knapp, ("Contractor"), who agree as follows: RECITALS WHEREAS, City requires the sen, ices of a qualified contractor to provide the work product described in Exhibit A of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, CiD' lacks the qualified personnel to provide the specified work product; and WHEREAS, Contractor is duly qualified to provide the required work product; and x,x.%IEREAS, Contractor is agreeable to providing such work product on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. RESULTS TO BE ACHEIVED. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Contractor shall provide to City the work product described in Exhibit A ("Scope of Work"). Contractor is not authorized to undertake any efforts or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this A~eement until receipt of a fully executed Purchase Order from the Finance Department of the City of Saratoga. 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement commences on August 1, 2000 and extends through the completion of the project, unless it is extended by written mutual agreement between the parties, provided that the parties retain the right to terminate this Agreement as provided in Exhibit D at all times. 3. PAYMENT. City shall pay Contractor for work product produced pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth in Exhibit B ("Payment"). The pasa'nents specified in Exhibit B shall be the only payments to be made to Contractor in connection with Contractor's completion of the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall submit all billings to City in the manner specified in Exhibit B; or, if no manner is specified in Exhibit B, then according to the usual and customary procedures and practices which Contractor uses for billing clients similar to Ciw. Standard Independent Contractor Agreement East printed 4/17.'01 9:41 AM P :'-Planninffdames:Miscellaneous\KNAPP Contract.doc Page 1 of 4 4. FACILITIES AtND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth in Exhibit C ("Facilities and Equipment"), Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment, which may be required for completing the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. City shall furnish to Contractor only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit C according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS. City and Contractor agree to and shall abide by the general .provisions set forth in Exhibit D ("General Provisions"). In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the other term or condition shall control insofar as it is inconsistent with the General Provisions. 6. EXHIBITS. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein and made a part of this Agreement. 7. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. This Agreement shall be administered on behalf of the City by Community Development Director ("Administrator"). Ihe Administrator has complete authority to receive information, interpret and define City's policies consistent with this Agreement, and communicate with Contractor concerning this Agreement. All correspondence and other communications shall be directed to or through the Administrator or his or her designee. 8. NOTICES. All notices or communication concerning a party's compliance with the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and may be given either personally, by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by overnight express carrier. Ihe notice shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered in person or the date upon which the postal authority or overnight express carrier indicates that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving Party. The Parties shall make good faith efforts to provide advance courtesy notice of any notices or communications hereunder via telefacsimile. However, under no circumstances shall such courtesy notice satisfy the notice requirements set forth above; nor shall lack of such courtesy notice affect the validity of service pursuant to the notice requirement set forth above. Any Party hereto, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other, may designate any other address as substitution of the address to which the notice or communication shall be given. Notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at the addresses set forth below until specified otherwise in writing: Notices to Contractor shall be sent to: Allison Knapp 383 Crecent Avenue San Francisco, California 94110 Notices to City shall be sent to: Standard Independent Contractor Agreement Last printed 4-"17/01 9:41 AM P :'PlanningXJames\Miscellaneou$\KNAPP Contract.doc Page 2 of 4 Community Development Director City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 With a copy (which copy shall not constitute notice) to: City Clerk City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 9. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement supersedes an), and all agreements, either oral or wxitten, between the parties hereto with respect to Contractor's completion of the Scope of Work on behalf of City and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to the rendering of such services in any manner whatsoever. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or othenvise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding. No amendment, alteration, or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. IN WITN~Ess WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this-Agreement. Position: CITY OF S,ML~.TOGA, a municipal corporation By: Nanle' Title: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Date: By: Date: Standard Independent Contractor Agreement Last printed 4i17/01 9:41 AM P 5-PI anning\James'~Miscellaneous'.-IC\'APP Contract.doc Page 3 of 4 City Attomey .APPROVED AS TO BUDGET AUTHORITY AND INSURANCE: Ad~ninistr~ive Services Director Attachments Exhibit A -- Scope of Work Exhibit B -- Contract Payment and Reporting Schedule Exhibit C -- Facilities and Equipment Exhibit D -- General Provisions Exhibit E -- Insurance Requirements Standard Independent Contractor Agreement Last printed 4/17i01 9:41 AM P 9.Plannin g'Jame sqvliscel I aneoust, KNAPP Contract.doc Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK Contractor shall perform those selwices assigned to him by the Community Development Director. Said sen:ices shall include, but are not limited to, assisting the Ci~, in processing development review applications; preparing reports to the Planning Commission; carrying out the necessaD, relations with applicants and the public in the review process; and providing general assistance to the Communiw Development Department. Consultant shall be responsible for all research and reviev¥ relating to the work. assignments. Exhibit A Page 1 of 1 Last printed 4/17/0! 9:44 AM P:~Planning'dames~Miscellaneous\Schubert Ex A.doc EXHIBIT B PAYMENT 1. TOTAL COMPENSATION. City shall pay Contractor at a rate of $75.00,~nour for work to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred pursuant to this Agreement. The total sum stated above shall be the total which City shall pay for the work product to be provided by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement. 2. INVOICES. Contractor shall submit invoices, not more often than twice a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for work performed and reimbursable expenses incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information: ao Serial identifications of bills, i.e., Bill No. 1; The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; c. a summary containing the total contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, and the remaining balance available for all remaining billing periods. 3. MONTHLY PAYMENTS. City shall make monthly payments, based on such invoices, for satisfactory progress in completion of the Scope of Work, and for authorized reimbursable expenses incurred. 4. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES. There shall be no right to reimbursement of expenses incurred by Contractor except as specified in Exhibit A to this Agreement. Exhibit B Page 1 of 1 Last printed 4/17/01 9:47 AM Documentl EXHIBIT C FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as ma3: be reasonably necessary for Contractor's use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing said physical facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall Ci~' be obligated to furnish any facility which may involve incurring any direct expense, including, but not limiting the generality of this exclusion, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities. Contractor shall not use such sen'ices, premises, facilities, supplies or equipment for any purpose other than in the performance of Contractor's obligations under this Agreement. Exhibit C East printed 4;17/01 9:50 AM P: ~PEAN~ING:JAMES\CONTRACT~STANDARD CONTIL~CT EX. C (5-25-00).DOC Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT D GENERAL PROVISIONS o INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. Contractor shall complete the Scope of Work hereunder in accordance with currently approved methods and practices in Contractor's field. City shall have the fight to control Contractor only with respect to specifying the results to be obtained from Contractor ' pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not have the fight to control the means by which Contractor accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Likewise, no relationship of employer and employee is created by this Agreement between the City and Contractor or any subcontractor or employee of Contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as limiting the fight of Contractor to engage in Contractor's profession separate and apart from this Agreement so long as such activities do not interfere or conflict with the performance by Contractor of the obligations set forth in this Agreement. Interference or conflict will be determined at the sole discretion of the City. ST.4~NDARD OF PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall complete the Scope of Work required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Contractor is engaged in the geographical area in which Contractor practices its profession. All work product of whatsoever nature which Contractor delivers to City pursuant to this Agreement shall be prepared in a substantial, first class and workmanlike manner and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Contractor's profession. TIME. Contractor shall devote such time to the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of Contractor's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. CONTRACTOR NO AGENT. Except as City may specify in v,~ting, Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this A~eement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever. BENEFITS AND TAXES. Contractor shall not have any claim under this Agreement or othemtise against City for seniority, vacation time, vacation pay, sick leave, personal time off, overtime, health insurance, medical care, hospital care, insurance benefits, social security, disability, unemployment, workers compensation or employee benefits of any kind. Contractor shall be solely liable for and obligated to pay directly all applicable taxes, including, but not limited to, federal and state income taxes, and in connection therewith Contractor shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all liability that City. may incur because of Contractor's failure to pay such taxes. City shall have no obligation Exhibit D P:\Planning\James\Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 1 of 8 whatsoever to pay or withhold any taxes on behalf of Contractor. ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED. No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assi=munent of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect. However, with the consent of the City given in w-riting, Contractor is entitled to subcontract such portions of the work to be performed under this Agreement as may be specified by City. PERSONNEL. ao Qualifications. Contractor shall assign only competent personnel to complete the Scope of Work pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any such persons, Contractor shall, immediately upon receiving notice from city of such desire of City, cause the removal of such person or persons. bo Employment Eligibili~'. Contractor shall ensure that all employees of Contractor and any subcontractor retained by Contractor in connection with this Agreement have provided the necessary documentation to establish identity and empl%vrnent eligibility as required by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Failure to provide the necessary documentation will result in the termination of the Agreement as required by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. bo In General. Contractor represents and warrants that, to the best of the Contractor's knowledge and belief, there are no relevant facts or circumstances which could give rise to a conflict of interest on the part of Contractor, or that the Contractor has already disclosed all such relevant information. Subsequent Conflict of Interest. Contractor ag-tees that if an actual or potential conflict of interest on the part of Contractor is discovered after award, the Contractor will make a full disclosure in writing to the City. This disclosure shall include a description of actions which the Contractor has taken or proposes to take, after consultation with the City to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the actual or potential conflict. Within 45 days, the Contractor shall have taken all necessary steps to avoid, mitigate, or neutralize the conflict of interest to the satisfaction of the City. Interests of Cit3d Officers and Staff. No officer, member or employee of City and no member of the City, Council shall have any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof. Neither Contractor nor any member of any Contractor's family shall serve on any City board or committee or hold any such position which either by rule, practice or action nominates, recommends, or supervises Contractor's operations or authorizes funding to Contractor. Exhibit D P:",.Plannmg\lames\Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 2 of 8 COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. In General. Contractor shall observe and comply vdth all laws, policies, general rules and regulations established by City, and shall comply with the common law and all laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of governmental agencies, (including federal, state, municipal and local governing bodies) applicable to the performance of the Scope of Work hereunder, including, but not limited to, all provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 as amended. Licenses and Permits. Contractor represents and warrants to City that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Contractor to practice its profession. Contractor represents and warrants to City that Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Contractor to practice its profession. In addition to the foregoing, Contractor shall obtain and maintain during the term hereof a valid City of Saratoga Business License. Funding Agency Requirements. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance fi:om another entity, Contractor shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program. Drug-free Workplace. Contractor and Contractor's employees and subcontractors shall comply with the City's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. Neither Contractor nor Contractor's employees and subcontractors shall unlawfully manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess or use controlled substances, as defined in 21 U.S. Code Section 812, including marijuana, heroin, cocaine, and amphetamines, at any facility, premises or worksite used in any manner in connection with performing services pursuant to this Agreement. If Contractor or any employee or subcontractor of Contractor is convicted or pleads nolo contendere to a criminal drag statute violation occurring at such a facility, premises, or xvorksite, the Contractor, within five days thereafter, shall notify the City. Discrimination Prohibited. Contractor assures and agrees that Contractor vdll comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other laws prohibiting discrimination and that no person shall, on the grounds of race, creed, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, religion, Vietnam era veteran's status, political affiliation, or any other non-merit factors be excluded fi:om participating in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under this Agreement. 10. DOCUMENTS .4aND RECORDS. Exhibit D P:',,planmng\James\Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 3 of 8 ao Propert?,., of CID'. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda or other written documents or materials prepared by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement shall become the property of City upon completion of the work to be performed hereunder or upon termination of this Agreement. Retention of Records. Until the expiration of five years after the furnishing of any services pursuant to this Agreement, Contractor shall retain and make available to the City or any party designated by the City, upon written request by City, this Agreement, and such books, documents and records of Contractor (and any books, documents, and records of any subcontractor(s)) that are necessary or convenient for audit purposes to certify the nature and extent of the reasonable cost of services to City. Use Of Recycled Products. Contractor shall prepare and submit all reports, v~xitten studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper. Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the contract administrator, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stampecb'sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the reporffdesign preparation. The stamp/seal shall be in a block entitled "Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with report/design responsibility" as per the sample below. Seal and Signature of Registered Professional with repom/design responsibility. 11. CONFIDENTIAL INFOR31ATION. Contractor shall hold any confidential information received from City in the course of performing this Agreement in trust and confidence and will not reveal such confidential information to any person or entity, either during the term of the Agreement or at any time thereafter. Upon expiration of this Agreement, or termination as provided herein, Contractor shall return materials which contain any confidential information to City. Contractor may keep one copy for its confidential file. For purposes of this paragraph, confidential information is defined as all information disclosed to Contractor which relates to City's past, present, and future activities, as well as Exhibit D P:\Planning\James\Contract\Standard Conh'act Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 4 of 8 12. 13. activities under this Agreement, which information is not otherxvise of public record under California law. RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTOR. Contractor shall take all responsibility for the work, shall bear all losses and damages directly or indirectly resulting to Contractor, to any subcontractor, to the City, to City officers and employees, or to parties designated by the City, on account of the performance or character of the work, unforeseen difficulties, accidents, occurrences or other causes predicated on active or passive negligence of the Contractor or of any subcontractor. INDEMNIFICATION. Contractor and City agree that City, its employees, agents and officials shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be fully protected from any loss, injury., damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys fees, litigation costs, defense costs, court costs or any other cost arising out of or in any way related to the performance of this Agreement. Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity provision are intended by the parties to be interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to the City. Contractor ackno~vledges that City would not enter into this agreement in the absence of the commitment of Contractor to indemnify and protect City as set forth below. ao Indemnit3:. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its employees, agents and officials, from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind whatsoever without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, to the performance of this Agreement. All obligations under this provision are to be paid by Contractor as they are incurred by the City. bo Limitation on IndemniB'. Without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement or this section, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City as set forth above for liability attributable to the sole fault of City, provided such sole fault is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. This exception will apply only in instances where the City is shown to have been solely at fault and not in instances where Contractor is solely or partially at fault or in instances where City's fault accounts for only a percentage of the liability, involved. In those instances, the obligation of Contractor will be all-inclusive and City will be indemnified for all liability incurred, even though a percentage of the liability is attributable to conduct of the City. Co Acknowledgement. Contractor acknowledges that its obligation pursuant to this section extends to liability attributable to City, if that liability is less than the sole fault of City. Contractor has no obligation under this agreement for liability proven in Exhibit D P:\Planning\James\Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 A_M Page 5 of 8 a court of competent jurisdiction or by wxitten agreement bew~,een the parties to be the sole fault of City. Scope of Contractor Obligation. The obligations of Contractor under this or any other provision of this Agreement will not be limited by the provisions of any workers' compensation act or similar act. Contractor expressly waives its statutory immunity under such statutes or laws as to City, its employees and officials. Subcontractors. Contractor agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section fi.om each and every subcontractor, subtier contractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Contractor in the performance or subject matter of this Agreement. In the event Contractor fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required here, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. 14. 15. In General. Failure of CiLy to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligation~ on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder. This obligation to indemnify, and defend City as set forth herein is binding on the successors, assigns, or heirs of Contractor and shall survive the termination of this agreement or this section. For purposes of Section 2782 of the Civil Code the parties hereto recognize and agree that this Agreement is not a construction contract. By execution of this Agreement, Contractor acknowledges and agrees that it has read and understands the provisions hereof and that this paragraph is a material element of consideration. City approval of the insurance contracts required by this Agreement does not relieve the Contractor or subcontractors from liability under this paragraph. INSUI~NCE REQUIREMENTS. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance as set forth in Exhibit E. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. a. Events of default. Each oft he following shall constitute an event of default hereunder: Failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement and failure to cure such breach immediately upon receiving notice of such breach, if the breach is such that the City determines the health, welfare, or safety of the public is immediately endangered; or Failure to perform any obligation under this Agreement and failure to cure such breach within fifteen (15) days of receiving notice of such breach, if the breach is such that the City determines that the health, welfare, or safety of the public Exhibit D P:'-.,Plannmg\James\Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 6 of 8 16. 17. 18. 19. is not immediately endangered, provided that if the nature of the breach is such that the City determines it will reasonably require more than fifteen (15) days to cure, Contractor shall not be in default if Contractor promptly commences the cure and diligently proceeds to completion of the cure. Remedies upon default. Upon any Contractor default, City shall have the fight to immediately suspend or terminate the Agl-eement, seek specific performance, contract with another party to perform this Agreement and/or seek damages including incidental, consequential and/or special damages to the full extent allowed .by law. No Waiver. Failure by City to seek any remedy for any default hereunder shall not constitute a waiver of any other fights hereunder or any right to seek any remedy for any subsequent default. TER3IINATION. Either party may terminate this Agreement with or without cause by providing 10 days notice in v~ting to the other party. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time without prior notice in the event that Contractor commits a material breach of the terms of this Agreement. Upon termination, this Agreement shall become of no further force or effect whatsoever and each of the parties hereto shall be relieved and discharged herefrom, subject to payment for acceptable services rendered prior to the expiration of the notice of termination. