The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-28-1983 CITY COUNCIL AGEDACITY OF SARATOGA A=DA BILL NO. , DATE: July 28, 1983 DEPAI7lM : City Manager Initial: Dept. Hd. C. A C. Mgr. SUBJECT: NOTICE OF SURPLUS SCHOOL SITE - BROOKVIEW SCHOOL Issue Summary Pursuant to the Naylor Act (Chapter 1, Article 5 of the California Education Code) Moreland School District has served notice on the City of the availability of the Brookview School. This action follows an extended period of discussion between the City and the School District concerning the purchase by the'City of "El Quito" park located at the El Quito:School site. The City has leased the E1 Quito Park site from the District and has developed it as a park with the intent of eventually purchasing the site to serve the northeastern area of the community. Discussions hwve centered on the.District selling the park to the City under the terms -of the Naylor Act, which would require that the City respond affirmatively to an offer of sale for both Brookview and E1 Quito School sites. It is the City's desire and intent to conclude this purchase in one transaction. However, the School District has determined first to offer Brookview School site. In order to preserve the possibility for meeting the City's stated objective, it is essential that the City respond affirmatively to the District's offer on the Brookview site and begin negotiations with the District to determine whether it is possible to acquire at least a portion of the E1 Quito site in lieu -of a part of Brookview. Recommendation Adopt the attached Resolution making the necessary findings and authorizing the City Manager to file notice. The resolution requires a 2 /3rds. (4 /5ths) vote under the Naylor Act. Fiscal Impact The City has identified sources of financing the acquisition of El Quito Park site and has budgeted monies for that purpose. Funding availability presently is limited,.however, to acquisition under the Naylor Act provisions which allow the City to purchase the site for park and open space purposes at 25% of fair market value. If the City does not preserve the option to purchase under Naylor, either the full site may not be acquired or the City will have to pay consider- ably more for it. The recommended action preserves the preferred possibility. E"hibiis /Attachments 1. Resolution 2. Notice of Availability from Moreland School District 6 /30/83 3. 7/13/83 response to Moreland School District 4. Draft reply to Moreland pursuant to this recommendation S. Copy of Naylor Act Council Action 8/3: Callon /Fanelli moved to approve Resolution 2078 with amendment. Passed 5 -0. J;:-, 0 Board of Trustees MORELAND SCHOOL DISTRICT John W. Anderson President CALIFORNIA'S OLDEST KNOWN RURAL SCHOOL DISTRICT • 1851 Damon G. Nalty Clerk ROBERT M. REASONER Marilyn M. Incardona SWerintendent Anna K. Kurze Arthur A. Woods, Jr. June 30, 1983 QLCEF D Mayor of Saratoga ' 51983 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue " — — Saratoga, CA 95070 Honorable Mayor; Pursuant to Education Code Section 39393.5 you are hereby offered for sale at fair market value, the following property owned by the Moreland School District: A school site of approximately 11.57 acres with approximately 28,000 square feet of elementary school buildings thereon located at 12301 Radoyka Drive in Sara- toga, California. If you wish additional information please contact: School Property Managers, Inc. 645 Hermosa Way Menlo Park, CA 94025 Attn: Mr. R. G. Bjoring (415) 324 -0913 If you are interested in the purchase of this property, you must notify School Property Managers, Inc. or the Moreland School District within sixty (60) days. If no contact is received the property may be disposed of as otherwise provided for by the Education Code of the State of California. Sincerely, Robert W. Reasoner Superintendent RWR /RGB /b 4710 Campbell Avenue San Jose, California 95130 4081379 -1370 il� ��r �� 4. ID @0 nj& Wr 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 City Manager July 13, 1983 Mr. Robert W. Reasoner, Superintendent Moreland School District 4710 Campbell Avenue San Jose, CA 95130 Dear Mr. Reasoner: Your letter of Jun, 30 concerning the offer of sale of the Brookview School site at 12301 Radoyka Drive, Saratoga, has been received and will be presented to the City Council at their July 20 regular meeting. I anticipate the City Council will schedule this matter for discussion at their July 26 study session. An official reply would be forthco:ainq some time thereafter. In light of our previous discussions regarding the Cit_v's purchase of the El Quito Park site, located on the E1 Quil.o School property which currently we have under lease agreement from you, the timing of this offer of sale of Brookview raises some concerns on our part. For the past two years, the City has set aside monies for the purchase of the E1 Quito Park site, even reallocating monies from other projects to do so. The amount set aside has been equiva* lent to our mutual discussions on the fair market value of the 6+ acres at E1 Quito, adjusted according to the "Na�zlor Act" provisions. However, as we've discussed, _n order to obtain the E1 Quito Park site in this fashion, it would be necessary to combine, in effect, the Brookview and E1 Quito School sites so that th�are would ba sufficient total acreage to satisfy the provision., of the Navior Act. This approach has been discussed between .