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of this Agreement conceming retention of records, City's fights to material produced, confidential information, contractor's responsibility, indemnification, insurance, dispute resolution, litigation, and jurisdiction and severability shall survive termination of this Agreement. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parties shall make a good faith effort to settle any dispute or claim arising under this Agreement. If the parties fail to resolve such disputes or claims, they shall submit them to nonbinding mediation in California at shared expense of the parties for at least 8 hours of mediation. If mediation does not arrive at a satisfacto~ result, arbitration, if agreed to by all parties, or litigation may be pursued. In the event any dispute resolution processes are involved, each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys fees. LITIGATION. If any litigation is commenced between parties to this Agreement concerning any provision hereof or the fights and duties of any person in relation thereto, each party, shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. JURISDICTION AND SEVERABILITY. This Agreement shall be administered and interpreted under the laws of the State of California. Jurisdiction of litigation arising from this Agreement shall be in that state and venue shall be in Santa Clara County, California. If any part of this Agreement is found to conflict with applicable laws, such part shall be inoperative, null and void insofar as it conflicts with said laws, but the remainder of this Agreement shall be in full force and effect. Exhibit D p:\Planning~James~Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25-00).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 7 of 8 20. NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL. Contractor understands and agrees that there is no representation, implication, or understanding that the City will request that work product provided by Contractor under this Agreement be supplemented or continued by Contractor under a new agreement following expiration or termination of this Agreement. Contractor waives all fights or claims to notice or hearing respecting any failure by City to continue to request or retain all or any portion of the work product fi.om Contractor following the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 21. P.4JtTIES IN INTEREST. This Agreement is entered only for the benefit of the parties executing this Agreement and not for the benefit of any other individual, entity or person. 22. WAIVER. Neither the acceptance of work or payment for work pursuant to this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any fights or obligations arising under this Agreement. The failure by the City to enforce any of Contractor's obligations or to exercise City's fights shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the fight to do so thereafter. Exhibit D P:\ Planning\James\Contract\Standard Contract Ex. D (5-25430).doc Last printed 4/17/01 9:53 AM Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT E INSURANCE Please refer to the insurance requirements listed below. Those which have an "X" indicated in the space before the requirement apply to Contractor's Agreement (ignore any not checked). Contractor shall provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and request that they provide Certificates of Insurance complete with copies of all required endorsements to: Administrative Services Officer, City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Contractor shall furnish City with copies of original endorsements affecting coverage required by this Exhibit E. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements and certificates are to be received and approved by City before work commences. City has the right to require Contractor's insurer to provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. X Commercial Generabq3usiness Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated: X $1,000,000 per occurrence/S2,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury, and property damage $ per occurrence bodily injury/$ per occurrence property damage Coverage for X, C, U hazards _,.MUST be evidenced on the Certificate of Insurance If the standard ISO Form wording for "OTHER INSUqLa3qCE", or other comparable wording, is not contained in Contractor's liability insurance policy, an endorsement must be provided that said insurance will be primary, insurance and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City, its officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be in excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute to it. X Auto Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated: X X $1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage $ 30,000 per person/S 60,000 per accident for bodily injuny S 50,000 per occurrence for property damage $ 500,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage Garage keepers extra .liability endorsement to extend coverage to all vehicles in the care, custody and control of the contractor, regardless of where the vehicles are kept or driven. Exhibit E Last printed 4/18/01 11:08 AM P:'~LAN.~INGd.~dvtES\CONTIL,~C'I'~STANDARD CONIRACI EX. £ (6-27-00).DOC Page 1 of 3 Professional/Errors and Omissions Liability with coverage as indicated: $1,000,000 per loss/$2,000,000 aggregate $5,000,000 per loss/$5,000,000 aggregate Contractor must maintain Professional/Errors & Omissions Liabilitx. coverage for a period of three years after the expiration of this Agreement. Contractor may satisfy this requirement by renewal of existing coverage or purchase of either prior acts or tail coverage applicable to said three year period. Workers' Compensation Insurance Including minimum $1,000,000 Employer's Liability The Employer's Liability policy shall be endorsed to waive any right of subrogation as respects the Ci~', its employees or agents. The Contractor makes the following certification, required by section 1861 of the California Labor Code: I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require eveD' employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract X Additional Insured Endorsement(s) for Commercial General/Business Liability coverage naming the City of Saratoga, its officers, employees and agents as additional insured. (NOTE: additional insured language on the Certificate of Insurance is NOT acceptable without a separate endorsement such as Form CG 20 10) X The Certificate of Insurance ~ST provide 30 days notice of cancellation, (10 days notice for non-pa~vrnent of premium). NOTE: the following words must be crossed out or deleted from the standard cancellation clause: "... endeavor to..." AND "... but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives." All subcontractors used must comply with the above requirements except as noted below: Exhibit E Last printed 4.'I 8.'01 11:08 AM P:~PLAN.~ING,-IAMES\CONTIL~C'D, STANDARD CONTRACT EX. E (6-27-00).DOC Page 2 of 3 As to all of the checked insurance requirements above, the following shall apply: ao Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either (1) the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or (2) the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. CiB? as Additional Insured. The City., its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor, premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of the protection afforded to the . City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. Co Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: Any failure to comply xvith reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. Coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII Exhibit E Last printed 4/18/01 11:01 AM p:'PLAN.'N1NG~JAMES'~CONTRACT',STANDARD CONTRACT EX. E (6-27-00).DOC Page 3 of 3 J R NAVA AGENCY FARM E RS' 415 467 4740 04/16 '01 10:39 N0.716 EVIDENCE OF ~ - STATE OF CALIFORNIA Name and Address 0£ A ~napp wcilam 383 Crescent Ave San ?rancisco, CA 94110 Exchange KEEP THIS FA-~?.ER,c i.XSU:;.=_\C'= ~.¥..::A::~-.'[:. a-: a'~r.h,',,r'~zed ca~ .~.C~u'.::,~_m~_i'..'-, Ac:.. ':.~-rr~f~es that ~.t has Cal '_ [o '::i..~ F-:.~;:..'-'~ul Ke.~pon.~b~: ~t'~, LAW for Johnny R. Nava Agency 100 ()Id County Road, S=e.108 Brisbane, CA 94005 (415)467-1900 02/02 110289340 01/23/2001 vehicle Author! zed Agen,' 07/23/2001 Vehicle ID # Year NON-DA ACCORD E IHGC63175YA030379 200,9 [TIFiCATE IN YOUR., AUTOMOB_'LS AT ALL TIMES ",'J~.AT T'.: LY0 iN CASE OF AN ACCIDEITT' · 7 ~ ETOI~ KENEE~ ATP.. S~op profuse bleeding ~_r p.~.~m~h~e. /,void mo-.~ing un injured per~n - ~n may ~e"~o~s['/ comE-1icate the i~l~u-y ~1~ a - . ,~AK., .~. N,.., ,.D = ,-[f.~u 7'0 ~R~v'~NT FUR~ ~GE Set +%~"es, Signal ~;ik}': flashlight at ni~t. ' 3. KGT2FY THE PCi_IC~. Many times a pas~i ~iver ::: bystander w~l' ¢~c this fo~ you. 4. GATHER iHE FACTE. 5e ,ute re ~e~ the ~es of w~tr:ess~s, a~ we', ] ar other pertinent in: D~tiO~. 5. BE t'AREFL~ WKAT YLU SAY, Don't a~it ~esDcnsibiliny. Investigation may show y( were 6. ~SPOHT TC PROPER AS~HORITIES. Each s=a has law for Vo~r stale ~::d co~ly_ 7. NOTiPY FA[~b'}{~3 I~EDIATELy. Time is I~ it is mot convenic~:t to contac: your zeLephcne cr fax thc ::~aresn Fa~-s C~a~m O~f~ce, lis~cd in th~ yellow Dages~ ] GLASS REPAIR'REPLACEmENT CLAIMS. Call your Agent [~efore any repairs) for coverages and reco.nunended ~ocal shops. .RF_~JD CAREFLrLLY TME CALIFOFMIA FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT, (SECTION 16020) OF THE %~HICLE CEDE, REQUIRES EVERY O~ER OR OPERATOR OF A VEHICLE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT. S CF '-~-]E FI~i~C]A[ RESPONSIBILITY ACT SHALL CARRY EVID_~NCE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE VEHICLE AT ALL TiFfS. L~ER %~HICLE CODE (SECTION 16025) EVERY DRIVER I~$OLVED iN AN ACCIDENT M-JST PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF PINANCIAL ,RESPONSIBILITY AT THE SCENE. FAILURE TO COMPLY IS .~N INFRACTION AND S.HALL ~E PUNISHABLE BY A FINE OF NOT MeRE THAN ~';0 HUNDRED FIFTY (250). J R NAVA AGENCY 415 467 4740 04/16 '01 15:17 N0.730 02/02 HOt. OCR. THle CERT~GATE OOEB NOT AMrdm, EXTt-NO OR JOHN NAVA INSURANCE AGENCY ALTER TNE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POUCIEB BELOW. 100 OLD COUNTY ROAD, STE. 108 ~ BRISBANE, CA 94005 I d15 467 1900 FAX 415 467 4740 ~! A FARMERS INSURANCE ~8~ ere,cent: Ave i Brisbane, CA 94005 C .................................. COMPANY D THIS IS TO OERTIF¥ THAT THE POUCIE. S OF ~ Llgl'l O ~_LOW MAV~ BE~EN I~L~-O TO TI'~ INSUR~U NAMED A~OVE FOf~ THE: POL.~Y INOtCA1T. O. No'rWTTHSTANC,HN~ ANY R~It.~R:~e:NT. ~ Oi CO~lOl~ OF ANY CONTIa~CT OR OTI-~_R 0OC~T WITH I;~Sao~E,CT TO ~M.,I~H THIS CC-R'TIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED 01~ MAY P~.RTA.I~. TI4F_ ~ ~ AFFOI~O~D BY TIlE POLICIF...S I~ESCRIBED klF_.~EIN I$ SUedECT TO ALL TH~ EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SL~H POU~ES. UMtTS St"t ~ MAY HAVE HE'EN REDL~ED BY PAID CLAIMS i DEDUCTIBleS 96 ~0289340 0~/23/0~ 0T/23/01 C~P: $240 A~ .: : .COLL: $500 2000 Honda Acco:d ~ VIN: ~HGC63175YA030379 · 4/17/01 3:43 PM l 4CO ?D. CERTIFICATE Z;;;?;y, Renton & Associates 510 465-3090 1-510-452-2193 14088678555 002 Client~: 3460 AT,T.ISK~A2 OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 04/17/01 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A M-ATTER OF INFOR;'~-tTION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT A.M~'D. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE .AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. INSURED Allison Knapp Wollam 496 Cullin Drive Pacifica. CA 94044 INSURERS AFFORDING COVER.AGE Hartford Ins. Co of Midwest :NS-JR. ER. :NSURER .'NSU.~ER. COVEKAGES THE POLICIES OF I);SL'RA_NCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSL-ED TO THE INSUq~D NAR{ED ABOVE FOR TITE POLIC%' PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTA_N"DD;( ANY REQUIREME_N'r. TER.M OR CONDITION' OF AN.'%' CONWIL&CT OR OTHER DOCD.%'IENT %%T'I'H RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE _MAY BE ISSUED el ,C,'l PERTAIN. THE iNSUR.-%NCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SLq~JECr TO ALL THE TEKMS. L'KC/_USIONS ANq) CONDrFIONS OF SUCI- POLICIES. AGGREGATE LLMITS SHOX, N MAY I-L&V'E BEEN REDUCED BY P.tiD CLAL%L$. POLl CY EFFEC'I'IVE POLl CV EXPIRAT ION TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NL.%'IBER DATE iMM I)D'YY~ DATE iMM DD YY'~ LIMITS A iO£SEZALLIAmLITY.~. 57UECFG9508 11/01/00 11/01/01 ~,c~c,_--c-.:.~s:~1:1,000,000 ,xi ::~:-:*::~: >:~-:~'~r-~::'~:-~' ?:~-: :'~'":'~ :'*'~ :'--' ~:* ]: 3 0 0,0 0 0 ~-~:x.~:~-.cv:~::~v -~1,000,000 I mx=.~,z.,~,--~.c-~ :2,000,000 AL~OMOBI LE LIABILITY  ~.V.B:NED ~N~LE LZM.--. ALL OWNED , ! ~_--3[Ly: Nf'j.~y · __i SUHEZL'L-ED AUT __ H iRED .%.L'T DS 5CDi-Y ;N."J RY { N ?N.~-A-NEZ A'_-7: S ,.'Fer acc [~e.-? $ ' i OTHER The certificate holder is named as an additional insured as respects general liability for claims arising from the operations of the named insured. CERTIFICATE HOLDER I I ADDffIO'XALINSURED:D,$URERLETI'ER: CAN'CELLATI ON ~ity of Saratoga tn: 3777Kristin Borol Fruitvale Saratoga. CA 95070 ACORD25-S;7/97 1 of 1 #M58457 $ H OL~D .~NYO~T~ E AB O%lg DESCRibED POLICW S BE C~-NCELLED BEFOR~T~E EX?IRATK)N DATE THEREOF, THE ISblqNG INSURER WILLENDEAVOR TOMAIL'~ {'} DAYSWR//'YEN NOTICETOTHE CERTIFICATE HOLDERNAMEDTOTHE LEF'r, BUT F.~.'RE TODOSOSHALL IM POS E N O OB LIG-%TION OR LIABILITY OF ,% N Y KIN D U PO N TH E IN $ If RE W,. ITS AGE N TS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AL'rHORI ZED REPRE.qENTATIVE (.7 ~ ~//. / .~/~ .~RD CORPOI~-~ ON l~SS DE~LEY,RENTON, & ~SSC 510 4~2 219~ P.02×02 POLICY NUMBER: 57UECFG9508 COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CG 20 10 10 93 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. ADDITIONAL INSURED - OWNERS, LESSEES or CONTRACTORS FORM B This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART NameofPersonorOrganiz~ion: City of Saratoga Attn: Kristin Borel 13777 Fruitvale Saratoga, CA 95070 SCHEDULE (if no entry appears above, information required to complete this endorsement will be shown in the Declarations as applicable to this endorsement.) WHO I$ AN INSURED (Section II) is amended to include as an insured the person or organization shown in the Schedule, but only with respect to liability arising out of your ongoing operations performed for that insured. CG 20 10 10 93 Ti'IT~31 D SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6. 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY~ /.~ DEPT HEAD: Paula Reeve SUBJECT: Approval of Service Delivery Plan for Law Enforcement Contract with County of Santa Clara for FY 2001-2002 RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Move to approve the FY 2001-2002 Law Enforcement Service DeliveD, Plan, and Authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City. REPORT SUMMARY: The current Law Enforcement Contract with the County of Santa Clara covers a five- year period from 1997-2002. The contract terms require the Sheriff to develop an annual Plan of Execution projecting service levels for Saratoga, which are mutually agreed upon by the Sheriff's Department and the City. Appendix A of the attached Plan, outlines proposed hours and costs for General Law Enforcement, Investigative, and Supplemental Patrol Sen:ices. General Law Enforcement includes patrol of established beats, and response to emergencies and other types of calls for sen'ice. These priorities are reviewed quarterly, offering the City an opportunity to modify.' its law enforcement goals predicated on changing community needs. The City Council exercised this option last October, when it approved increasing Supplemental Patrol hours to provide two additional deputies to address traffic congestion issues throughout Saratoga. Comparable hours for additional traffic patrol are reflected in the FY 2001-2002 Plan under the category of General Law Enforcement. FISCAL IMPACTS: The projected expense for Saratoga's FY 2001-2002 contract law enforcement services is $2,900,416. This amount reflects an $182,916 increase over last year's budget to cover an anticipated cost of living increase for personnel. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING: The Sheriff's Department will not have a current plan to provide law enforcement services to the City of Saratoga. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing Additional. ATTACHMENTS: 2. FY 2001-2002 Plan of Execution for Law Enforcement Services. '0 Plan of Execution Law Enforcement Services Contract City of Saratoga Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Office of the Sheriff County of Santa Clara Field Operations Bureau Plan of Service Delivery Part 1, Section A.3, of the Lax,,, Enforcement Contract between the County,' of Santa Clara and the CiD' of Saratoga, provides that the Sheriff shall develop a Plan of Service that shall be reviewed and mutually agreed upon by the City and the Sheriff. This Law Enforcement Sen, ices Plan is developed to satisfy these provisions of the Law Enforcement Contract. ResponsibiliO, Under the Contract, it is the responsibility of the Sheriff to provide services to the City, in accordance with this plan. The Sheriff is solely responsible for the administration and supervision of all such sen, ices provided under the Contract. During the term of this agreement, the City agrees not to contract with or purchase from any other entity, public or private, for law enforcement services without the express consent of the Sheriff. Service Levels Sen'ice levels referred to herein are determined by the amount of reported hours provided and charged to the City under the terms of the Contract in each of the sen'ice categories of General Law Enforcement, Investigative Sen, ices and Supplemental Sen, ices. General Law Enforcement includes the patrol of established beats and response to emergency calls and other calls for sen'ice. Plan of Patrol The patrol established beats will be provided for by the assignment to specific geographical areas of the City by Sheriff's patrol units. Beat responsibility maps will be provided to the City as updating occurs. Based on the current Deputy Sheriff's Association Contract, the Sheriff's Field Operations Division, Patrol Section, employs a ten-hour workday for its sworn personnel. Plan of Service Delivery -- Page 2 FY 2001 - 2002, City of Saratoga Patrol hours will be conducted with marked patrol units, unmarked patrol units, and motorcycles distributed by the West Valley Commander as to the shifts, hours, and days of the week to fulfill the contract. School Resource Officer One Depu~, to work 10 hours a day, 4 days a week, while school is in session to perform duties as mutually agreed upon. Response to Calls for Service Average response times for FY 2000 - 2001 Goals for 2001 - 2002 Priority 1: 5.86 min 6 min Priority 2: 9.54 min 10 min Priority 3: 19.97 min 20 min Priority 1' A life endangering situation or major felony that requires immediate Sheriff's Office response to preserve life or apprehend the responsible ancl/or that, due to its nature, requires the widest possible search for recommend units or requires that all channel dispatchers be made aware of the incident. Priority 2: Any crime against a person that does not require a priority 1 and is either occurring or has occurred within the past 15 minutes or less or any property crime that occurred within the last 10 minutes or less, or any non-crime situation where delayed response leads to a potential danger/hazard to the public. Priority 3: Any crime which exceeds in time limits of priority 2 (more than 15 minutes for crimes against persons or more than 10 minutes for crimes against property) or other situations which requires the response of a Depu~, Sheriff in a timely manner. Priority 4: Any call for sen, ice that does not require a timely response by a DepuB, Sheriff. Average response time has some value in weighing the issue of the number of patrol units assignedto an area. The average response time is affected by several factors: 1. The elapsed time from when the call is received by County Communications until it is dispatched to a patrol unit. Plan of Service Delivery -- Page 3 FY 2001 - 2002, City of Saratoga 2. Need for an immediate response based on initial reported information. 3. Unit availability during peak time periods. 4. Call stacking by priority/nature of reported information. Investigative Services West Valley Detectives will be responsible for handling fraud, forgery, embezzlements, assaults, auto theft, .juvenile cases, missing persons, sexual assaults and all property crimes. Domestic violence, robbery, and homicide cases will be handled by Headquarters Detectives due to the specialized training requirements. The initial case investigative responsibility for all reported crimes, misdemeanor and felony, is with the responding patrol officer. The length and/or depth of this initial investigation depends on the time availability of the patrol officer. Cases requiring extensive follow-up investigation are routed to the West Valley Detective Section or assigned to appropriate beat units. Investigative services to the City of Saratoga will be provided by the Investigative Service Division. The Investigative Selwices Division, organized by investigative case specialization, investigates most felony and certain serious misdemeanor crime reported to the Sheriff's Department on a weighted case management basis. The Patrol Section conducts follow-up into misdemeanor and traffic investigations by case assignment to appropriate beat units. All reported felony and certain serious misdemeanor cases are assigned to an investigator for control purposes. Those cases showing no solvable case characteristics are cased controlled and monitored by an assigned investigator assisted by appropriate beat units. Not every felony or serious misdemeanor case can be successfully investigated to a conclusion. Those cases that indicate appropriate characteristics are focused upon to maximize the use of investioative time and cost. Plan of Service Delivery -- Page 4 FY 2001 - 2002, City of Saratoga Other Law Enforcement Services Traffic investigations shall be handled by the two investigators assigned to the West Valley Station. These charges are now included in the West Valley Station overhead and shared by the three contract cities and the unincorporated areas based on percentage of total, general enforcement hours. - The Patrol Section, in fulfilling its responsibilities, provides other serxices to the CiD' as needed to meet it commitments. Specialized sen, ices available to the City include: Hostage Negotiations Unit Sheriff's Emergency Response Team Underwater Recovery Unit Search and Rescue Unit Narcotics Unit Criminal Intelligence Unit Canine Unit (including narcotics dogs) Bomb Unit (ordinance) Coordinating agency and provided logistics for Auto Theft Task Force Sexual Predators Task Force Domestic Violence Task Force Although such units are not routinely used, their existence enhances the capabilities of the Patrol Section in its delivery of sen-ices. Special events, which are mutually identified by the Sheriff and the City, shall be charged at the actual costs of the event. Plan of Service Delivery -- Page 5 FY 2001 - 2002, City of Saratoga Limitation of Charges for 2001 - 2002 Cost recovery of unanticipated special events, requiring significant increases in service provided to the City shall be negotiated by the Sheriff with the City Manager. For fiscal year 2001 - 2002, the amount of service (chargeable hours) anticipated by category is shown in Appendix A. The 2001 - 2002 hourly rate shall remain in effect until July 1, 2002. Hourly rates will be provided in Appendix A. The new Appendix A shall be delivered to the City in accordance with Section II of the Law Enforcement Master Contract. Service Priorities and Objectives for 2001 - 2002 For the provisions of sen, ice during the 2001 - 2002 fiscal year, the following priorities and objectives are established. Sheriff and City agree to follow these priorities and pursue the objectives. 1. Maintenance of Average Response Time Maintain the annualized average response time for priority 1 and 2 calls for sen'ices at or below 7 minutes. 2. Monitor Serious Crime The Sheriff shall monitor the incidence of serious crime within the City by reporting districts and will: a. Focus additional patrol in areas of significantly higher activity in an effort to reduce such incidence level; and b. Report to the City such developments, including recommendations on measures to reduce these levels. 3. Review of Priorities and Objectives Review, on a quarterly basis, or as otherwise desired, priorities and objectives with the City or its representatives. 'O Plan of Service Delivery -- Page 6 FY 2001 - 2002, City of Saratoga The above Plan of Service for 2001 - 2002 is hereby approved. It is the intent of the Sheriff to provide services according to this Plan, subject to the terms .and conditions of the Law Enforcement Contract. It is the intent of the City to render full cooperation and assistance to the Sheriff in providing the services called for and in meeting the priorities and objectives set forth herein. By By Laurie Smith Sheriff Dave Anderson City Manager Date Date: PROPOSED COSTS FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 RATES CUPERTINO LOS ALTOS HILLS SARATOGA UNINCORP. CITIES GENERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT Proposed Hours - Activity Proposed Hours - Patrol 900 Codes (10% of Above Hours) Total Hours 6,786.7 4,438.7 1,122.5 34,250.0 5,321.0 19,014.0 12,347.9 $3,392,805 $527,098 $1,883,527 $1,223,183 7,200.0 43.0 4,356.0 0.0 $4,189 $424,318 $0 $715,320 Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 ~ $99.06 SUPPLEMENTAL PATROL - DAYS: Proposed Hours Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 ~ $97.41 Cupertino @ $99.35 SUPPLEMENTAL PATROL - NIGHTS: Proposed Hours 2,080.0 0.0 $0 $211,266 2,000.0 $199,260 0.0 $0 Proj. Costs FY 2001-2002 @ $99.63 Cupertino ~ $101.57 INVESTIGATIVE HOURS: Proposed Hours Detective Investigation: Average of last 6 yrs (Cup.& Sar.) Proj CostsFY 2001-2002 ~ $98.29 6,830.0 566.0 2,200.0 6,183.7 306.8 1,808.8 $671,321 $55,632 $216,238 0.0 $0 FY02cont A - 42 4/26/01 RESERVES ACTIVITY HOURS: Proposed Hours PROPOSED COSTS FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 LOS ALTOS RATES CUPERTINO HILLS 1,650.0 22.0 $828 5,364 6.1931% 6,360 594,107 Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 ~ $37.65 $62,123 OPERATING COSTS OF WEST VALLEY SUBSTATION: (See Note) Est. Costs FY 2000-2001 Hours 43,530 86,612 Percentage 50.2586% Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 ~ $102,697 51,614 SUBTOTAL COSTS: Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 5,104,449 PROJECTED SPECIAL SERVICES Projected Hours FY 2001-2002 1,777 0 Proj Costs-Sergeant ~ $58.90 104,678 Proj Costs-Sergeant (Traffic Control) 100,728 SCHOOLS RESOURCE OFFICER Proj. Costs FY 2001-2002 ~ $80.74 275,000 0 TOTAL SHERIFF LAW ENFORCEMENT COSTS Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 5,584,855 594,107 OTHER COSTS Proj CostsFY 2001-2002 0 0 SARATOGA 340.0 $12,801 25,370 29.2916% 30,082 2,766,226 134,190 2,900,416 UNINCORP. CITIES 200.0 $7,53O 12,348 14.2567% 14,641 1,245,354 0 0 1,245,354 0 FY02cont A - 43 4/26/01 PROPOSED COSTS FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 RATES LOS ALTOS CUPERTINO HILLS SAIS,~TOGA UNINCORP. CITIES BOOKING FEES Proj Costs FY 2001-2002 TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT COSTS Proj.Costs FY 2001-2002 TOTAL COSTS CoMpARIsoN Proj.Costs FY 2001-2002 FY02cont 118,002 3,418 22,927 5,702,857 597,525 CONTRACT UNINCORP. CITIES AREA 9,223,725 1,245,354 A - 44 2,~ ~.3,343 1,245,354 4/26/01 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Comm. Development AGENDA ITEM CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY: City Attorney SUBJECT: Resolution Denying An Appeal From The Decision Of The Planning Commission; Applicant/Apellant San Filippo; Sobey Road; DR-00-36 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the resolution denying the appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission concerning DR- 00-36 on Sobey Road. STAFF REPORT: The attached resolution memorializes the Council's decision at its meeting of May 16, 2001 to deny the referenced appeal. FISCAL IMPACTS: None. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of Agenda; The hearing on May 16, 2001 was the subject of mailed and published notice. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: The City Clerk will notify the appellant and the applicant of the Council's final action. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution denying the appeal. RESOLUTION NO. 01- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DENYING AN APPEAL FROM THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION; APPLICANT/APPELLANT-SAN FILIPPO; SOBEY ROAD (APN 397-05-091); DR-00- 036 WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga received an application for Design Review approval for the construction of a new 5,312 square foot, two-story residence and 529 square foot cabana on a 43,042 square foot lot; and WHEREAS, on January 24, 2001 and March 14, 2001, the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga held duly noticed public hearings on said application at which all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence and following the conclusion thereof, the Planning Commission voted to deny Design Review approval; and WHEREAS, the decision of the Planning Commission was appealed to the City Council of the City of Saratoga by the applicant, Ms. Grace San Filippo; and public heating opportunity to WHEREAS, on May 16, 2001 the City Council conducted a duly noticed de novo on the appeal at which time any person interested in the matter was given the full be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the staff report, minutes of proceedings conducted by the Planning Commission relating to the application, and all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council in support of and in opposition to the appeal. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, as follows: After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans, and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the appeal from the Planning Commission is denied and the action of the Planning Commission is affirmed, based on the following findings: 1. The height, elevations and placement on the site of the proposed residence, when considered with reference to: (i) the nature and location of residential structures on adjacent lots and within the neighborhoods; and (ii) community viewsheds will, contrary to section 14-45.080(a) of the Saratoga City Code, unreasonably interfere with views and privacy of other residents in the neighborhood in light of the availability of siting and design alternatives that would avoid such interference. Page 1 of 3 Resolution 01- 2. The design of the proposed residence in relation to structures on adjacent lots and to the surrounding region' creates a visual impact of excessive bulk and is not integrated into the natural environment contrary to section 14045.080(c) of the Saratoga City Code, in that the structure's design in relation to the land gives the appearance of being a three-story rather than a two-story structure. 3. The height and bulk of the-proposed residence is not compatible with existing residential structures on adjacent lots and those within the immediate neighborhood and within the same zoning district contrary to section 14045.080(c) of the Saratoga City Code due to the height and bulk of the structure in relationship to the site; and 4. The proposed residence does not conform to each of the applicable design policies and techniques set forth in the Residential Design Handbook and as required by Section 15-45.055(0 of the City Code in that the proposed residence (a) does not conform to Policy 1 because the location of the structure on the site together with the design of the structure make the structure out of scale with neighboring residences and the natural setting of the site and (b) the proposed residence does not conform to Policy 3 because the design of the structure and location on the site would interfere with the privacy of adjacent properties in a manner that could be avoided by alternative designs and locations on the site. Bo Nothing in this resolution shall be deemed to prejudice the ability of the applicant to submit revised plans for consideration by the Planning Commission. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City Council at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of June, 2001. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk Page 2 of 3 Resolution 01- SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works PREPARED BY: ~~ AGENDA ITEM: ~_~ CITY MANAGER: U.~-~___ ~J SUBJECT: Landscaping & Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 - Public Hearing, Approval of Engineer's Report, and Confirmation of Assessments for FY 01-02 RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Move to adopt the Resolution Ordering the Improvements and Confirming the Diagram and Assessments for FY 01-02. REPORT SUMMARY: Attached is the final Resolution, which requires adoption by the Council to complete the renewal of the Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 for FY 01-02. Once adopted, the Resolution approves the Engineer's Report and confirms the assessments for the upcoming fiscal year.. The Council can consider the Resolution only after the close of the Public Hearing. Per the direction of the City Council, staff sent informational letters to each property owner within each Zone in the Assessment District describing what the District's function is and what the amount of their proposed assessment will be (see attached sample letter). A total of 3,798 letters were mailed. FISCAL IMPACTS: All of the costs associated with the administration and operation of the Landscape & Lighting Assessment District are recovered via the assessments levied against the benefiting properties. The only exception is the reduction to the indirect cost allocation, capped at $10,000, which will be supported by the General Fund. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The Resolution would not be adopted and the assessments would not be confirmed. If this occurs, the Council will need to direct staff accordingly. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): None in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): The assessment roll will be finalized and transmitted to the County Auditor by August 10 for placement on the upcoming tax roll. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: The Resolution of Intention and Notice of Heating have been published a locally distributed newspaper as prescribed by law. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution Confirming Assessments. 2. Sample Letter to Property Owners. 3. Engineer's Report. RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE IMPROVEMENTS AND CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 CITY OF SARATOGA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LLA-1 RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, as follows: WHEREAS, on the 21st day of February, 2001, said Council adopted its Resolution No. 01-014, "A Resolution Describing Improvements and Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 2001-2001" for the City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1, pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, and directed the City Assessment Engineer to prepare and file with the Clerk of this City a written report called for under said Act and by said Resolution No. 01-014; and WHEREAS, said report was duly made and filed with the Clerk of said City, whereupon said Clerk presented it to the City Council for its consideration; and WHEREAS, said Council thereupon duly considered said report and each and every part thereof and found that it contained all the matters and things called for by the provisions of said Act and said Resolution No. 00-014, including (1) plans and specification of the existing improvements and the p/:oposed new improvements; (2) estimate of costs; (3) diagram of the District; and (4) an assessment according to benefits; all of which were done in the form and manner required by said Act; and WHEREAS, said Council found that said report and each and every part thereof was sufficient in every particular and determined that it should stand as the report for all subsequent proceedings under said Act, whereupon said Council pursuant to the requirements of said Act, appointed Wednesday, the 6th day of June, 2001, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. of said day in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, as the time and place for hearing protests in relation to the levy and collection of the proposed assessments for said improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, for Fiscal Year 2001- 2002, and directing said Clerk to give notice of said hearing as required by said Act; and WHEREAS, it appears that notices of said hearing were duly and regularly published and posted in the time, form and manner required by said Act, as evidenced by the Affidavits and Certificates on file with said Clerk, and that all notices and ballots required by Article XIIlD, Section 4(c) and (d) of the California Constitution, were mailed to all property owners of record subject to the assessment at least 45 days prior to the date of the public hearing on the proposed assessment or increase, as evidenced by the Affidavit and Certificates on file with the City Clerk, whereupon said hearing was duly and regularly held at the time and place stated in said notice; and WHEREAS, persons interested, objecting to or in favor of, said improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, or to the extent of the assessment district, or any zones therein, or to the proposed assessment or diagram or to the Engineer's estimate of costs thereof, and all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard, and all matters and things pertaining to the levy and collection of the assessments for said improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, were fully heard and considered by said Council; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and ordered, as follows: 1. That the public interest, convenience and necessity require and said Council does hereby order the levy and collection of assessments pursuant to said Act, for the construction or installation of the improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, more particularly described in said Engineer's Report and made a part hereof by reference thereto. 2. That the City of Saratoga Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 and the boundaries thereof benefited and to be assessed for said costs for the construction or installation of the improvements, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, are situate in Saratoga, California, and are more particularly described by reference to a map thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of Said City. Said map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the terhtory included in said District and any zone thereof and the general location of said District. 3. That the plans and specifications for the existing improvements and for the proposed improvements to be made within the assessment district or within any zone thereof contained in said report, be, and they hereby are, finally adopted and approved. 4. That the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs and expenses of said improvements, maintenance and servicing thereof, and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report, be, and it hereby is, finally adopted and approved. 5. That the public interest and cOnvenience require, and said Council does hereby order the improvements to be made as described in and in accordance with said Engineer's Report, reference to which is hereby made for a more particular description of said improvements. 6. That the diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the assessment district referred to and described in said Resolution No. 01-014, and also the boundaries of any zones therein and the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within said District as such lot or parcel of land is shown on the County Assessor's maps for the fiscal year to which it applies, each of which lot or parcel of land has been given a separate number upon said diagram, as contained in said report, be, and it hereby is, finally approved and confirmed. 2 7. That the assessment of the total amount of the costs and expenses of said improvements upon the several lots or parcels of land in said District in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots or parcels, respectively, from said improvements, and the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof and of the expenses incidental thereto contained in said report be, and the same hereby is, finally approved and confirmed. 8. That said Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 be, and the same hereby is, finally adopted and approved as a whole. 9. -That the City Clerk shall forthwith file with the Auditor of Santa Clara County the said assessment, together with said diagram thereto attached and made a part thereof, as confirmed by the City Council, with the certificate of such confirmation thereto attached and the date thereof. 10. That the order for the levy and collection of assessment for the improvements and the final adoption and approval of the Engineer's Report as a whole, and of the plans and specifications, estimate of the costs and expenses, the diagram and the assessment, as contained in said Report, as hereinabove determined and ordered, is intended to and shall refer and apply to said Report, or any portion thereof, as amended, modified, revised or corrected by, or pursuant to and in accordance with any resolution or order heretofore duly adopted or made by this Council. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, at a meeting thereof held on the day of ,2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: John Mehaffey, Mayor City of Saratoga Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE * SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 · (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 May 1 O, 2001 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsmith - Subject: Landscaping'& Lighting Assessment District LLA-1 Renewal for Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised of an upcoming Public Hearing regarding the renewal of the Landscaping & Lighting AsseSsment District (LLA-1). The meeting will be~held on June 6, 2001, at 7:30 P.M.,'in the Civic Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. Your property is located within one of the LLA-1 zones. Each property within a particular zone pays equally for landscaping and/or lighting services, which includes but is not limited to the cost of maintenance, water, electricity, and administration, your assessed amount for these services show up on your yearly property tax bill. The amount assessed varies fi-om zone to zone and fi-om year to year based on cost factors such as: maintenance, water, and electricity. For fiscal year 2001-2002, most assessments either went down or stayed approximately the same as last year. In any case, no assessment went above the maximum allowed assessment, which would require a ballot vote of the property owners within a zone. For your information, your property is in Zone 11 and your preliminary assessment for fiscal year 2001-2002 is $19.68. Along with this letter, you will fmd the following information: · A Notice, which among other things, indicates the date and time for the Public Hearing on the assessment proposal. · A description of improvements for each zone. If you have any question regarding the abOve information; please call me directly at 868-1241. Sincerely, John Cherbone Public Works Director Printed on recycled paper. NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City Clerk of the Saratoga City Council, State of California, has set Wednesday, the 6th day of June 2001, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, as the time and place for pubhc heating on: Ae The City of Saratoga's intention to order the levy and collection of assessments pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. The levy and collection of the proposed assessment. for the construction or installation of said improvements, including the maintenance and servicing, or both, thereof, and when and where it will consider all oral statements and all written protests made of filed by any interested person at ort before the conclusion of said hearing, against said improvements, the boundaries of the assessment district and any zone therein, the proposed diagram or the proposed assessment, to the Engineer's estimate of the cost thereof, and when and where it will consider and finally act upon the Engineer's report, and tabulate the ballots. All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge the subject projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public heating described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to., the public hearing. In order to be included in the City Council's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Thursday before the meeting. A copy of any material provided to the City Council on the above hearing(s) is on file at the Office of the Saratoga City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga. Questions may be addressed to the City Clerk, (408) 868-1269. /s/Cathleen Boyer City Clerk PUB:05/02/01 DESCRIPTION. OF IMPROVEMENT~ The design, construction or installation, including the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereot~ landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass or other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other ornamental structures and facilities, and public lighting facilities for the lighting of any public places, including traffic signals, ornamental standards, luminaires, poles, supports, tunnels, manholes, vaults, conduits, pipes, wires,' conductors, guys, stubs, platform.s, braces, transformers, insulators, contacts, switches, capacitors, meters, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances, including the cost of repair, removal or replacement of ali or any part thereof; providing for the 'life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, · fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities o~: for the lighting or operation of any other improvements; and the operation of any fountains or the maintenance of any other improvements.. This work specially benefits the parcels assessed therefor since 1)the work is adjacent to the neighborhoods within which said parcels are located, and r~sults in a) helping to identify, distinguish and enhance these neighborhoods, including the entrances thereto; b) helping to improve the' quality of life in these neighborhoods by reducing the potential for graffiti, eliminating dust and litter, providing sound attenuation, eliminating the pOtential for blight, and providing added security and safety through lighting and an added City presence; and 2) in the absence of this assessment district, the work and improvements would not be othenvise accomplished by the City. Benefits Provided within Each Zone: Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 (Manor Drive Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Manor Drive median and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage along Tract 3822. (Fredericksburg Landscape DistricO. Provides for landscape maintenance along the Cox Avenue frontage of Tracts 3777, 4041 and 4042. (Greenbriar Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Seagull Way entrance to Tracts 4628, 4725 and 4726, and of the common areas along Goleta Avenue and Guava Court. Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 (Quito Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting and landscape maintenance in the E! Quito Park residential neighborhood: Tracts 669, 708, 748, 6785, 7833, and 8700. (Azule Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting in the Azule Crossing residential neighborhoods: Tracts 184, 485, 787, 1 i 11,' and 1800. (Sarahiils Lighting District) - Provides for streetlighting in the Sarahills residential neighborhood: Tracts 3392 and 3439. Zone 7 (Village Residential Lighting District).- Provides for streetlighting in four separate residential neighborhoods surrounding Saratoga Village. Includes all or a' portion of Cunningham Acres, La Paloma Terrace, Mary Springer #1 and #2, McCartysviile, Saratoga Park, Williams, and Tracts 270, 336, 416, 2399, 2502, 4477, 5350, 5377, 5503, 5676, 6419, and 6731. ' -.. Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 15 Zone 16 ZOne 17 Zone 22 Zone 24 Zone 25 Zone 26 Zone 27 Zone 28 Zone 29 Zone 31 (McCartysville Landscape District) - Provides for Landscape maintenance' along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tract 5944. (Tricia Woods Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tract 7495. (Maintenance and water shared with Zone 27). (Arroyo de Saratoga Landscape District) - Prov/des for landscape maintenance ofthe Via Monte entrances to all or a portion of Tract~ 2694, 2835, 3036, and 4344. (Leutar Court Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance of the Leutar Court frontage in Tract 6996. (Bonnet Way Landscape District) - ProVides for monthly landscape maintenance along Bonnet Way: Tract 5462. (Beauchamps Landscape District) - Provides for landscaping and lighting of the Prospect Road entrance to the Beauchamps subdivision: Tract 7763. (Sunland Park' Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Quite Road frontage of Tracts 976 and 977. (Prides Crossing Landscape District) - Provides for periodic landscape maintenance along Prospect Road between the Route $5 overcrossing and Titus Avenue, and along Cox Avenue between the Route 85 overcrossing andSaratoga Creek. Includes ali properties bordered by Route 85, Prospect Road and Saratoga Creek with the exception of the Brookview neighborhood (Tracts 1493, 1644, 1695, 1727, 1938, and 1996).. (Village Commercial Landscape and Lighting District)-- Provides for routine maintenance of Village Parking Districts 1-4 and Big Basin Way landscaping and street lighting. (Saratoga Legends Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenanCe along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of~ and pedestrian pathways within, Tract 8896. (Beilgrove Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for common area landscape maintenance and lighting aSsociated with Tract 8700. (Cunningham Place/GlaSgow Court Landscape District) Provides' for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road frontage of Tracts 6199 and 7928. (Maintenance and water shared with Zone 10). (Kerwin Ranch Landscape District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Fruitvale Avenue and Saratoga Avenue frontages of Tracts 8559 and 8560. (Tollgate Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for maintenance of the common 'area landscape and lighting improvements along Tollgate Road at the entrance to Tracts 3946 and 5001. (Horseshoe Drive Landscape and Lighting District) - Provides for landscape maintenance along the Saratoga-Los Gatos Road frontage of Tract 247. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Community Development PREPARED BY: Mark J. Connolly ~ AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAD: ~~ SUBJECT: Continuance of appeal for DR-00-054& V-01-002; Kittridge Road- MARTIN/ROSE RECOMMENDED ACTION (S): Continue the item to the June 20, 2001 meeting REPORT SUMMARY: The apphcation is for Design Review and Variance approval to construct a new 7,272 square foot two story residence on a 347,173 square foot vacant parcel. The Variance is necessary for retaining wails to exceed five feet in height and possibly closer than 10 feet for parallel walls. The Variance is also necessary to exceed 15,000 square feet of impervious surface due to a long driveway. Maximum height of the structure is 26 feet tall, located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. Due to concerns of drainage affecting their lower elevation property the project was appealed. On April 12, 2001 City Staff visited the site and made recommendations/revisions to the plans, and sent the items to the apphcant. The apphcant felt they could further improve the drainage issues. The appellants had requested a continuance of the May 16, 2001 meeting to the June 6, 2001 meeting in hopes that this would be enough time to resolve the issues. A meeting with the apphcants, the applicant's engineer, and the appellants was held on the appellant's site on May 15, 2001. At the meeting an engineered drainage system that would solve the existing and future drainage problems affecting the appellant's home was discussed, and all parties came to an amicable agreement on a design and course of action. To date the applicant's engineer is still working on the design, and progress is moving forward, although not yet resolved." Staff is recommending continuing the item to the June 20, 2001 meeting to allow the design to be finalized and agreed upon by both parties. FISCAL IMPACTS: None CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION (S): Reversal of the Planning Commission's denial will constitute approval of the project, which the City Council may do with or without additional conditions. ALTERNATIVE ACTION (S): Provide direction and refer the item back to the Planning Commission FOLLOW UP ACTION (S): The City Attorney will prepare a Resolution for the next available meeting to memorialize the decision of the City Council on this matter. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: A public hearing notice was mailed to surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and published in the Saratoga News newspaper. 2 of 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2001/02 and 2002/03 Budget RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): 1. Adopt the Resolution amending the City's Classification Plan. 2. Adopt the Resolution implementing staffing changes and authorizing positions in the City service for Fiscal Year 2001-02. 3. Adopt the Resolution establishing the Fiscal Year 2001-02 Appropriation Limit. 4. Adopt the Resolution establishing a schedule of fees. 5. Adopt the Resolution adopting the budget for Fiscal Years 2001-02 and 2002-03 making appropriations and authorizing carryovers thereto and expenditures therefrom. REPORT SUMMARY: After the close of the public heating, it is recommended that the City Council act on the attached five Resolutions to formally approve the latest reorganization plan tentatively approved by the Council in June, to adopt the budget for the biennium beginning July 1, 2001 and ending June 30, 2003. The resolutions are listed in the order in which they should be adopted and are briefly summarized as follows: Resolution amending the City's Classification Plan - This Resolution, similar to ones you have adopted previously, amends the City's Employment Classification Plan to add the position of Park Maintenance Leadworker. In addition, the existing limited term positions of MIS Assistant and Recreation Program Coordinator are reclassified as regular positions. Finally, the Public Safety Officer is maintained as a limited term position and the EconOmic Development Coordinator is added as limited term. The limited term positions receive benefits, but are not permanent; and they are renewed by the City Council on an as-needed basis. Resolution implementing a reorganization plan and authorizing permanent positions in the City service for Fiscal Year 2001-02. This Resolution adopts a reorganization plan by first rescinding thc Resolution which adopted the prior reorganization plan. Section 2 identifies the positions in the current organization to bc added, increased, decreased, or eliminated by adopting thc plan, and Section 3 authorizes the permanent positions in the City service by department for Fiscal Year 2001-02. Lastly Section 4 grants continuing authority to thc City Manger to take administrative actions as needed to effectuate thc plan. Resolution establishing the City's Appropriation Limit for FY 2001-02. This Resolution sets the City's Appropriation (Gann) Limit for Fiscal Year 2001-02 at $22,950,540, which is~ 9.40% higher than last year's limit, in accordance with Article XIIIB of the State Constitution. The factors used to calculate changes to the prior year's Gann Limit are provided by the State Department of Finance and the worksheet showing the history of the limit since it was first required to be established is attached to the Resolution. 4. Resolution establishing a schedule of fees. This Resolution establishes the City's fee schedule for Fiscal Year 2001-02. No changes to the fee schedule arc recommended. Resolution adopting the budget for Fiscal Year 2001-02 and 2002-03. This last Resolution formally adopts thc two year budget and authorizes expenditures for Fiscal Year 2001-02 and 2002-03 of $34,394,203 and $14,490,579 respectively. Section 3 of thc Resolution also establishes thc City's policy for thc usc and carryover of reserve funds Negotiations have not yet been completed with the City's employee associations. At the time that negotiations are completed, a budget adjustment will be prepared incorporating into the Budget the fiscal impact of the final agreement. FISCAL IMPACTS: All as stated in the Resolutions and the companion budget documents. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Depending on what Resolutions were not adopted, either the staffing plan would not be approved, the fee schedule would not be approved, and/or the two year budget would not be adopted. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): Direct staff to remm on June 20, 2001, with a modified Budget and/or modified Resolutions. 2 FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): 1. A Resolution incorporating changes to the Following documents will be prepared once negotiations are completed: a. Memorandum &Understanding with the Saratoga Employees Association. b. Letter of Understanding with the Saratoga Management Organization. 2. The final budget document will be printed and distributed. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: A general notice of the budget hearing was published in the Saratoga News and mailed to the Community Group list. ATTACHMENTS: Attachments: Resolutions RESOLUTION ]qO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING THE CITY'S CLASSIFICATION PLAN WHEREAS, Rule 3.02 of the City's Personnel Rules provides that the City Council may amend the City's Classification Plan from time to time; and WHEREAS, concurrent with the adoption of this Resolution, the City Council has adopted a Resolution Implementing a Reorganization Plan and Authorizing Permanent Positions in City Service which includes the addition of new and amended classifications in the City's classification plan; and WHEREAS, the City has apprised recognized labor organizations of these amendments to the classification plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the new and amended classifications are reasonable and appropriate; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga does hereby amend its classification plan to abolish the following classifications: None; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council include the following new or amended classifications, as specified in class descriptions on file with the Office of the City Manager: Park Maintenance Leadworker; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the following two positions which were previously classified as limited term now be classified as regular positions: MIS Assistant and Recreation Program Coordinator; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that .the City Council include the following limited term positions, as specified in class descriptions on file with the Office of the City Manager: Public Safety Officer and Economic Development Coordinator. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on 6th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk ResoClas. doc 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA IMPLEMENTING A REORGANIZATION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING PERMANENT POSITIONS IN CITY SERVICE WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 85-9.122, A ResOlution Implementing a Reorganization Plan and Authorizing Permanent Positions in City Service, on June 21, 2000; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the adoption of said ResolUtion No. 85-9.122, the City Manager has recommended further changes to both the City's organization and Classification Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the recommendations of the City Manager and believes that implementing these further changes will be in the best interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: Rescission of Resolution No. 85-9.122: Resolution No. 85-9.122, adopted by the City Council on June 21, 2000, is rescinded in its entirety. Section 2: Addition/Elimination of Funding for City Positions: Funding for the following positions are added, increased, decreased or eliminated, effective July 1, 2001: ADDITION/DELETION Addition Addition Increase Deletion POSITION FTE Park Maintenance Leadworker 1.00 Facility Maintenance Worker 1.00 Office Specialist (Human Resources) 0.25 None 0.00 Section 3: Funding for City Positions: The positions listed below are hereby authorized effective July 1, 2001- POSITION City Manager Assistant City Manager City Clerk Administrative Analyst. Economic Development Coordinator (limited term) Office Specialist City Manager's Office FTE 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 6.00 Community Development Director Assistant/Associate Planner Building Official Building Inspector Plan Check Engineer Community Services Officer Public Safety Officer (limited term) · Office Specialist Community Development Department 1.0 4.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 14.00 Public Works Director Assistant/Associate Engineer Administrative Analyst Street Maintenance Supervisor Street Maintenance Worker Park Maintenance Supervisor Park Maintenance Leadworker Park Maintenance Specialist Park Maintenance Worker Office Specialist Public Works Department 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 6.0 2.0 21.0 Administrative Services Director Administrative Analyst Accounting Supervisor Technology Coordinator MIS Assistant Office Specialist Administrative Services Department 1.0 0.75 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.90 9.65 2 Recreation Director Recreation Supervisor Recreation Program Coordinator Facility Coordinator Facility Maintenance Supervisor Facility Maintenance Worker Office Specialist Recreation Department 1.0 2.0 1.0 0.6 1.0 3.0 1.75 10:35 Total Positions 61.00 Section 4: Miscellaneous: The City Manager is authorized to take whatever other administrative actions are necessary or appropriate in order to effectuate this reorganization, consistent with this and other City Council resolutions relating to this reorganization. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 6th day of June, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk ResofTE. doc 3 RESOLUTIONNO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA · ESTABLISHING THE FISCAL YEAR 2001-02 APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR THE CITY OF SARATOGA. WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga has established its Base Year appropriation limit as $5,961,747; and WHEREAS, the cumulative changes to population and to the California per capita personal income since the Base Year established the revised Proposition 111 Fiscal Year 2000-01 AppropriationLimit as $20,977,606; and WHEREAS, to the best of the City's knowledge and belief, the State Department of Finance figures provided to the City in response to Proposition 111 passed by the voters in June 1990, reflect the appropriate statistics relevant to the calculation of the Fiscal Year 2001-02 Appropriation Limit: · Population adjustments for the year ended December 31, 2000, equals 1.47%; and · Per capita change in California personal income determined for Fiscal Year 2001-02 equals 7.92%. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that, based on the foregoing figures and the provisions of Article XIIIB of the Constitution of the State of California, the following figure accurately represents the Fiscal Year 2001-02 Appropriation Limit for the City of Saratoga: $22,950,540. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 6th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk ResoGann. doc 2 CITY OF SARATOGA Gann Limit Appropriation Personal Fiscal Population Income Year. Change Change 1978 - 79 BASE YEAR 1979- 80 -0.87% 10.17% 1980- 81 1.54% 12.11% 1981 -82 0.19% 9.12% 1982- 83 1.88% 6.79% 1983- 84 0.15% 2.35% 1984 -85 0.10% 4.74% 1985 -86 -0.73% 3.74% 1986- 87 0.16% 2.30% 1987 -88 0.63% 3.47% 1988 -89 1.19% 4.66% 989- 90 1.33% 5.19% 990- 91 1.35% 4.21% 991 - 92 1.31% 4.14% 992- 93 1.48% -0.64% 1993- 94 1.71% 2.72% 1994 - 95 1.60% 0.71% 1995 - 96 3.30% 4.72% 1996 - 97 1.08% 4.67% 1997- 98 2.89% 4.67% 1998 - 99 2.12% 4.15% 1999- 00 1.73% 4.53% 2000 - 01 1.63% 4.91% 2001 - 02 1.47% 7.82% Gann Limit $5,961,747 $6,510,915 $7,411,797 $8,103,119 $8,816 O04 $9,036 715 '$9,474.520 $9,757 116 $9,997 5OO $10,409 583 $11,024 317 $11,750 712 $12,410 73O $13,093 845 $13,202 594 $13,793,609 $14,113,809 $15,267,720 $16,153,314 $17,396,306 $18,502,359 $19,675,107 $20,977,606 $22,950,540 %Change 9.21% 13.84%~ 9.33%~ 8.80%I 2.50%1 4.84% 2.98% 2.46% 4.12% 5.91% 6.59°/~ 5.62°/, 5.50°/~ 0.83% 4.48% 2.32% 8.18%I 5.80%~ 7.69%~ 6.36%I 6.34%I 6.62%8 9'40%I Recalculated under Proposition 111 as passed by the voters in June 1990. Source for revised CPI and population growth: State Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit. As a result of the Proposition 111 audit, this calculation has been corrected for 1992-93 forward to reflect greater of County or City population change. MJW:GannLmt 5/31/01 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE OF FEES WHEREAS, the City Council did review the proposed budget for Fiscal Years 2001-02 and 2002-03 at a duly advertised public hearing and took cognizance of all testimony presented, both oral and written, at its regularly scheduled meeting of June 6, 2001; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted resolution 00-34 on June 21, 2000, a Resolution Establishing a Schedule of Fees for Fiscal Year 2000-01. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: The fees set forth in the attached exhibit "A" are hereby established pursuant to the Saratoga City Code and shall be paid to or collected by the City for each of the applications, permits, extensions, renewals, services or other matters enumerated therein. No application shall be deemed filed or complete until all required fees have been paid in full to the City. Section 2: Resolution Number 00-34 and all amendments thereto are hereby repealed in their entirety, it being the intent of the City Council that the fee schedule adopted by this Resolution shall supersede all prior schedules pertaining to the same subject matter. Section 3: This Resolution shall become effective on July 1, 2001, and shall be applicable to all fees and deposits which are payable to the City from and after the effective date hereof. 3_ The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 6th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk ResoFee. doc 2 0 0 f- .-1 o o o .~> .~ .~> ~ o o ~-- 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 0 444 ~ ~ 44 ~ ~ 0 o 0 0 0 - P'.- I'~ I'~ 0 0 LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E CL CL 0 0 0 o z 0 z r4:> c~ ILl 0 0 0 0 0 0 ZZZ Z t-- .o.9. o {.9 "iD ,-. 0 I.- o A 0 1.0 0 0 0 t- r- .o .9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~'~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 ~.0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0_ 0 tO Il') tO I~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 · 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ._.9. 0 0 0 0 0 I'~ I~ I~ 0 0 0 o o ._o o o '~ 0 0 C 0 0 0 X CZ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .9 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t- ~-- .o ._o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ._ o ~ '- 0 0 0 0 0 ._o o._© 'E E E ._E ._E ._E ._c ._ ._ 0 0 .~_ '13 0 0 E E E E E E E E ._ ._ ._ 0 ._.9. 2 t-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ADOPTING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEARS 2001-02 AND 2002-03, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING CARRYOVERS THERETO AND EXPENDITURES THEREFROM WHEREAS on June 6, 2001, the City Manager forwarded to the City Council of the City of Saratoga the proposed budget for the Fiscal Year 2001-02 and Fiscal Year 2002-03; and WHEREAS, the City Council did review the proposed budget at a duly advertised public heating on the proposed budget and took cognizance of all testimony presented, both oral and written, at its regularly scheduled meeting of June 6, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council hereby approves expenditures in the following amounts for Fiscal Years 2001-02 and 2002-03 from the consolidated budgets: FY 2001-02 Operating Programs General Government Library Project Capital Projects Contingency Appropriation Total Budget FY 2002-03 $11,514,385 $11,474,178 2,803,615 $2,816,401 14,000,000 0 5,876,203 0 200,000 200,000 $34,394,203 $14,490,579 No expenditures beyond said amounts are authorized without further action by the City Council. Any adopted expenditure not expended shall be carried over to future years for subsequent expenditure authorization. Section 2: The following appropriations for Fiscal Years 2001-02 and 2002-03 are hereby approved: From Current Revenues From Library Bond Proceeds (To) From Fund Balances Total Budget FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 $16,752,571 $15,273,329 15,000,000 0 2,641,632 (782,750) $34,394,203 $14,490,579 Section 3: Restricted reserves shall be utilized exclusively for the purposes designated in the budget document. No expenditures from the reserves are specifically authorized. Rather, reserves shall be transferred to the appropriate budget by specific action of the City Council as deemed necessary. Funds remaining in reserves at the end of the fiscal year shall be carded over to future years at the City Council's discretion. The General Operating Reserve shall be used exclusively for the purpose of providing necessary funds for cash flow, emergency operations, and to supplement the total' Budget as needed. Accordingly, a minimum reserve of $2,000,000, plus accrued interest thereon, of General Fund operating appropriations shall be maintained at the close of the fiscal year. An Economic Uncertainty Reserve of $1,500,000 shall be established as of June 30, 2001, for future fiscal security in the event of an economic downturn or reductions in revenues from the State of California. Section 4: This resolution shall be operational on July 1, 2001, and may be amended from time to time by resolution of the City Council. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 6th day of June, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk ResoApp2OOO.doc 3 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works AGENDA ITEM: SUBJECT: Congress Springs Park Improvement Project - Award of Construction Contract RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): 1. Approve Resolution making appropriation adjustments to the fiscal year 2000/01 budget in connection with the Congress Springs Park Improvement Project. Move to declare Perma-Green Hydroseeding, Inc. of Gilroy to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project. Move to award a construction contract to Perma-Green Hydroseeding, Inc. in the amount of $1,020,350 and authorize the City Manager execute the same. Move to authorize staffto execute change orders to the contract up to $75,000. Approve purchase of Tifway 2 turf from West Coast Turf in the amount of $115,000. REPORT SUMMARY: Sealed bids for the Congress Springs Park Improvement Project were opened on May 31. A total of two contractors submitted bids and a summary of the bids received is attached. Perma-Green Hydroseeding, Inc. of Gilroy submitted the lowest bid of 1,440,125, which is 11% below the Engineers Estimate of 1,619,665. The recommended contract award amount of $1,020,350 includes bid items 1 thru 33 (base bid items) and 42A (the City has received donations for this alternate bid item). The recommended award amount is 3% below the corresponding engineers estimate for the same bid items and will allow for construction of the basic infrastructure improvements. Additionally, it is recommended that the City purchase the project turf from West Coast Turf in the amount of $115,000 for their Tifway 2 turf variety. The City's turf consultant recommended this turf to be best variety for the needs of Congress Springs Park. West Coast Turf is the sole source for this turf variety. In anticipation of the project, West Coast Turf has set aside enough turf for the project. In order to award a construction contract, it is necessary to increase the budget for this project by $200,000. The following is a breakdown of the costs: Approved Project Budget: $1,200,000 Design Costs: (182,500) (includes project design, donation brochure, turf consultant, and construction observation) Turf: (115,000) (includes purchase and installation of tu~f by grower) Bidding/Printing: (5,000) Construction Contract: (1,020,350) Change Orders: (75:000) (authority to make changes to the contract if needed) Shortfall: $197,850 The increases to the project budget can be offset by an estimated increase of $200,000 over the projected revenue estimate in Park Development Fees. Additionally, when enough donations have been received for the amenities, staff will request authorization to increase the construction contract by the corresponding donated amounts. It is therefore recommended that the Council declare Perma-Green Hydroseeding, Inc to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project, and award a construction contract in the amount of $1,020,350. Further, it is :recommended that Council authorize staff to execute change orders up to an amount of $75,000 to cover any unforeseen circumstances, which may arise during the course of the work. FISCAL IMPACTS: Funding for this work is programmed in the adopted budget in C.I.P. No. 0002 (Congress Springs Improvements Project) - Account No. 4010 (Contract Services). If the resolution appropriating an additional $200,000 to the project budget is approved, the increase will be offset by an estimated $200,000 overage in Park Development Fee revenue. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Perma-Green Hydroseeding, Inc will not be declared the lowest responsible bidder and a construction contract will not be awarded to that finn. The Council may make specific findings to declare another bidder to be the lowest responsible bidder, or reject all of the bids and direct staffto re-bid the entire project. However, staffdoes not believe that a lower bid will be obtained by/'e- bidding the project due to the current construction market. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): NOne in addition to the above. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): The contract will be executed and the contractor will be issued a Notice to Proceed. Work will. begin as soon as possible and completed by the end of October. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution making appropriation adjustments to the fiscal year 2000/01 budget. 2. Bid Summary. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA MAKING APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 BUDGET WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No 00-38 adopting the budget for Fiscal Years 2000-01 and 2001-02 on June 21, 2000'; and WHEREAS, subsequent to the adoption of said Resolution, the City Manager has recommended further changes to the City's budget; and WHEREAS, the original appropriations of $1,175,000 for Congress Springs Park are insufficient to construct and design the project; and WHEREAS, the total cost to design and construct Congress Springs Parks needs to be increased by $200,000 to complete the construction phase of the project. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves to increase the appropriations for Congress Springs Park capital improvement project, using Park Development Fund Balance. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the above adjustments to the City of Saratoga's Fiscal Year 2000-01 budget will be made using the following entries: 310-9010-522-40.10-0002 310-0000-330-01.00 Revenues/ Expenditures Fund Balance (Increase) (Decrease) Congress Springs Park-General Contracts $200,000 Park Development Fund Balance $200,000 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjoumed mee{ing of the Saratoga City Council held on the 6th day of June, 2001, by the following vote: AYE S: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: John Mehaffey, Mayor Cathleen Boyer, City Clerk SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works PREPARED BY: John Cherbone and Richard Taylor SUBJECT: Septic Abatement Program Status Report RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and provide direction to staff. REPORT SUMMARY: This report has been prepared jointly by the Public Works Department and the City Attomeys Office to provide the Council with a comprehensive assessment of the technical and legal issues to be considered. The first part of the report will provide an update on the compliance rate of the existing Septic Abatement Ordinance, while the second part of the report will present various options the City could take to increase water pollution controls in the City. Part One - Septic Abatement Ordinance Update Background: In an effort to improve underground and creek water quality in Saratoga, the Saratoga City Council adopted a septic abatement ordinance that applies to all properties within the City. The ordinance requires that septic systems in the City be abandoned and the properties connected directly to the public sanitary sewer system when a public sewer line is available within 200 feet of a property line. A public sewer line is not considered "available" if existing grades do not permit gravity flow connections, or if a legal easement or fight-of-way to the sanitary sewer system does not exist. Property owners with properly operating septic systems may request up to a five-year extension of time to connect to the public sanitary sewer. Qualifying property owners facing financial hardships are able to apply for Community Development Block Grant funds to help pay for the cost of the septic abatement and sewer connection. Compliance Rate: The City initiated the new septic abatement ordinance in 1999 by collecting lists of properties fi:om the West Valley and Cupertino Sanitation Districts that were believed to be subject to its requirements. Of the 586 properties identified by the districts, staff was able to remove many that were either undeveloped parcels or properties that had connected to the sanitation system but were absent fi:om the district's records. A notice dated February 22, 2000 was sent to each of the remaining property, owners notifying them of their responsibility (see attached notice). The notice gave them Six months to comply with the ordinance. The deadline was August 21, 2000. Of the 586 properties noticed, 221 properties did not respond. In order to insure that property owners received proper notice of the requirements, Council directed staff to send one final notice to the 221 noncompliant property owners giving them 45 additional days to comply with the ordinance. On February 23, 2001, the final notice was sent via certified mail (see attached notice). The following is a breakdown of the status of the 586 properties: Connected to Sanitary Sewer: 270 Vacant Parcel: 102 Extension Granted: 56 Exempt (No Easement/Right-of-Way) 20 Exempt (Inadequate Grade) 20 Exempt (Greater than 200 ft.) 5 Exempt (Total) 45 Connection Permit Issued 33 Misc. Exempt (Not in City) Noncompliance (No Response) 59 Noncompliance (Undeliverable) 8 Noncompliance (Communicating w/City) 12 Noncompliance (Total) 79 Of the 79 noncompliant properties, 67 have been sent a Notice of Intention To Record a Notice Noncompliance via certified mail (see attached notice and cover letter). Additionally, a copy of this notice is required to be physically posted on the noncompliant property. The remaining 12 noncompliant properties have been in constant contact with the City and are trying to comply with the ordinance. Staff recommends that these properties not be issued a Notice of Intention while they are demonstrating an effort to bring their properties in compliance. Unless the property owner requests a hearing before a Hearing Officer within 20 days of the date of the Notice of Intention, the City may proceed to Record a Notice of Noncompliance {see attached notice). PART TWO - Water Quality Enforcement Options Background This part of the report describes (1) the City's ongoing water quality protection programs; (2) water quality in Saratoga creeks in relation to national water quality standards; (3) potential sources of continuing water quality problems in Saratoga creeks; and (4) potential strategies to address those water quality problems. The findings can be summarized as follows: Water Quality Protection Programs -- The City has adopted an ordinance to promote connections of properties currently served by septic systems to the local sewer system. The City is working with the West Valley Sanitation District to identify potential sewer- related sources of contamination and has successfully abated two major pollution sources. In addition, the City has posted signs along Saratoga Creek warning of the contamination. Current Water Quality Conditions -- Despite the progress in the City's ongoing water quality protection programs, fecal coliform levels in Saratoga Creek and other waterways exceed national standards for the protection of human health and the environment. Even when the water appears crystal clear and there is no obvious indication of pollution, tests have recorded fecal coliform levels that pose a health threat to people--especially children--that may. be attracted to the creek by its pristine appearance. Potential Sources of Contamination -- Based on circumstances in the area and a review of available technical literature on the subject, the probable sources of contamination are septic systems and faulty sewer lines. Potential Strategies for Response -- There are a number of options available to the City. With respect to both the sewer system and septic systems these include increased public education efforts and stepped-up code enforcement. To limit contamination from faulty sewer systems the City could also adopt regulations establishing minimum construction, maintenance, and/or performance standards for sewer laterals connecting homes and businesses to the sewer system. To limit contamination from City's remaining septic systems, the City could require regular maintenance and could also require removal of those septic systems near creeks that pose the greatest risk to City waterways. This staff report provides a general discussion of the foregoing options for the Council's consideration. At the Council's direction, City staff will prepare more detailed analyses and specific recommendations for those options the Council wishes to pursue in more depth. For more detailed information regarding the above options please see attachment titled "Water Quality Enforcement Options." FISCAL IMPACTS: See accompanying text. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Notice for this meeting. CONSEQUENCES OF NoT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Staff will continue to implement existing City ordinances. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: Report to the Council on staff implementation of Council directives. ATTACHMENTS: 1. February 22, 2000, Notice. 2. February 23, 2001, Notice. 3. Notice of Intention and Cover Letter 4. Notice of Noncompliance 5. Water Quality Enforcement Options. Incorporated October 22, 1956 ATTACHMENT 1 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE · SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 * (408) 868-1200 February22,2000 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Nick Streit Ann Waltonsrni~h' NOTIC~ OF REQUIREMENT FOR CONNECTION TO PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER In an effort to improve underground and creek water quality in the region, the Saratoga City Council recently adopted, a new sewage disposal ordinance that applies to all properties within the City of Saratoga. The ordinance requires that septic systems in the City be abandoned and the properties connected directly to the public sanitary sewer when a public sewer line is available within 200 fl. of a property line. A public sewer line is not considered "available" if existing grades do not permit a gravity flow connection, or if a legal easement or right-of-way to the sewer line does not exist. Your property has been identified as being within 200 fi. of an existing public sewer line. If you feel that your property has been incorrectly identified or cannot be connected to the public sanitary sewer due to grade or right-of-way constraints, you may submit a report from a Registered Civil Engineer or a Licensed Land Surveyor to the City for consideration. Otherwise, you will need to connect your property to the public sanitary sewer within 180 days of receipt of this letter. Property owners .with properly operating septic systems may request up to a five-year extension of time to connect to the public sanitary sewer. To request an extension, you will need to submit a report from a Registered Civil Engineer, a Registered Environmental Health Specialist or a person with a C42 State Contractors Board License, verifying that your septic system is functioning properly pursuant to Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department standardsl If you cannot locate an RCE, REHS or C42 Licensee to prepare the report, you may contact the County Environmental Health Department directly for assistance. The attached Notice of Requirement for Connection to Public Sanitary Sewer provides more specifics of this program and its requirements. If you have any questions, you may contact the following agencies for assistance. A sanitation district boundary map is attached to identify the district that serves your property. City of Saratoga Community DevelOPment Department Shirley Nishkian at (408)868-1244 for program information and requirements · Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department Kurt Fisher at (408) 299-6060 for septic system inspection requirements · Cupertino Sanitary District Carl Beckham at (408) 253-707t to determine if sanitary sewer is available · West Valley Sanitation District Sam Young at (408) 378-2407 to determine if sanitary sewer is available The City understands that this notice may impose a financial burden on homeowners, and there is ultimately a financial exception that can be made for qualifying individuals. Please contact City of Saratoga staff to inquire about a financial exception. Your sanitation district may also provide a financing assistance program, and should be contacted directly with inquiries. - Thank~ you for your attention and anticipated cooperation in this matter. . Incorporated October 22, 1956 ATTACHMENT 2 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE · SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 · (408) 868-1200 February 23, 2001 COL"NCIL MEMBERS: £van Baker Start Bogo$ian John Mehafley Nick Strei! Ann 'Waltonsmith ' · Via Certified Mail The City is writing you in regard to the Sewage Disposal Ordinance that applies to all properties within the City of Saratoga. According to our records, in February 2000, we notified you that the Health Officer of the City of Saratoga had determined that your property was subject to various provisions of the Saratoga City Code concerning abatement of septic systems. This letter is to follow up on our earlier correspondence and to inform you that the deadline for compliance with the various requirements specified in the notice have been extended to April 9, 2001. A copy of the February 2000 notice is enclosed for your information and we urge you to read it carefully. In summary, the notice states that according to the City's records your property (1) is not connected to an approved sewer system, (2) generates sewage, and (3) is located within 200 feet of an approved sewer system. Based on that determination, the notice specified several available options. These are: Demonstrate that the determinations described above concerning your property are not correct; or Connect the property to an approved sewer system; or Request and receive a five year extension of time to connect to an approved sewage system; or Vacate the property in a way that allows no further generation of sewage on the property.. The February 2000 notice set forth various deadlines for complying with these requirements. In order to ensure that all affected property owners had ample notice of · the requirements of the City's septic abatement program as well as ample time to comply, the City has directed staff to extend all compliance deadlines in the February, 2000 notice by 45 days from the date of this letter. OVER According to our records, you are not in compliance with the various requirements of the Saratoga City Code described in the February 2000 notice. If this is not correct and you have supplied the City with the relevant compliance information, please accept our apologies and contact us as soon as possible so that we can correct our records. If you have not complied, please be informed that due to the compl!ance period extension directed by the City Council, you may comply with the requirements-of the' septic abatement program until. April 9, 2001. If you elect not to comply, the City will take the steps necessary to record a Notice of Non-Compliance concerning your property in' the Santa Clara County Recorder's office as specified in section III of the February, 2000 notice. The Notice of Non-Compliance will become a part of the information retained by the County Recorder's office concerning your property. In accordance with the Saratoga City Code, the notice will state that no improvements, including building additions, can be approved while the substandard sewage disposal system continues in operation. Once recorded, a Notice of Non-Compliance may be removed only if the City makes one of the four determinations outlined in section III of the February 2000 notice. Please do not hesitate to contact us at (408) 868-1222 if you have any questions concerning the City's septic abatement program or the enclosed notice. ATTACHMENT 3 May 25, 2001 Re: Notices regarding Sewer Disposal Ordinance Violations Dear Property Owner: You have been served with a NOTICE OF INTENTION TO RECORD A NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE ("Notice of Intention") pursuant to City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance (Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code). This Notice of Intention informs you that a condition and/or sewage disposal system maintained on your property violates the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance. You may request a hearing before a Hearing Officer within 20 days of the date of the Notice of Intention to contest this notice. However, if you do not request a hearing within the 20-day period, the Manager for the City of Saratoga will proceed to record, at the Santa Clara County Recorder's Office, a NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE ("Notice of Existence"). The Notice of Existence signifies the existence of the violation being maintained on your property. If a hearing is requested within the 20-day period as explained above, the Notice of Existence will not be recorded unless and until there is a determination by a Hearing Officer. If you have any questions concerning the Notice of Intention, please contact this office at Sincerely, Dave Anderson City Manager NOTICE OF INTENT TO RECORD NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE In accordance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that:. 1. The City of Saratoga has adopted by reference Division B 11, Chapter II, Article 1 and 2 only, of the Santa Clara County Code, as it may be amended from time to time, together with the additions, deletions and amendments specified in Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code, as its sewage disposal regulations. The resulting regulations constitute the sewage disposal regulations for the City of Saratoga (hereinafter "City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance"). Article 7-10, including Section 7-10.080, requires connection to a public sanitary sewer under specified conditions. 2. The Health Officer of the City of Saratoga (def'med at Saratoga City Code Section 7-10.010 to mean the City Manager) has determined that real property as indicated above by street address and assessors parcel number (APN) constitutes property within the boundaries of the City of Saratoga from or upon which sewage is generated and which premises are not connected to an existing approved public sanitary sewer available within 200 feet of the boundary line of such property, as required by the Saratoga City Code. The owner of the above-described real property has not demonstrated compliance with the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance to the satisfaction of the City of Saratoga, including but not limited to Section 7-10.080 of the Saratoga City Code, which requires any person owning or occupying property within the boundaries of the City from or upon which any sewage whatsoever is generated, which premises are not connected to an existing approved public sanitary sewer facility available line of such property, to connect thereto or vacate or cause to be vacated such premises within a specified period of time. 3. Section B 11-29.1 of the Santa Clara County Code governing recordation of a notice of violation was duly amended by the City of Saratoga to read as follows at Saratoga City Code Section 7-10.090: Section B 11-29.1. Record Notice of Violation. The Health Officer shall record a notice of the existence of a substandard sewage disposal system violation in the office of the County Recorder, and shall notify the owner of the affected real property and any other known party responsible for the violation that such action has been taken. This notice is to inform all parties that no improvements, including building additions, c. an be approved while the substandard sewage disposal system continues in operation. 4. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN to the owner of the real property described in paragraph 2 above and any other known party responsible for the violation that the City Manager intends to record a NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara. The NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE will be recorded by the City Manager unless a hearing before a Hearing Officer established pursuant to Saratoga City Code Section 3-15.070 is requested by the owner of the affected real property (described in paragraph 2 above) and/or any other party responsible for the violation within 20 days from the date of this notice of intention. 5. In the event that a hearing is not requested and the violation has not been corrected, or in the event that after the conduct of a hearing before the Hearing Officer, and consideration of all evidence presented thereat by the appellant, the Hearing Officer determines that a violation of the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance exists, the City Manager is authorized to record a NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara. The determination by the Hearing Officer following a hearing in accordance with the rules of procedure established by the Hearing Officer is final and may not be appealed to the City Council. 6. Upon determination by the City Manager and City Health Officer of compliance with the Saratoga City Sewage Disposal Ordinance (currently codified at Article 7-l0 of the Saratoga City Code), the City Manager shall furnish to the owner or other interested person a NOTICE OF EXPUNGEMENT of any NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE which has been recorded. 7. This notice shall be in addition to any other rights, remedies or actions available to the City of Saratoga by reason of the violation of the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance on the property described in paragraph 2 above. Information regarding this notice and/or the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance may be obtained by contacting the City of Saratoga Director of Public Works: Public Works City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: (408) 868-1222 Fax: (408) 867-8555 DATED: .,2001 CITY OF SARATOGA By: Dave Anderson, City Manager and City Health Officer ATTACHMENT 4. WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: DAVE ANDERSON, SARATOGA CITY HEALTH OFFICER CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CA 95070 NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE AND NOTICE OF RECORDATION OF NOTICE OF VIOLATION In accordance with Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that: 1. The City of Saratoga has adopted by reference Division B 11, Chapter II, Article 1 and 2 only, of the Santa Clara County Code, as it may be amended from time to time, together with the additions, deletions and amendments specified in Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code, as its sewage disposal regulations. The resulting regulations constitute the sewage disposal regulations for the City of Saratoga (hereinafter "City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance"). Article 7-10, including Section 7-10.080, requires connection to a public sanitary sewer under specified conditions. 2. The Health Officer of the City of Saratoga (defined at Saratoga City Code Section 7-10.010 to mean the City Manager) has determined that real property known as (street address) and also known as __ __- (APN) constitutes property within the boundaries of the City of Saratoga from or upon which sewage is generated and which premises are not connected to an existing approved public sanitary sewer available within 200 feet of the boundary line of such property, as required by the Saratoga City Code. The owner of the above-described real property has not demonstrated compliance with the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance to the satisfaction of the City of Saratoga, including but not limited to Section 7-10.080 of the Saratoga City Code, which requires any person owning or occupying property within the boundaries of the City from or upon which any sewage whatsoever is generafed, which premises are not connected to an existing approved public sanitary sewer facility available line of such property, to connect thereto or vacate or cause to be vacated such premises within a specified period of time. 3. Section B 11-29.1 of the Santa Clara County Code governing recordation of a notice of violation was duly amended by the City of Saratoga to read as follows at Saratoga City Code Section 7-10.090: Section B 11-29.1. Record Notice of Violation. The Health Officer shall record a notice of the existence of a substandard sewage disposal system violation in the office of the County Recorder, and shall notify the owner of the affected real property and any other known.party responsible for the violation that such action has been taken. This notice is to inform all parties that no improvements, including building additions, can be approved while the substandard sewage disposal system continues in operation. 4. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN to the owner of the real property described in paragraph 2 above and any other known party responsible for the violation that this NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE has been recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara. 5. NOTICE IS HERBY FURTHER GIVEN to all parties that no improvements, including building additions, can be approved while the substandard sewage disposal system continues in operation on the real property described in paragraph 2 above. 6. Upon determination by the City Manager and City Health Officer of compliance with the Saratoga City Sewage Disposal Ordinance (currently codified at Article 7-10 of the Saratoga City Code), the City Manager shall furnish to the owner or other interested person a NOTICE OF EXPUNGEMENT of this NOTICE OF EXISTENCE OF SUBSTANDARD SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM IN VIOLATION OF SARATOGA CITY SEWAGE DISPOSAL ORDINANCE. 