-he City and School District, and it is my understanding that the approach seemed agreeable to the School District. Mr. Robert Reasoner July 13, 1983 Page two One of the questions I am sure will arise at the Council study session is what effect the current offer of sale of Brookview will have upon the "combined" approach mentioned above. Our concern would be to respond in such a way as to keep open the opportunity for this approach and preserve our option to acquire the full El Quito Park site in the manner described. Perhaps, prior to the meeting-of July 26, you might respond to this concern so that we might better understand the intentions of the School District and reply appropriately. Sincerely, . J. Wayne Dernetz City Manager ck _ cc: City Councilmembers R. Shook, Community Development H. Toppel, City Attorney D. Trinidad, Maintenance .VN J Mkt' � o � 0-MITE oo 0&iaZ1XQ)(5Z 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 OFFICE: City Manager August 4, 1983 Mr. Robert W. Reasoner Superintendent Moreland School District 4710 Campbell Avenue San Jose, CA 95130 Dear Mr. Reasoner: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Linda Callon Martha Clevenger Virginia Fanelli John Mallory David Moyles In response to your offer dated June 30, 1983, to purchase the surplus school site located at 12301 Radoyka Drive, Saratoga, California, commonly known as the Brookview School, and pursuant to Section 39394 of the California Education Code, notice is hereby given that the City of Saratoga proposes to purchase or lease such site, or portion thereof, or other surplus property as may be offered by the Moreland School District in substitution therefor. Enclosed is a copy of a Resolution adopted by the Saratoga City Council on August 3, 1983, concerning your offer. The City of Saratoga and the Moreland School District have been engaged for some time in discussions regarding acquisition by the City of the El Quito parklands which the City now leases from the District. It is still the intention and desire of the City to purchase this property. However, your current offer on the Brook - view site has prompted requests from residents in the area for the City to purchase this land as well in order to preserve the exist- ing park and recreation facilities for use by the community. You have advised the City of your desire to develop the Brookview site through filing a Tentative Map for full subdivision of the property, as may be permitted under current zoning and subdivision regulations. We believe that through a process of creative plan- ning and good faith negotiation your objectives, along with those of the City and its residents, can be achieved through the open process prescribed by State laws. Numerous options would seem to be available which should be fully explored by all parties concerned. I suggest that a meeting be scheduled as soon as possible between the representatives of the City and the District so that we may begin our negotiations for acquisition of your surplus school land. Please call me to arrange for such a meeting at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, J. Wayne Dernetz City Manager )�r irwingat e o all „1 In the reso- Inc. V* San i =t. (1979) 160 r ncnconform- chi• article, forin with all the governing :;0 days from 1te, lease such to any lessee, crnls and con - ;,t the term of ;!4 ;iif to 39369, ich lease. r or employee negotiate the xecuted unless snch lease. ocerning board after the re- teal a proposal the resolution n 3U days from f property; sub- this article. . c. 689, see note EDUCATION CODE § 39391 - ARTICLE 5. SURPLUS SCHOOL PLAYGROUND, PLAYING FIELD, AND RECREATIONAL PROPERTY [NEW] Sec. 39390. Legislative intent. 39391. Application of article. 39392. School site; governing board. 39393. Authorization to sell or lease school sites. 39394. Offers to sell or lease school sites to public agencies; priorities; discretion; notice of intent to purchase or lease. 39395. Retention of part of school site. 39396. Sales price; maximum and minimum; annual rate of lease. 39397. Public agencies proposing to purchase or lease land; findings; approval. 39397.5 Public agencies; surplus school property purchases; plans; operative date of section [New]. 39398. , Maintenance by public agencies; uses of land; reacquisition by school dis. trict. 39399. Law governing. 39400. Failure of compliance by school district; validity of transfer or conveyance. 39401. Exemption of surplus school sites. 39402. Alternative agreements for disposition of property. 39403. Limitation on rights of acquisition or lease by public agencies [New]. 39404. Excluded school districts. Article 5 was added by Stat8.1980, c. 736, p. x'199, § 2. 3 39390. Legislative Intent The Legislature is concerned that school playgrounds, playing fields and recrea- tional real property will be lost for such uses by the surrounding communities even where those communities in their planning process have assumed that such proper- ties would be permanently available for recreational purposes. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this article to allow school districts to recover their investment in such surplus property while .making it possible for other agencies of government to acquire the property and keep it available for playground, playing field or other outdoor recreational and open -space purposes. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, P. 2199, § 2.) Library References Schools and School Districts X65. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts 4 241 et sea. 3 39391. Application of article This article shall apply to any school site owned by a school district, which the governing board determines to sell or lease, and with respect to which the follow - ing conditions exist: (a) Either the whole or a portion of the school site consists of land which is used for school playground, playing field, or other outdoor recreational purposes i and open -space land particularly suited for recreational purposes. (b) The land described in subdivision (a) has been used for one or more of the } purposes specified therein for at least eight years immediately preceding the date i of the governing board's determination to sell or lease the school site. s (c) No other available publicly owned land in the vicinity of the school site is ade- quate to meet the existing and foreseeable needs of the community for playground, playing field, or other outdoor recreational and open -space purposes, as determined c by the governing body of the public agency which proposes to purchase or lease land from the school district, pursuant to Section 39397. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2199, § 2. Amender] by Stats.19031, c. 507, p. —, § 1.) by amendment I Asterisks * * • Indicate deletions by amendment 89 § 39392 EDUCATION CODE § 39392. School site; governing board cations • ' • t As used in this article, "school site" rneans a parcel of land, or two or more con- c the tiguous parcels, which Is owned by a school district. " pun These provisions steal governing board of the school district %viiich owns the school site. § 39395. Retention of part of school site § 39397.5 Public agencie In determining what portion of a school site shall be offered for sale or lease date of sect) pursuant to this article, the governing board may retain any part of the school site (a) No public agency m containing structures or buildings, together with such land adjacent thereto which, pursuant to this article u as determined by the governing board, must be included in order to avoid * * * plus school property. Th reducing the * * * value of that part of the school site containing such struc- tion of which the public tures or buildings to less than 50 percent of fair market value. s �1ant to this article and (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2200, § 2. Amended b Stats.1981, c. 507, p. —, § 2. school acreage as propert y ) established pursuant to th sires to purchase only a p § 39396. Sales price; maximum and minimum; annual rate of lease this article, It shall desi (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b) or (e), the price at which i,rovide a description of th land described in Section 39391, excluding that portion of a school site retained by designating the metes and the governing board pursuant to Section 39395, is sold pursuant to this article shall (b) Any property design not exceed the school district's cost of acquisition, calculated as a pro rata cost of agencies do not wish to pu acquiring the entire parcel comprising the school site, adjusted by a factor equiva- a school district withou lent to the percentage increase or decrease in the cost of living from 'the date of (c) This section shall be purchase to the year in which the offer of sale is made, plus the cost of any im- (Added b provement to the recreational and open -space portion of the land which the school y Stats.1981, C. 50 district has made since its acquisition of the land. In no event shall ° ' ' the library References Schools X74 . price be less than 25 percent of the fair market value of the land described in C.T.S. Schools* and School Section 39391 or less than the amount necessary to retire the share 'of local bonded 263. Indebtedness plus the amount of the original cost of the approved state aid appli- Underline Indicates changes or additlons by amendment Asterisks * * ° Indicated 90 27 Cal.Code -4 1982 P.P. �•„ or more con- . I. me:ms the „ School site con - t,,.,r.l ,locides, to sell of this article. es; priorities; dis- board, prior In S,•ction 89391, ex- hoalyd pursuant to 1h,r school site con - ['I.,.r11i119 ;; w rctairtec( by the „ ;eucies in ac. the ];Ind may be within the' area in ..1 tT.'-d. woter the offer shall t•• ,dfered by a school %cithin 60 days after 1, sell or lease. , -(!,i for sale or lease i,:trt of the school site �a1ij:u :cnt thereto which, �onler to avoid ,•n;tt,1il1i1ig such struc- dil, c. 507, p. § 2•) ,rate of lease `(,•t, the price at which a .school site retained by Riant to this article shall leil as a tiro rata cost of istcd by a factor equiva- living from the date of pits the cost of any Ira- he land which the school event shall * * * the of the land described in tl:<: share of local bonded ap;,rnived state aid avpli- additions by amendment EDUCATION CODE § 39397.55 cations oil ■ * * the property, excluding that portion of a school site retained by the governing board pursuant to Section 39394, at the time of the offer. These provisions shall apply to land that the school district acquired by gift or for consideration. (b) A school district that offers a portion of a school site for sale may offer such portion of property for sale at its fair market value, provided the school district offers an equivalent size alternative portion of * * * that school site for school playground, playing field, or other recreational and open -space purposes. (c) Land which Is leased pursuant to this article shall be leased at an annual rate of not more than 3[oth of the maximum sales price determined pursuant to sub- division (a) of this section, adjusted annually by