7. The recordation of this notice shall be in addition to any other rights, remedies or actions available to the City of Saratoga by reason of the violation of the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance on the property described in paragraph 2 above. Information regarding this notice and/or the City of Saratoga Sewage Disposal Ordinance may be obtained by contacting the City of Saratoga Director of Public Works: John Cherbone, Director of Public Works City of Saratoga 13777 Fmitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Phone: (408) 868-1241 Fax: (408) 868-1280 DATED: ,2001 CITY OF SARATOGA By: Dave Anderson, City Manager and City Health Officer ATTACHMENT 5 Water Quality Enforcement Options I. Ongoing Water Quality Protection Programs The City has several programs underway to protect water quality and develop a better · understanding of the water quality problems in the City. These include ongoing testing, requiring the removal, of septic systems, working with the West Valley Sanitation District to identify faultY components of the sewer system, and public education. The testing program has been conducted in cooperation with the Santa Clara Valley Water District and local residents to follow-up on the initial testing efforts of the Urban Creek Assessment Project in 1998. Test results are presented in section II, below. In recognition of the City's severe water quality problem, the City Council in 1998 adopted the ordinance to promote the conversions to the local sewer system. The Public Works Department has also been working with the West Valley Sanitation District to identify potential sources of contamination that may be associated with the sewer system. These efforts have identified two major sources of contamination: 1) a leaky sewer pipe located at the intersection of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. and Big Basin Way that was repaired by West Valley Sanitation District, and 2) a sewer lateral connected directly to the storm system located near 4th Street, which was capped off. The City has also been working to ensure that the public is aware of the health risks posed by the contamination in the creek and how those risks can be avoided. Towards that end, the City has posted signs in the vicinity of Saratoga Creek warning of the contamination. In addition, articles have been published in the Saratoga News and the Saratogan. II. Water Quality In Saratoga The City has worked with concerned residents and other public agencies to assess water quality in Saratoga creeks on a continuing basis. In order to put those test results in comext, we describe below national water quality standards followed by a summary of recent test results. A. National Standards Contact with polluted water can cause a wide variety of diseases, including intestinal, eye, ear, nose, throat and skin diseases, surface wound infections and infections of internal organs. Pursuant to the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") has established national standards for the amount of pollution that may safely be present in water, based on empirical studies of the correlation between the incidence of disease and the levels of pollution. EPA has established a national standard for fecal coliform Pollution to guard against bacterial, viral, protozoan and other harmful contaminants. Because many dangerous intestinal microbial pathogens inhabit warm-blooded animals and are shed in feces, the number of fecal coliforms present in a water sample is indicative of the degree of health risk associated with using the water for drinking, swimming or fi~shing. Following are EPA's national standards for fecal coliform concentration: No more than 200 fecal coliforms per 100 milliliters (ml) of water on a sustained day-in, day-out basis; and · No more than 400 fecal coliforms per 100 ml of water more than 10 percent of the time. EPA developed the standard because the "density at which a statistically significant swimming-associated gastrointestinal illness was observed, was about 400 fecal coliforms per 100ml." ("Saratoga Creek Fecal Coliform Pollution," Urban Creek Assessment Project Draft Information Release, April 8, 1998 at 4 ("UCAP"), quoting EPA "Quality Criteria for Water," 1976.) Therefore, EPA set the standard so that a noticeable risk of swimming-related illness would not exist more than 10 percent of the time, and the day-in, day-out concentration would not exceed half the that level. B. Saratoga Testing Results As you know, past test results for Saratoga Creek have revealed contamination levels exceeding the EPA-designated safety standards. Although the City and the West Valley Sanitation District (which has primary responsibility for the sewer system in the vicinity of Saratoga Creek where problems were first identified) have made substantial progress in addressing this issue, recent test results indicate that problems remain. Most recently, tests were conducted on May 15, 2001. At that time the City had been implementing the septic abatement ordinance for over a year and had, in cooperation with the West Valley Sanitation District, repaired the faulty sewer systems at the above-mentioned locations. The test results for Saratoga Creek showed the following (fecal coliforms per 100ml): · At Springer Ave. 70 · At Wildwood Park 240 · At Saratoga-Sunnswale Rd. 1600 · At Herriman Ave. 1100 · At Crestbrook Ave. 500 · At Congress Springs Park 900 In addition, testing was performed in other Saratoga creeks. These tests showed the following: · Rodeo Creek at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. 1300 · Calabazas Creek at Saratoga-Sunnyvale Rd. 300 · Wildcat Creek at Montpere Way 500 · San Tomas Aquino Creek at Pollard Rd. 900 Although these results represent only one round of testing, they indicate that the water quality problems are not limited to Saratoga Creek alone and that additional testing is warranted to assess the full scope of the problem in creeks other than Saratoga Creek. Earlier test results revealed even greater levels of contamination. For instance, in the three series of 1996-97 tests reported in the UCAP report, results between Springer Avenue and Crestbrook Avenue in the City of Saratoga were as follows: · The tests measured a maximum level recorded of 160,000 fecal coliforms per 100 ml--400 times the upper EPA standard at which there is a noticeable health risk. · At least once on every day of testing, the tests measured a level of 3,000 or higher--7.5 times the upper EPA standard. · The median tested level was 800--twice the upper EPA standard. 96 percent of the tests (43 of 45) exceeded the EPA's day-in, day-out maximum of 200. · 76 percent of the tests (34 of 45) exceeded the EPA's upper limit of 400. (UCAP at 2.) III. Sources Of Contamination The Saratoga Creek tests described in the preceding section were taken at a series of locations in Saratoga Creek, beginning just upstream fi.om Saratoga Springs and extending through the City of Saratoga. (Id.) The tests revealed that the samples collected immediately upstream fi.om Saratoga Springs, a mile upstream from the City of Saratoga, satisfied the EPA standards. (Id_40. Therefore it is extremely unlikely that wild or domestic animals upstream from the City contribute si~maificantly to the water quality degradation within the City;°in other words, the most likely sources of contamination originate within the City. (Id.) Moreover, because of the xvide distribution of contamination, it appears that multiple sources are to blame for contamination. (Id. at 7.) The most likely sources of contamination are subterranean flows from septic tanks or leaking sewer lines. (Id.) The following describes EPA and other government research regarding the contamination threats posed by septic systems and sewer systems. In addition, this section describes in general terms approaches to regulating septic and sewer systems to limit their public health risks. Specific options for further regulation in Saratoga are presented in section 1V ("Options for Further Action"). A. Pollution from Septic Systems 1. Background The EPA, states and local governments across the country recognize that septic systems are a major contributor to water quality problems. (See, e.g., EPA "Draft Guidelines for Management of Onsite;T)ecentralized Wastewater Systems," Sept. 26, 2000 ("Guidelines") at 2; EPA Fact Sheet on the Guidelines, EPA-832-F-00-012 ("EPA Fact Sheet"), July 2000 at 1; Martin Kelly and Nancy Phillips, "Ordinances for the Protection of Surface Water Bodies," Seminar Publication: National Conference on Urban Runoff Management, EPA~.'625?R- 95/003, April 1995 ("Kelly and Phillips") at 97; "EPA's 305(b) Report to Con~ess 1996/1998" ('305(b) Report") at Chapter 6, Septic Systems.) Following are key facts, compiled from EPA repons: Onsite wastewater treatment systems such as septics serve approximately 25 percent of U.S. households, resulting in about 4 billion gallons of wastewater released each and even' day by these systems. (Guidelines at 1.) More than half of existing systems are more than 30 years old, and Census data indicates that at least 10 percent of onsite systems are malfunctioning and up to 70 percent are failing in some communities. (Fact Sheet at 1.) Homeowmers are usually unaware of their system's inability to properly process waste. Unless the system backs up or waste rises to the surface, most people assume their system is functioning even when it has failed. (Guidelines at 2, Kelly and Phillips at 97.) Many ov~mers are unaware that septic tanks must be inspected and pumped out every 3-5 years, and it is common for septic systems never to be maintained during an owner's occupancy of the home. ("Pointer No. 10, Managing Nonpoint Source Pollution from Households" EPA841-F-96- 004J, 1996 ("Pointer") at 2; Kelly and Phillips at 97.) Frequently homeowners are unaware they even have a septic system, much less of the work it takes to keep it functioning. (Id.) According to EPA, septic tanks contribute to water quality problems when septic systems malfunction or are improperly installed or maintained, and where they are simply sited in an inappropriate location or at too ~eat a densiW. (Id.) For example: · In 1996, states identified more than 500 communities as having septic systems that have caused public health problems. (Guidelines at 2.) Nationally, states have reported that designated uses such as swimming are not being met in more than 5,000 water bodies because of pathogens and that almost 5,000 are impaired by nutrients, in part by pollution from septic tanks. (Fact Sheet at 1.) In addition to contaminating storm water and surface waters such as rivers, lakes and estuaries, septic tanks are major contributors to ~oundwater and drinking water contamination. (See, e.g., Guidelines at 2, Kelly and Phillips at 97.) States report failing septic systems as the third most important source of groundwater contamination, and EPA reports that contaminated drinking water sources result in 168,000 viral and 34,000 bacterial illness each year, with septic systems contributing to the total. (Guidelines at 2.) Septic systems are also the leading source of pollution for 36 percent of the impaired miles of ocean shoreline surveyed, and a factor in 32 percent of all harvest-limited shellfish growing areas. (Id.) Health risks from fecal coliform and associated pathogens are only one of the risks from septic systems; they also contribute nitrate contamination that poses health risks to infants, elevated nitrogen and other nutrient concentrations that lead to overgrov~h of algae and nuisance aquatic plants, chemical pollution from household cleaners and hea-~ metal pollution from pigments used in cosmetics. (Id.; Kelly and Phillips at 97; 305(b) Report at Chapter 6, Septic Systems.) 2. EPA Recommendations for Septic Regulation EPA recommends, even in areas of low environmental sensitivity ,,','here there are no known problems, a regulatory system for septic systems that provides for regular inspections and maintenance. (Guidelines at 6, Article at 3.) For more sensitive areas or ,,','here there are -known problems, EPA recommends a more active management scheme such as operating permits or utility maintenance or ownership. (Guidelines at 6-16.) Sensitive areas might include, for example, those areas with "a direct impact on public health" such as the need to protect drinking water or "direct contact recreational waters." (Guidelines at 10-11.) Research has found that even where septic systems are properly maintained, they will be ineffective to protect the public health where they are sited in inappropriate locations, at too high a density, or with improper design or installation. (Kelly and Phillips at 97; Pointer at 2; Guidelines at 1-2.) For example, soils that are too permeable permit the tank effluent to travel too rapidly way from the drain field without proper biologic treatment. Soils that are impermeable, by contrast, can become clogged with effluent, causing lateral or upward seepage. (Kelly and Phillips at 97.) In the latter case, it is possible that the homeowner may be inconvenienced, but in the former, the owner may assume eve~.~hing is working as planned and will be unaware of the significant pollution that is occurring. (Id.) Similarly, if there are too many septic systems within a given watershed, pollution problems can also occur. Recommended acceptable densities vary ~eatly, with densities being a function of soils, depth to the water table, and distance from surface water bodies. (Id.) As a general matter, EPA suggests that new decentralized onsite wastewater systems may be the most cost-effective way to safely up~ade failed septic systems in rural areas of low population densities (one dwelling or less per acre), but that centralized collection and treatment is usually the most cost-effective way to upgrade fi'om failing septics in suburban and urban areas (three or four dwellings per acre or more). ("Response to Congress on Use of Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems," EPA 832-R-97-001b, April 1997 ("Response to Con~ess") at 6.) Because of the difficulty of properly maintaining septic systems even in areas where they are sited properly and exist at sufficiently low densities, many jurisdictions prefer to encourage the switch to centralized sewer systems rather than attempt to enforce rules to up~ade and maintain onsite systems. Several State of California Regional Water Quality Control Boards ("Regional Boards") have similarly encouraged connections to sewer systems rather than onsite disposal. For instance, the North Coast Regional Board Basin Plan finds that "On-site waste treatment and disposal systems should not be permitted if adequate community sewerage systems are available or feasible," and the San Francisco Bay Regional Board Basin Plan provides that local governments should not permit individual septic systems for any 6of13 subdivision of land unless the municipality specifically determines that such systems are in the public interest and can be operated consistent with state water quality goals. (North Coast Basin Plan, 1996 at 4-11.00; San Francisco Bay Basin Plan, 1995 at 4-38; see also id. at 4-21 to 4-22 (discussing Livermore's efforts to discourage onsite systems in favor of sewer systems).) According to EPA, California is one of only three states that do not have specific regulations governing decentralized systems; instead such systems are governed almost exclusively at the local level. (Response to Congress at 18.) However, some Regional Boards have become more aggressive at encoura~ng local governments to improve management of septic systems. Moreover, the State Legislature recently enacted a statute to require the State Water Resources Control Board ("State Board") to address the issue. Assembly Bill 885, si~maed into lax,,' late last year, requires the State Board, on or before January 2004, "to adopt, specified regulations or standards for the permitting and operation" of certain onsite sexvage treatment systems. (A.B. 885, Water Code § 13291(a).) The statute specifically provides for the authorization of local agencies to implement the regulations within their jurisdictions if so requested, and provides that local agencies may adopt requirements that are more protective of the public health or the environment than the State Board's. (Water Code §§ 13291(b)(3) and (d).) The State Board will soon establish a process for involvement by interested local governments in the preparation of its standards and City staff has contacted the Board to ensure that the City remains abreast of new developments. B. Pollution from Faulty Sewer Lines Like septic systems, faulty, sewer lines leak and contribute pollution to nearby waters. For example, a malfunctioning sewer main (now repaired) caused contamination through the storm drain beneath the intersection of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga Avenue. The problem is likely to be a'recurring one, since it is relatively common for old or improperly maintained sewer lines to leak. Indeed, the distributed pattern of contamination through Saratoga Creek caused the UCAP authors to conclude that the Creek was being contaminated fi.om multiple sources, which likely included both septic systems and faulty sewer lines. (UCAP at 2, 7.) Subsequent data collected by City staff confirms that some of the remaining pollution flowing through the storm drains to local waters probably comes indirectly from sewer lines. These lines may be operated by one of the two sanitation districts serving the City or may be lines connecting private homes and businesses to the public system. The City has much less control over the sewer system than it does over septic systems within City limits, since the sanitation districts are the primary agency responsible for the public sewer system. The City does have regulatory authority and responsibility for private lines connecting homes and businesses to the public system. Several potential approaches are described in Section W, below. IV. Options For Further Action This section discusses a number of possible approaches to improve the standards governing the City's remaining septic systems, followed by possible approaches to reduce pollution from faulty 7of13 sewer laterals, options for further water quality testing and, finally, a brief discussion of the City's potential participation in the Water Board's process to develop statewide standards for septic systems. Once the Council has reviewed these options and identified those approaches it wishes to explore in depth, City staff will provide more detailed evaluations of the potential options and specific recommendations for further action. A. Septic Systems There are a number of tools available to supplement the City's existing programs to limit contamination from septic systems. This section describes four measures that could pursued either independently or in combination. Several of the measures are adapted from Draft Guidelines published by EPA. EPA's Draft Guidelines for Management of Onsite/Decentralized Wastewater Systems were published last year and describe minimum levels of appropriate local management for septics and similar systems. The Guidelines are designed to address the planning, siting, design, installation, operation, maintenance, monitoring and enforcement of onsite disposal. The Guidelines describe a series of increasingly protective approaches that can be put in place depending on local needs, which include the extent to which there is a need to protect a sensitive value such as recreational water bodies, whether the water body is already impaired and whether septic systems have already been identified as contributors. (Guidelines at 10-11.) 1. Increased Enforcement of Existing Codes One option would be for the City to focus its efforts on increased code enforcement. Examples of expanded efforts under the existing code include increased outreach to property owners having septic systems to inform them of their obligation to maintain those systems and regular inspections of all septic systems in the City to ensure that the systems are being properly maintained and are properly sited. Because the City currently lacks a comprehensive inspection and enforcement regime for existing septic systems, this approach would require developing such a program either by reallocating City staff or contracting with a public or private inspection agent. This approach would allow the City to assess the effect of its ongoing efforts before moving immediately to more aggressive regulation. However, the effectiveness of this approach is likely limited because of the high costs that could be associated with testing to assess the full scope of potential contamination associate with individual septic systems. EPA has indicated that an inspection program alone is not sufficient in environmentally sensitive areas such as the Saratoga Creek. 2. Maintenance Contracts This option would require homeowners with onsite systems to have ongoing septic maintenance agreements. With this approach, septic owners would be required to contract 8 of 13 with either the system manufacturer or supplier, or another qualified service provider to ensure the system is functioning appropriately throughout its lifetime. The City, (through its adoption of County Code section B 11-12) already requires maintenance contracts for the first five years of operation of certain large onsite systems (typically multi-unit systems) that are subject to Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. The City could extend this requirement to all septic systems, and extend the requirement beyond the first five years to include older systems. EPA suggests that a maintenance contract system may be appropriate where local environmental factors make conventional systems only marginally suitable, and enhanced onsite systems should be used. Benefits include, primarily, a reduced risk of system failure as compared to lesser levels of management. Limitations include the availability of qualified service providers and the need for the City to track compliance with the contracting requirements. In addition, to the extent this approach involves upgrading conventional septic systems to more sophisticated onsite systems, homeowners' costs will rise accordingly. 3. Operating Permits Some state and local governments have instituted requirements for operating permits for onsite systems. (ELI at 48; Response to Congress at E-5.) With this approach, the City would issue limited-term operating permits to property owners wishing to use a septic system. The permits would be renewable for another term only if the owmer demonstrates that the septic system is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the permit. An operating permit system such as this would effectively shift the burden for identifying polluting systems from the City to the property owners, by requiring the property ov~mers to demonstrate periodically that their septic systems are up to City standards. An operating permit system such as this could also be desigx~ed so that onsite systems must provide treatment to achieve specific quality criteria such as effluent limits. Therefore, it may allow a more flexible approach that tailors performance according to the site's environmental sensitivity. In Califomia, a variant of this approach has been implemented in Stinson Beach. After discovering that the tov~m's septic systems were polluting the beach, the State legislature empowered the Stinson Beach County Water District, which reports directly to the San Francisco Bay Regional Board, to operate an inspection and permitting scheme for the town's onsite systems. Operation and responsibility for maintaining the onsite systems rests with property owners, but the District staff perform site inspections--every two years for conventional septic systems--and can issue permits for their operation, which may contain conditions reflecting the specific circumstances at a particular location. If necessary, the District issues citations listing violations and prescribes a timetable for compliance. The District has the authority to cut off the water supply to non-complying properties. During the initial period of operation about half the existing systems needed repair or replacement. (Response to Congress at E-5 to E-6.) EPA suggests in its Guidelines that an approach this ag~essive should be considered where onsite systems must provide treatment to meet specified water quality criteria 9 of 13 such as standards for drinking water or waters used for direct-contact recreation, especially where problems have already been identified. (Guidelines at 11.) Benefits include the fact that the permit provides the City a mechanism for continuous oversight of system performance and negotiating corrective actions or le'~34ng penalties where necessary, and so increases compliance and reliability. Such a system could also increase the range of sites suitable for onsite treatment by increasing the level of performance and reliability of such systems. Limitations include, primarily, that such a system requires a higher level of technical and engineering expertise to implement and, relative to some other approaches, would cost the property owmer and the CiD, more to implement. 4. Remove the Abatement Exception for Below Grade Systems Currently, property owners in Saratoga are not required to connect to the public sewer system where their property is located at an elevation below that of the sewer system. (See City Code § 7-10.020 (requiring connection for certain systems "if possible ~ade is present").) There are currently 15 properties with septic systems that operate under this exception. Of these, 10 adjoin or are in the immediate vicinity of a creek. Ihe City could remove this exception, at least where the septic system is within a prescribed distance fi.om a creek. Such an action would require those property owners to install a pumping system to move the sewage from their structure to the public sewer and to install a private holding tank to provide for sewage storage in the event of a pumping failure (e.g., in the event of an electricity blackout). Benefits of the system include, primarily, increased connection to the public sewer system rather than septic systems in the environmentally sensitive areas nearby streams. Limitations include the cost to the property owner of upgrading, which can cost up to $15,000 dollars in addition to the cost of the sanitary lateral. B. Sewer Lines lines. Following are several potential options to prevent pollution from faulty sewer 1. Increased Enforcement of Existing Code Because the City has the authority to regulate the maintenance of certain lateral sewer lines (the smaller lines that run fi.om the building to the sewer lines maintained by the Sanitation District), it is possible for the City to require homeovmers to provide proper maintenance of those lines. In fact, the City has already adopted by reference section B11-9 of the Santa Clara County Code. This makes property owners responsible for maintaining sewer laterals and provides that no person shall maintain any sewer pipes or conduits so as to cause contaminated waters to seep into the soil or contaminate bodies of water. The City could increase its enforcement of this section. The primary benefit of this approach is that it utilizes existing legislation. However, the approach is limited by the fact that neither the CiD' nor the County codes provide 10 of 13 specific mechanisms for ensuring compliance. Thus the code provides little guidance to property, oamers as to the specific actions that must be taken to be in compliance and provides little guidance to code enforcement officers as to what conditions xvould constitute a code violation. Potential improvements to the City Code are described below. 2. Sewer Lateral Design Standards The City could amend the City code to establish minimum design standards for sewer laterals (including requirements for a two-way cleanout that allows for periodic cleaning and for performance testing), and provide a mechanism for ensuring code compliance. This requirement could be prospective only or could be imposed as a requirement at the time of sale or of a major remodel. The City would require that the property owner provide certification of compliance a, ith the sewer lateral code prior to any transfer or sale of the property., and possibly before remodeling or when city inspectors have reason to believe a given property's laterals are failing. To obtain the certification, the property ovmer would have to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City's inspector that the laterals are installed according to code and that the laterals are free from structural defects such as cracks, breaks, missing portions or changes in grade that would prevent proper functioning, and that all joints are tight and sound. Albany is an example of a municipality that has adopted this approach. Potential benefits include a higher degree of sea:er lateral reliability as compared to a municipality without such a regulatory scheme. Limitations include the potential difficulty of inspecting the laterals to make the certifications, the need to secure qualified inspectors a'ho can make the tests, and the attendant costs to the homeoauaer and the City. There is also a possibility that visual inspections might fail to turn up system flaws that would be revealed by performance tests, described in the next section. 3. Performance Based Standards As with the preceding approach, this option would mandate that property owners maintain and repair their sewer laterals. However, this approach relies on performance based rather than technolo~mf based standards. As with the technology based approach, the City would require that the property owner provide certification of compliance with the sewer lateral code prior to any transfer or sale of the property, and possibly before remodeling or when city inspectors have reason to believe a given property's laterals are failing. But to obtain certification, the property owner would be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City's designated inspector that the lateral does not leak at an unacceptable rate. To test a lateral, a contractor plugs the lateral at one end and surcharges the lateral with a'ater for a certain period of time, then measures the amount of water loss. If the loss exceeds a specified rate, the property owner must repair the line. (£xfiltration can also be tested with pressurized air by measuring the reduction in air pressure from initial surcharge over a given period of time.) Variations of this approach are in place in Alameda and Hillsborough. 11 of 13 Benefits of such an approach as compared to a visual inspection might include a more accurate gauge of the variable that matters most-whether the lateral actually leaks. Limitations include the potential difficulty in accessing the laterals for the testing and the need to secure qualified contractors who can make and certify the tests, and the resulting costs to both the ov~mer and the City. 4. Continued Cooperation with Sanitation Districts As noted above, the West Valley Sanitation District and Cupertino Sanitation Districts are primarily responsible for the operation and maintenance of the City's public sewer system, and the Districts have responsibility for the main lines. Given the possibility that at least some of the remaining contamination of City waters may be due to faulty mains, it may make sense for the City to expand its efforts to work with the two Districts to enhance the sewer system's performance. The West Valley Sanitation District has embarked on an a~essive pro,am to identify and repair its sewer lines. In the short term, the District has targeted its efforts to the vicinity of Saratoga Creek, and has budgeted funds to inspect and, if necessary, repair faulty sewer lines in that area. In the longer term, the District will be systematically reviewing its entire system, conducting inspections and flow measurements to identify flaws. Over 20 years, the District could invest $1-2 million in this project, which is designed to meet not only existing, but upcoming EPA standards. Because some recent testing has, for the first time, indicated there is a potential water quality problem in Saratoga within the jurisdiction of the Cupertino Sanitation District, it may be advisable for the City to step up its efforts to work with that District as well. C. Testing To enhance the City's understanding of the extent of the water quality de~adation in waters that flow through Saratoga, and to improve the City's ability to respond with the most environmentally sound and cost-effective solutions, the City may wish to consider further testing. Several approaches are described below. 1. Continue Testing of Saratoga Creek The City should consider continued testing of Saratoga Creek. Such an action would refine the City's understanding of the extent of the remaining impairment, and allow the City to more precisely identify the sources of contamination. 2. Test Other Water Bodies The City should consider expanding its water quality tests to other creeks and other water bodies within Saratoga. Such tests would reveal whether the impairment of Saratoga Creek is an anomaly or whether it is a sign of a more systematic failure of local septic 12 of 13 systems, sewers, or other pollution sources. Such tests would also assist the City in designing appropriate septic or sewer lateral ordinances, or other solutions, which could be implemented with an even more sophisticated understanding of the problems they are designed to address. 3. Enhance Testing to Track Sources The City should consider special tests designed to identify the most significant sources of water pollution in Saratoga Creek and other waters. Specifically, the City could authorize tests, which utilize unique chemical markers that are placed in possibl.e contamination sources. After an appropriate amount of time, those chemical markers can be identified at various testing sites along the creeks if those sources indeed contribute to pollution in the creeks, and as a result, the City will have a better understanding of which sources contribute most to the impairment. Active Participation in State Board's Stakeholder Process to Develop Statewide Standards for Onsite Systems As discussed above, the State Water Resources Control Board is instituting a stakeholder process as part of its development of state-wide standards for onsite disposal systems, as required by A.B. 885. Staff has contacted the State Board to ensure that the City remains abreast of all new developments with the standards, which are due in 2004. The Council may also wish staff to participate more actively in the development of those standards, for example, by seeking to influence the State Board to pursue a direction similar to that the City chooses locally. 13 of 13 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: CiD' Manager PREPA~RED BY: Dave Anderson AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HE.M): SUBJECT: Follow-up on Fire District Issues stemming from the April 24, 2001 Joint Meeting with the Public SafeW Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): Accept report and direct staff accordingly. REPORT SUMS. LM1Y: Background The City Council met at an adjourned meeting with the Public Safety Commission on April 24th and held a public forum on Fire District issues at that meeting. As an outcome of the public forum, the Council instructed staff to place an item on the regular City Council Agenda to allow for Council discussion of Fire District issues to consider the following three questions: Should the CiD, conduct further studies of Fire District service enhancement issues to provide the City Council, the Fire Districts and Saratoga residents' further information and analysis that would lead to a clear resolution of the issue? Following such a study should the City initiate an election of Saratoga residents to provide advice or compel a specific outcome concerning the resolution of the Fire District service enhancement issue? · Should the City Council halt the construction of the new fire station because of Fire District service enhancement issues? Discussion Further Studies The enhancement of service delivery options or consolidation xvith Central Fire District has already been studied extensively. The DMG Maximus study published in October 2000 was intended to evaluate the fire and emergency medical services needs of the Saratoga Fire District CSFD"). It concluded that: 1) An additional level of support and coordination was needed at the SFD. [This issue is being remedied by creating an Assistant Chief position in the SFD as of June 2001.] 2) 82% of 911 calls are occurring outside the hours of the on duty dispatcher at the SFD station. Outside of dispatcher duty hours, a firefighter performs these duties. [To address this finding the SFD will be contracting with Santa Clara County for dispatching sen, ices starting in August 2001.] 3) There were significant deficiencies in the collection and dissemination of relevant management-information. [Contracting with Santa Clara Dispatch will partially resolve this issue.] 4) Effectiveness of Fire Suppression/Rescue levels: The District is currently providing a 6-minute response time to 90% of calls for emergency service. The District is able to deliver 4 firefighters to the scene of a fire but is challenged to provide a minimum of 9 people on scene within a 10-minute travel time. [In August 2001 the minimum staffing that the SFD xvill be able to provide routinely will be increased to 7 firefighters, including one paramedic.] The DMG Maximus report recommended that "... the District work to identify the closest unit to all areas qf the District and provide either contract or automatic aid response agreements to assure all citizens of the District are afforded the highest service level possible. " On March 8, 2001 the Saratoga Public Safety Commission Study Committee released its Report on Fire Protection Delivet3'. The Study Committee's mission was to "evaluate the adequacy of the current fire protection delivery system to meet the basic public safety and paramedic sen'ice needs of Saratoga residents and businesses." Its primary finding was that "... Saratoga's hybrid fire service system is adequately meeting the current fire protection and paramedic needs of the ciO'. Response times for emergency service calls are generally under five minutes ... annual properO' losses are low relative to properO; values and medical service deliver); complies with established patient protocols." On April 4, 2001, the Firefighters and Citizen's Taskforce (FACT) issued a rebuttal to the report published by the Public Safety Commission, objecting to its conclusions. The FACT report supports the proposed N.F.P.A. Standard 1710 as the definition of an appropriate fire response effort, which requires 13 firefighters. The report also states that the Saratoga Fire District invokes mutual aid on every structure fire in Saratoga, overusing a voluntary reciprocal program, and delaying the response of needed additional fire apparatus to the scene of the fire. On March 15, 2001 the Saratoga Fire District issued an RFP for contract fire protection, emergency medical, and communications services. The Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District ("Central Fire") and the California Department of Forestry ("CDF") provided responses to the SFD on May 7, 2001. The California Department of Forestry proposal includes four altematives ranging from 52.4 to $3.1 million which would house from eight to nine CDF firefighters in the SFD fire station. These proposals assume a 13-firefighter response to fires within Saratoga relying upon an automatic aid call to Central Fire on all Saratoga fire responses. The proposal from Central Fire includes the following alternatives: Contract Proposal for an approximate cost of $2.2 million annually including reduced staffing at the SFD fire station. [The proposal includes a commitment for a multi-station first response of 14 firefighters.] Contract Proposal for an approximate cost of $ 3.8 million annually including staffing at current levels for the Saratoga fire station. [The proposal includes a commitment for a multi-station first response of 14 firefighters.] Boundary. Drop Proposal as an alternative to contracting. Central Fire describes this as a pro,am "... whereby agencies agree to commit emergency resources as if they were part of a single agency. SimpS, stated, existing borders become invisible and participating agencies benefit from the synergy of the combined resources." [The boundaD' drop proposal would provide for a 7 firefighter response from SFD and a automatic first alarm response from Central Fire with an additional 7 firefighters to all fires in Saratoga.] In light of the alternatives presented by Central Fire and CDF, additional studies by the City may not be needed. The City. Council may wish to state a position strongly encouraging the Saratoga Fire District Commission to move forward with an open and public decision process to complete the RFP process in a manner that ensures an appropriate level of protection for Saratoga residents. One or more options available in the response from Central Fire appear to address issues the Council has previously discussed: · Enhanced Fire Response: Increased first alarm fire response comparable with proposed N.F.P.A Standard 1710. · Increased firefighter safeD': due to the increase in the number of first responders available for fire support duties. · Retain Local Control: The boundary drop proposal allows the residents in the Saratoga Fire District to retain control of SFD resources with the benefits of a "virtual district" without operational boundaries. The Saratoga Fire District is currently moving forward with the RFP process. The Fire Commission interviewed CDF and Central Fire on Thursday May 31st, and scheduled a public hearing to review the RFP responses and to take public input on June 12, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. in the Senior Center. Election Issues On April 18, 2001 the City. Attorney issued a staff report concerning the City's ability to regulate or control the provision of fire protection services within the City.. While he concluded that the City may not regulate the Fire Protection Districts which serve the City, he stated that the City may seek to assume responsibility for providing fire protection sen, ices within the City by petitioning the Santa Clara County. Local Agency Formation Commission to reorganize the two districts in a manner the would allow the City. to assume responsibility for providing fire protection sen, ices. If the Saratoga Fire District acts on the Request for Proposal in a timely, open and fair manner, the City Council may wish to set this issue aside. If the District does not follow through with the RFP process the City. Council may wish to hold out the possibility of a CiD' assumption of fire protection sen'ices within it's boundaries. There are two methods by which questions concerning the organization of the two fire districts serving the City can be placed before the voters. First, the City may place an advisory measure on the ballot. The Elections Code allows such measures "for the purpose of allowing voters within the jurisdiction, or a portion thereof, to voice their opinions on substantive issues." (Elec. Code § 9603.) The advisory measure can also be considered by voters outside the City with the consent of the Board of Super~,isors and assuming that the City election can be consolidated with a County election. Alternatively, the City could look to the LAFCO process itself to ensure that there is an opportunity for voters to consider the relevant issues. As a general role, any organizational changes ordered by LAFCO require the approval of the voters within the territory directly affected by the proposed changes. (Government Code section 57077.) There are some situations in which the voter approval requirement would not apply, but these typically arise only for changes in organization that are supported by all of the agencies affected (e.g., a merger of a fire district into a City with the support of both the CiD' Council and the District Commission). The specific manner in which the vote would be conducted and the individuals that would be entitled to vote would depend on the specific changes in organization ordered by LAFCO. Voter approval would not be required if LAFCO rejects a proposed change in organization on its own or in response to written protests objecting to the change in organization from more than half the residents of the territory affected by the change. Fire Station Construction The Council has also asked staffto consider whether the City should deny the Saratoga Fire District's pending use permit application for the new fire station until such time as the issues concerning the organizational structure of SFD and the manner in which fire protection sen'ices are offered in the City have been resolved. In reviewing SFD's applications for a use permit and for a temporary use permit, the Planning Commission on June 13th will be considering the land use implications of allowing the respective project sites to be used as an expanded fire station and temporary fire station. Because the organizational and operational issues discussed above do not pertain to the land use issues relating to the use of the land upon which the stations will be located, those issues have no bearing on the use permit issue. Central Fire has informed the City that the building design proposed by SFD would work under any scenario contemplated in the RFP response they submitted. Of course there may be land use issues that pertain directly to the proposed use permits. These issues will be considered by the Planning Commission and could be considered by the Council if the Commission's decision is appealed to the Council. In light of the City's policies concerning Council- Commission communications it would not be appropriate for the Council to address the land use issues relating to the use permits prior to action on the permits by the Commission. FISCAL IMPACTS: None CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION(S): The Ci~, Council would not provide guidance and direction concerning Saratoga Fire District service enhancement issues. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The CiW Council could choose not to provide input on Saratoga Fire District service enhancement issues. FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Inform SFD and Central Fire of Council direction on the issues presented in this report. :M)VERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda served as notice for this report. ATTACHMENTS: None SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 ORIGINATING DEPT: Public Works PREPARED By: ~....~'~"'.-~.--'~' AGENDA ITEM: CITY MANAGER: DEPT HEAl): '~~~ SUBJECT: Grant Vqriter Service Providers RECOMMENDED ACTION (S): Receive report and provide direction to staff. REPORT SUMMARY: Council requested staff research various options regarding professional Grant Writing Sen'ices for the City of Saratoga. Staff called the Cites of Cupertino, Los Gatos, Campbell, Sunnyvale and Monte Sereno in an effort to determine how these Cities handle their Grant Writing Sen'ices. The response from each city indicated Ci~' staff at the individual department level processed their own ~ant materials. Due to higher levels of staffing, these cities are able to handle this function with little disruption to the individual departments. Staff also researched professional ~ant writing sen'ices. Contained in attachment A and listed in the table below is a summary of the sen'ices and cost structure for these vendors. Grant Service Vendor: National Grant Services Seliger Associates Revisions Grant Services Grantwriting, Fundraising Development Services and Type of Services: . Grant Proposals, Project Administration, Public Outreach. Grant Writing, research, Business Plans. Proposal Writing, review. Grant Writing, Fundraising Fee Structure: S1,000 retainer fee plus 10% of amount rewarded up to S250,000.00 $2,000.00 flat fee. Other fees depend upon project size. $65.00 an hour, minimum fee of $1,200.00. $1,000.00 research fee; $2,000.00 $2,500.00 proposal writing fee. Bonnie J. Hale Technical Writer/Editor, Grant Writer, Developmental Editing $60.00 an hour, minimum fee of $1,200.00. Retainer of 50% of projected costs. In conclusion, if Council so desires, staff can send out a Request for Proposal (R.F.P.) to seek out the services of a professional grant writer. FISCAL IMPACTS: None. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLO~VING RECOMMENDED ACTION (S): City staff will continue to perform grant-v~xiting services. ALTE1LNATIVE ACTION (S): None. FOLLOW UP ACTION (S): None. ADVERTISING, NOTICING .~ND PUBLIC CONTACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: None. 2 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: PREPARED'g'~ ~'\ ~ OEPT HEAD: SUBJECT: League of California Cities Grassroots Coordinator Network RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review the attached correspondence and authorize the City Mayor to submit ballot to the LeagUe of California Cities Board in regards to the proposed Grassroots Network Coordinator. REPORT SUMI~LARY: Attached are correspondences from the League of California Cities providing information to cities that may be useful when preparing the FY2001-02 budget and requesting input on the proposed Grassroots Coordinator Network Program. Backo, round The Grassroots Coordinator Network proposal was developed by a task force authorized by the League Board of Directors as part of its strategic planning process. It responds to the deep frustration of many local officials about the cities' loss of political influence, compared with other better-positioned interest groups that contribute millions of dollars to political campaigns. The goal of the Grassroots Network is to focus on major issues of concern to all cities, such as fiscal reform, increased funding for transportation and local control (Attachment A). Cities will benefit from the increased visibility of city issues in local and statewide media, and by holding legislators accountable back home for the votes they cast in Sacramento. The proposal to create a Grassroots Coordinator Network is under active consideration by cities throughout the states at this time. Any dues increase, if approved, will be effective July 1, 2001. Since the League operates on a calendar year basis, the dues increase for the Grassroots Coordinator Network will be prorated for the last half of 2001 and the invoice due in July will equal one-half of the annual amount required to implement the grassroots program. Because city budgets usually mn July-June, and the League dues are billed by calendar year, the League recommends that cities budget enough to cover the grassroots network for an eighteen-month period July-December. If the membership approves the Network, the League would bill in July for the six-month period July-December. Then in December 2001, the League will send out notices to cities for the 12 months in 2002. The recommended budget amount includes costs for the grassroots program for 18-months, plus regular League dues adjusted by projected 4% cost of living increase. On April 28, 2001 the League of Califomia Cities Board unanimously approved the Grassroots Network for submission to the membership, proposing an amendment to the League bylaws to finance the additional of 14 new staffin 10 new offices as part of the new grassroots network to promote the League's core legislative priorities. In order to implement the Grassroots Coordinator Network it would take 2/3 of the voting cities to approve the dues increase and an amendment to the by-laws. The League of California Cities has provided the attached ballot (Attachment E) in order for the City Council to vote on the proposed Grassroots Network. The deadline to submit the ballot is June 29, 2001. FISCAL IMPACTS: The City of Saratoga's current dues paid to the League of California Cities is $6068. If the Grassroots Coordinator Network proposal is approved, based on the City of Saratoga's population, dues for FY 2001-02 would be $11,217 for 18-months. This is an increase of $1,410 for 12 months. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A .aDVERTISING, NOTICING .a2qD PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Correspondence from the League of California Cities - Dated 02/09/01 Attachment B - Overview of Grassroots Coordinator Network Attachment C - Grassroots Coordinator Network - Frequently Asked Questions Attachment D - League of California Cities- Priority Focus Attachment E - Ballot , aqu of £alifornia £iti s Better Cit~es-A Better Life February 9, 2001 To: City Managers and City Clerks in non-manager cities From: -Dan Harrison, Director of Administration (916-658-8267; harrisod@cacities.org) Subject: Budgeting for League Dues and Conferences in 2001-2002 I am writing to provide you with information I hope will be useful as you prepare your city's FY 2001-02 budget. In budgeting for League dues for the coming year, city managers should be aware of the possibility that the proposed grassroots coordinator network will be approved by League members and implemented during the coming budget period. The proposal to create a grassroots coordinator network is under active consideration by cities throughout the state. Information has previously been mailed to city managers, and information is available at the League's web site (www.cacties.org). We also will be mailing you additional information in the near future. If approved by the board of directors in April, all cities will have a chance to vote on the proposal, including a dues increase needed to pay for the program, through a mail ballot election that will be held this spring. How will the Grassroots Network affect the city's 2001-02 budget? The dues increase, if approved, will be effective July 1, 2001. Since the League operates on a calendar year basis, the increase for the grassroots coordinator network will be prorated for the last half of 2001 and the invoice due in July will be equal to one-half of the annual amount required to implement the grassroots program. Then, near the end of 2001, the League will send dues statements to cities that will cover annual membership dues for calendar year 2002, including the increase to cover the grassroots program, if it is approved. How to budget for League dues. Because city budgets usually run July-June, and the League dues are billed by calendar year, we recommend that cities budget enough to cover the grassroots network for an 18-month period. If the membership approves the Network, the League will bill in July 2001 for the six-month period July -December. Then in December 2001, the League will send out dues notices to cities for the 12 months of 2002. The table on the back of this memo outlines current dues and how the dues will change if the grassroots proposal is approved. The recommended budget amount includes costs for the grassroots program for 18 months, plus regular League dues adjusted by a projected 4% cost of living increase. We in no way are pre-judging the will of the membership; but we are trying to provide the most complete and helpful information we can pertaining to this issue and your budget. League Meeting Calendar. The attachment outlines League educational programs that will be held during the budget year, with the location and expected registration fees and hotel rates. We hope these materials will help you make informed budget decisions. Thank you for your involvement with the League. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES DUES AND THE GRASSROOTS COORDINATOR NETWORK For cities having a population of: Grassroots Dues with Recommended 2001 Network (t2 Grassroots Budget Amount Dues months) Network for FY 2001-02 1 to 501 to 601 to 701 to 801 to 901 ...... -to 1,001 to 1,251 to 1.501 to 1,751 to 2,001 to 2,251 to 2,501 to 2,751 to 3,001 to 4,001 to 5,001 to 7,501 to 10.001 to 15,001 to 20.001 to 25,001 to 30,001 to 40,001 to 50,001 to 60,001 to 70,001 to 80.001 to 90.001 to 100,001 to 125,001 to 150.001 to 5OO 6OO 7OO 8OO 9O0 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000 2,250 2,550 2,750 3,000 4,000 5,000 7,500 10,000 15,000 20 000 25 000 30 000 4O 000 50 000 60 000 70 000 80 000 90 000 1 O0 000 125 000 15O. 000 200,000 $37 $2O $57 $69 99 52 151 182 197 103 300 364 216 113 329 399 . 259 136 395 478 . 317 166 483 586 · 494 259 753 913 611 321 932 1,129 727 381 1,108 1,343 865 454 1,320 1,600 921 484 1,405 1,703 1,020 536 1.556 1.886 1,078 566 1,645 1,994 1,176 618 1,794 2,174 1,316 691 2,008 2,433 1,570 824 2.394 2,902 2,044 1,073 3,117 3,778 2,359 1,238 3,597 4,360 2,848 1,495 4,343 5,264 3,279 1,722 5,001 6,062 4,105 2,155 6,260 7,588 4,930 2,588 7,518 9,112 6,068 3,186 9,254 11,217 7,382 3,876 11,258 13,646 8,504 4.464 12,968 15,719 9,346 4,907 14,253 17,276 9,817 5,154 14,971 18,146 10.464 5.494 15.958 19,344 11,464 6,019 17,483 21,192 13,075 6,864 19,939 24,169 14,392 7,556 21,948 26,604 16,357 8,587 24,944 30,235 200,001 to 500,000 17,176 9,017 26,193 31,750 P/US 819 430 1,249 1,514 per each full 10,000 of population over 200,001 500.001 to 640,000 41,693 21,889 63,582 77,069 Plus 757 397 1,155 1,400 pereachfulllO,O00 ofpopulation over500,O01 Over 640,000 51,950 27.274 79,224 96,030 The bylaws stipulate that no city's dues shall increase by more than $5,000 per year. This proposal assumes the $5,000 cap will be suspended to implement the grassroots coordinator network. Then a cap will be reestablished. The city's 2001-02 budget should include an amount to cover the grassroots coordinator network during the last half of calendar 2000 as well as all of calendar 2002. Since the League is on a calendar year budget, 6-months of the grassroots network will be billed in July 2001--if the proposal is approved by the membership this spring. Then a full year's dues. including the grassroots network if it is approved, will be billed in December 2001 for calendar year 2002. 2,7/01 g:~rnss~nember~rid\dues\dues-public.xls Grassroots Coordinator Network Overview Purpose City officials have experienced deep frustration in recent years as the state government ~as amassed more resources and power at the expense of local govemment ~ervices. The League has a solid reputation as an advocate of city interests, but traditional lobbying methods are often a poor match for grassroots campaigns and financial contributions by other compet- ing interests. With term limits legislators have become more sensitive to the importance of maintaining solid local political relationships and have begun to locate their key staff in their distdct offices. Many organizations have already responded to the new political reality in Sacramento by investing in a stronger grassroots organization. The League now has to respond in kind to this new climate by building a solid grassroots network to coordinate city officials' efforts locally to influence legislators, their staff, potentially helpful community groups, and the news media. MajQr Elements The Network would consist of 10 field offices that would be staffed by 14 new and 3 existing staff (15 coordinators/2 support). The coordinators would work with city officials and the regional divisions of the League to promote key League legislative priorities with legislators, distdct staff, local media and other supporting community groups. They would arrange meetings, plan news conferences, organize letter writing and media campaigns, and coordinate grassroots efforts with community groups with similar agendas. In short, they would increase the impact of the League's 16 regional divisions and the already busy city officials in each division on the state legislature's and govemor's decisions affecting cities. Cost The Network would cost cities an additional $1.6 million each year in dues. This is the equivalent of 1/4 of one percent of the $650 million cities lose each year due to the ERAF Property Tax Shift and less than 1/8 of one percent of the $1.42 billion cities receive each year in VLF revenues, which most observers believe will become a victim of legislative raids in the next recession. Individual city amounts will vary depending on city population. For example, a city of 50,001 to 60,000 population would pay an additional $4,857. Such a dues increase will require amendment of the League bylaws approved by no tess than 2/3 of the League membership. Process The idea of the Grassroots Network originated with the City Managers Department. The League board of directors ap- pointed a special Task Force, chaired by Santa Barbara Mayor Hardet Miller, to review the proposal. After careful study, the Task Force unanimously recommended its approval. In November 2000 the board overwhelmingly endorsed the proposal in concept and requested that the proposal be shared widely with member cities and League divisions, departments, policy committees and caucuses for review and comment. Next Steps City officials are invited to participate in a dialogue about the Network at upcoming meetings of the divisions, departments, policy committees, and caucuses of the League. Wdtten comments are welcome as well. The board will revisit the proposal again at its April 2001 meeting when, depending on feedback from the membership, it will decide whether to submit it to each member city for action in the form of a bylaw amendment. Revised 12121100 Grassroots Coordinator Network Frequently Asked uest ons What is the Grassroots Coordinator Network? The Grassroots Coordinator Network would consist of 10 field offices staffed by 14 new and 3 existing staff who would serve as grassroots coordinators. Their job would be to work with city officials and the regional divisions of the League to aggressively promote key League legislative priorities with legislators, district staff, local media and other supporting community groups. Why do we need a Grassroots Network? The Network proposal was developed by a task force authorized by the League Board of Directors as part of its strategic planning process. It responds to the deep frustration of many local officials about the cities' loss of political clout, compared with other better-positioned interest groups that contribute millions of dollars to campaigns. The concept of establishing local field offices is used very successfully by political campaigns, as well as by teach- ers, labor and other statewide membership organizations. These groups find that a network of field offices is a well- tested means to communicate with a dispersed membership, and to mobilize local support for the organization's causes. How will cities benefit from this proposal? The goal of the Grassroots Network is to focus on major issues of concern to all cities, such as fiscal reform, increased funding for transportation and local control. Cities will benefit from the increased visibility of city issues in local and statewide media, and by holding legislators accountable back home for the votes they cast in Sacramento. The potential payback for this investment is enormous. For example, on a statewide basis the proposed $1.6 million dues increase needed to pay for the network is equivalent to only 1/4 of one percent of the annual $660 million annual ERAF loss to cities. It is less than 1/8 of one percent of the $1.42 billion cities receive each year in VLF revenues - portions of which they could lose if the state suffers another recession. What would the grassroots coordinators do? The coordinator's role is to increase the impact of the League's 16 regional divisions, by helping busy city officials focus strategic attention on state legislators' and the governor's decisions affecting cities. The coordinators will work to build relationships with local elected and appointed officials, local media, and other individuals and organizations in the region who might be called upon to be part of a local coalition on a particular League initiative or pending legislation. Page 2 of 4 The coordinators' would: · Arrange meetings, plan news conferences, organize letter writing and media campaigns, and coordinate grassroots efforts with community groups with similar agendas. · Support mayors, council members and city managers in drafting sample letters from cities; and train city staff on understanding and accessing the legislative process. · Provide regular presentations on legislative developments and insight into the political dynamics influencing legislative developments. Where will the field offices be located? The 10 field offices would be located around the state to ensure that coordinators are available to serve each of the League's 16 geographic divisions, while still balancing the need to maintain close contact with legislative districts and to be accessible to all cities. A map of the distribution by region is available in the information packet developed by the League, but no decision has been made yet about specific locations. The goal is to achieve the highest impact on League lobbying and greatest visibility among members, while still keeping expenses as Iow as possible. How was the decision made to locate the grassroots coordinators? The task force studied several alternatives. It considered factors such as the current boundaries of the 16 League regional divisions, statewide population distribution, legislative district boundaries, coverage of major media mar- kets, and driving distances within each coverage area. One option was to locate field offices primarily in densely populated areas with high concentrations of legislative districts, such as the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and Orange County areas. This option would require fewer coordinators, because the service areas would cover smaller geographic areas. The task force concluded, however, that to mobilize the resources of the entire League member- ship the coordinators would need to be visible and accessible to all the geographic divisions statewide. How does the Network relate to the ABC effort? Action for Better Cities was created to make expenditures and engage in "political" activities such as statewide initiative campaigns. Recently, through in-kind contributions of staff time and strategic counsel, ABC was able to play a major role in helping to defeat Proposition 37, the initiative that would have severely limited cities' abilities to impose fees to support local regulatory activities and provide services. While both the proposed Network and ABC share a similar objective, namely to gain more political clout for cities, the Network coordinators will focus on organizing local activities in support of League legislative positions. ABC will lead any initiative effort in support of fiscal stability and similar objectives. Our city already pays a lobbyist. Why do we need this network too? The Network doesn't replace the ongoing need to have a strong lobbying presence in Sacramento. (In fact, part of the task force recommendation which has been approved by the League Board of Directors is to set aside at least $50,000/year in the budget to hire contract lobbyists in Sacramento to assist League staff at strategic times on some key issues.) Cities that currently have their own contract or in-house lobbyist will probably continue to find that having their own representation makes sense, for two reasons. First, the League's lobbying program represents the interests of all 475 cities. It lobbies the legislature on matters of statewide importance to cities, and cannot provide the representation needed to address the individual needs of cities or even a single region. Second, the grassroots coordinators will be networking and organizing people, not Page 3 of 4 lobbyists. This work will support and enhance the efforts of all city lobbyists, regardless of whether they are con- tractors or in-house staff. Several prominent contract lobbyists who represent individual cities have commented that they see the network proposal as complementary to their ability to represent their clients. What kind of person will be hired to staff the Network? Everyone associated with this project has concluded that the best way to make this Network effective is to hire seasoned, professional, political organizers, not policy analysts or technical people right out of college. The budget provides an attractive salary and benefit package to do this. In addition to reassigning some League staff, we expect to recruit savvy political people who have worked on legislative or local elections, staffed legislative offices, or worked in public affairs or campaign consulting firms. What will it cost? The estimated annualized cost is $1.6 million, spread among all member cities. This estimate is based upon the following assumptions: Several current League staff members will be reassigned. Approximately 14 new staff will be hired. Much of the cost for the individual offices will be subsidized by the cities where the office is located, for ex- ample, by making office space available within a city facility. How will costs be distributed? Costs would be distributed among all cities based upon the League's dues structure, which is based on population. Some small cities pay only a few hundred dollars, while the largest cities pay tens of thousands of dollars. The median dues statewide are currently about $4,930. The Network would increase median dues by approximately $2,810.~ Additional information on the dues increase is available on the information sheet entitled "Cost Analysis". What is the process of considering the dues hike? Membership briefings and dialogue will take place between January and April to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to review and comment on the proposal. The League Board will gather and review this feedback when it meets in April 2001, make whatever changes in the concept it deems appropriate to respond to member concerns, and consider whether to submit the proposal with the dues increase to a vote of the entire membership. When would a dues increase start? If the Board votes in April to propose dues increase, it would schedule a mailed ballot election on an amendment to the League bylaws to implement a proposed dues increase for Spring of 2001, with an effective date of July 1, 2001. Support from 2/3 of the cities would be needed to pass the bylaw amendment. How would the Grassroots Coordinator Network affect the city's 2001.02 budget? The dues increase, if approved, will be effective July 1, 2001. Since the League operates on a calendar year basis, the increase for the grassroots coordinator network will be prorated for the last half of 2001 and the invoice due in July will be equal to one-half of the annual amount required to implement the grassroots program. Then, near the end of 2001, the League will send dues statements to cities that will cover annual membership dues for calendar year 2002, including the increase to cover the grassroots program. Page 4 of 4 Grassroots Lobbying Task Force Harriet Miller, Mayor, Santa Barbara - Chair John Thompson, City Manager, Vacaville, and President of the City Managers' Department- Vice Chair Eileen Ansari, Council Member, Diamond Bar Harry Armstrong, Mayor, Clovis Lee Ann Garcia, Council Member, Grand Terrace Tom Haas, City Attomey, Walnut Creek Jim Marshall, City Manager, Merced Patsy Marshall, Council Member, Buena Park Dave Mora, City Manager, Salinas Kevin O'Rourke, City Manager, Fairfield Susan Peppier, Council Member, Redlands Greg Pettis, Council Member, Cathedral City Mike Siminski, Council Member, Lompoc Armour Smith, Vice Mayor, Modesto Anne Solem, Council Member, Mill Valley Richard Tefank, Chief of Police, Buena Park Ruth Vreeland, Council Member, Monterey £ndnote "Part of the Network proposal requires temporary suspension of a current $5,000 cap on the growth in dues for any city. The proposal would suspend the cap only for this one-time dues increase. It would then reinstate a cap of $8,000, reflecting the percent- age League dues have grown since 1984, the year the cap was adjusted. Grassroots Coordinator Network Proposed ])istribution of Staff Among League Divisions I Legislative Coordinator 2 Legislative Coordinators 3 Legislative Coordinators 16 Heg~onal L)iw$~on$ 1. Rodwecd Empiro 2. Sacramento Valley L~. 0~rlb~,l Valloy 4. $ou-'.h San Joaquin VsIley 5. Des~-rl-MounLain 6. Inland Fmpir~. 7. Riverside County 8. Imperial County 9. San Die~j. o County 1 I. Las Angelas Count'/ 12.. ChannP. I 13. Monlcrcy IB~y 14. Peninsula 15. East Bay 16. NO,th Bay 4 12 / -~; Grassroots Coordinator NetwOrk Proposed Staff Assignments.' Cities and Legislative Districts DIVISION # STAFF # CITIES # LEG. DIST. 6 North Bay & Redwood Empire I 46 8 Sacramento Valley i 58 7 South San ]oaquin i 37 4 Central Valley I ~ 26 Riverside, Inland Empire, 13 Desert Mtn. 2 54 10 Orange County ! 33 33 Los Angeles County 3 86 6 Channel Counties 1 24 Peninsula, East Bay, Monterey 3 86 23 Bay 10 San Diego, Imperial County 1 25 Campbefl Cupertino Gilroy Los A!tcs Los Altos Hills Los Gates Milpitas Monte Serene Morgan Hill Mountain View Pale Alto San Jose Santa Clara Saratoga Sunnyvale Santa C/ara County Transportation Authority Santa C/ara Valley Water District ABAG March 30, 2001 The Honorable Henry Manayan -- --' President Santa Clara County Cities Association 505 West Olive Avenue, Suite 630 Sunnyva~,fl;A 94086 Dear ~n: ~ On behalf of the city managers of Santa Clara County, I am writing to urge the Cities Association to support the League of California Cities' proposed "Grassroots Coordinator Network." As you and your colleagues on the Cities Association Board know, the League is proposing a new network of grassroots coordinators to better organize and express the legislative message of cities. The network would consist of 10 field offices around the state and fourteen new staff positions. One office would be in our area. While the cost of the new program would require a significant increase in League dues, we city managers believe it is well worth the expense. Cities have consistently been last in the legislative food chain of Sacramento, with millions of local dollars literally taken from us. Despite our existing relationships with state legislators, our voice has not been able to compete with well-organized special interests. The inability to recover substantial ERAF funds despite record state surpluses is evidence of our inability to be effective with current resources and strategies. Small and medium-sized cities in particular have been unable to influence Sacramento. Other statewide membership organizations have used grassroots networks effectively to get their message across and we think it is time for the League to do the same. We respectfully urge the Cities Associate to endorse this effort. The Honorable Henry Manayan Page 2 March 30, 2001 would be happy to discuss this issue further with you or your colleagues, or make a pre~sentation at a-boafd'r~-eting if you so desire. I can be reached at (408) 730-7480. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, ~~S. LaSala City Manager City of Sunnyvale and Chair, Santa Clara County/Cities Managers' Association c: Santa Clara County City Managers League of California Cities Ballot on Grassroots Network City of Does your city vote to approve the addition of article XVI to the League's bylaws relating to the establishment of a League Grassroots Network (attached as Attachment A and incorporated by reference in this ballot), along with the dues schedule (attached as Attachment B and also incorporated by reference in this ballot)? [ ] Yes [ ] No Ballot returned by: City Official Name City Official Title Ballots must be returned by First Class Mail and postmarked no later than July 6, 2001. Return ballots to: League of California Cities 1400 K Street, 4th Floor Sacramento, CA 95814 Attention: Counting Committee Attachment A: Proposed Addition to League Bylaws Article XVI: Establishment and Financing of Grassroots Network ' Section 1: Enhancement of Advocacy Efforts. To enhance the League's advocacy efforts on behalf of cities, the League hereby establishes a Grassroots Network. The Grassroots Network consists of a series of field offices throughout California, responsible for coordinating city advocacy efforts and promoting statewide League policy priorities. Section 2: Dues Increase (a) Initial Financing. The dues increase approved concurrently with the addition of Article XVI shall finance the League's Grassroots Network for the second half of 2001 and for 2002. The increase shall be used exclusively to finance the Grassroots Network. (b) Continued Financing. Any subsequent dues increases shall occur in accordance with Article IV? Section 3: Accountability (a) Annual Goal-Setting and Performance Assessment. The League Board shall set long-term goals and annual objectives for the League's Grassroots Network. The League Board shall periodically report to the League's Member Cities on the Grassroots Network's performance in meeting those goals and objectives. (b) Board Discontinuance. If at any time the League Board finds the Grassroots Network is not meeting its objectives on behalf of cities, the League Board may discontinue the Grassroots Network. (c) Membership Vote on Program Continuation. On or before December 31, 2007, the Board shall ask Member Cities to vote on whether to continue the Grassroots Network beyond December 31, 2008.2 ~ Explanatory Note: "Article IV" is the existing section of the League's bylaws, which provide for 1) a two-thirds vote of approval by the League board for all dues increases as well as 2) division ratification of dues increases in excess of the Consumer Pdce Index. Article IV also caps individual city dues increases at $5,000 per year. 2 The League's bylaws provide that a majority of votes cast is necessary for decision on League votes. See Article XII, § 4. Attachment B: Proposed Dues to Establish the Grassroots Network ~_~_ Total Dues ~~ Base ~~' (~'-~ Including Base ~ Dues for :~~ Grassroots Dues ~ 2002 ~~ Network Forcifieshavingapopulafionof: 2001 ~-~:~~7~.___.~.___v~.~ [A+4%] :~~]:: lC+DJ ~ ~o soo s~7 ~ ~ s~ ~~:~ 95~ 501 to 600 ... 99 ~ ~ 103 157 601 to 700 ... 197 ~:~- ~ 205 312 701 to 800 216 ~.~ ~ =5 ?~ ~2 801 to 900 ... 259 ~ ~;~ 269 901 to 1,000 317 '~ ~ ~ ' ' 330 ~~ 503 1,501 to 1,750 ... 727~ ~ 756 -~:~:~~ 1,152 1,751 to 2,000 ... 865 ;~ ~:~:;~-~ 900 ~~ 1,373 2,251 to 2,550 ... 1,020 ~ ~_ 1,~1 ~~'~ 1,618 2,751 to 3,000 1,176 ~ ~~ 1,~3 ~ :~: 1,865 3,00~ to 4,000 ... ~,3~s ::~:~ ~,399 .~;~':~ 2,0ss 5,001 to 7,500 ... 2,~ 2,125 :~:~¥%~7~6~.- 3,241 7.50~ to 10,000 ... 2,359 ~~ 2,<53 ~-.:-~:~.~s:~- 3,7<~ o.oo ,o ,ooo ... 15,001 to 20,000 ... 3,279 ~:~ 3,411 5,201 ~0.00~ ~o 25,000 ... <,~05 <,2~ ~;'~~ ~,5~ ,o o,ooo ... 30.001 to 40,000 ... 6,~8 :~4~~ 6,311 ~;-'f: ~;~'~'~-~:9,624 50.001 to 60,000 ... 8,5~ %~ %~-;~; 8,~ ;k-T?:~'4;~ 13,487 60.001 to 70,000 ... 9,~6 : :~:~7~-~- 9.720 ~-:~;~-:*-~¢~;~: f 14,823- 70.00~ to 80,000 ... 9,8~7 ?~;;';~:,~.~ ~0,2~0 :;:7~~; ~5,570 80.001 to 90,000 ... 10,4~ ~.~%~:; 10,883 ~:-~~;~ 16,597 90,001 to 100,000 ... 11,4~ 7_;~:.~:~;~-~ 11,923 :~:~~ 18,182 100.001 tO 125,000 ... 13,075 ~;::;::?¢:~;~Z 13,598 ~'~¢~¢~9-~ 20,737 125.001 tO 150,000 ... 14,392 .3~ ...... ~;~'14,~8 '~:~-~'~;:; ~,826 ~50.00~ to 200,000 ... ~S.aS7 ~,~J~ ~7.0~a ~:'~,_¥;.~8~a~: 25.~2 200,001 to 500,0~ 17,176 ~?~-~~: 17,863 ;~:::¢~.:~ 27,241 Plus 819 ~:!:~? 852 ~~?~ 1,299 per each ~11 10,000 of popula~on over 200,001 500.001 to ~0,000 41,693 I-~~143,361 I~~:~ 66,125 Plus 757 I:~;~J 787 ~~~1 1,201 per each ~11 10,000 of popula~on over 500,001 Over ~0,000 51,950 ~:--~:~'~3~t ~.028 ~728~q 82,393 For purposes of establishing the grassroots network, the $5,000 dues cap in League bylaws article IV, section 2, is suspended for the years 2001 and 2002. The dues cap will apply to base dues without interruption and will apply to total dues in year 2003 and years following. The League board will consider in September whether a cost-of-living adjustment for dues will be needed in 2002. This table shows 2002 dues with a cost-of-living adjustment of 4%.