a factor equivalent to the per- centage increase or decrease in the cost of living for the immediately, preceding year, (d) The percentage of annual increase or decrease in the cost of living shall be the amount shown for January 1st of the appropriate year by the then current Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumers Price Index for the area in which the school site is located. (e) Whenever a school district closes a school site and sells any land described in Section 39391 pursuant to this article to help pay only for capital outlay costs Incurred directly as a result of the transfer of pupils from the closed school to an- other school or other schools of the district, the sale price of the property determined pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be increased by an amount equal to the additional costs incurred due to the school closure. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2200, § 2. Amended by Stats.1981, c. 507, p. —, $ 3.) § 39397. Public agencies proposing to purchase or lease land; findings; approval The governing body of a public agency which proposes to purchase or lease land from a school district pursuant to this article shall first make a finding, approved by a vote of two - thirds of its members, that public lands in the vicinity of the school site are inadequate to meet the existing and foreseeable needs of the community for playground, playing field, or other outdoor recreational and open -space purposes. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2201, § 2.) 5 39397.5 Public agencies; surplus school property purchases; plans; operative date of section (a) No public agency may purchase surplus school property from a school district pursuant to this article unless it has first adopted a plan for the purchase of sur- plus school property. The plan shall designate the surplus site or sites all or a por- tion of which the public agency desires to purchase at the price established pur- suant to this article and shall designate at least 70 percent of the total surplus school acreage as property which the agency does not desire to purchase at the price established pursuant to this article. Where the plan indicates that the agency de- sires to purchase only a portion of a school site at the price established pursuant to this article, it shall designate the percent of the property to be so purchased and provide a description of the general location of the property to be purchased, without designating the metes and bounds. (b) Any property designated by public agencies as surplus' school sites which the I do not wish to purchase, pursuant to subdivision (a), may be sold or leased by a school district without regard to the provisions of this article. (c) This section shall become operative on April 1, 1982. (Added by Stats.1981, c. 507, p. —, § 4, operative April 1, 1982.) Library References Schools X74. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts ¢¢ 253, 263. Asterisks * * * Indicate deletions by amendment 27 Cat.Code -4 91 1982 P.P. § 39398 EDUCATION CODE § 39398. Maintenance by public agencies; uses of land; reacquisitlon by school district Any land purchased or leased by a public agency pursuant to this article shall thereafter be maintained by such agency for playground, playing field, or other out- door recreational and open space uses. Land which prior to its sale or lease was used for playground or playing field purposes, shall continue to be maintained for such use by the acquiring agency, unless the governing body of that agency, by a two - thirds vote at a public hearing, determines that there is no longer a significant need for the land to be so used, in which case the land may thereafter be used for other outdoor recreational or open -space purposes. The school district ' • • may, at any time, • ' • reacquire the land at a price calculated in the manner prescribed in Section 39396, and the rights of reacquisition provided in this section shall be set forth in the deed or other. instrument of transfer. If the governing board of the public agency determines that the land is no longer needed for play- ground, playing field, or other outdoor recreational and open -space purposes, the public agency shall offer the property to the school district for reacquisition under this section, and the school district shall notify the public agency within 60 days of Its intent to reacquire • • • the land. If the school district intends to sell • • • the property within one year of the reacquisition date, the school district ' • • may finance the reacquisition of • • • the land by lien against the proceeds to be obtained from the sale of • • • the land by the school district. If the school district falls to give the public agency timely notice of its intent to reacquire the property, or If it fails to exercise its right of reacquisition, the public agency • ' ' may use or dispose of • • • the property. For purposes of this section, "cost of acquisition ", as used in Section 39396, shall refer to the cost at which the land was acquired by the public agency. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2201, § 2. Amended by Stats.1982, c. 466, p. —, § 29.) § 39399. Law governing The sale or lease of land by a school district pursuant to this article shall be subject to, and governed by, the provisions of Article 2 (commencing with Section 39030) of Chapter 1 and Article 4 (commencing with Section 39360), except to the extent that the provisions of this article are inconsistent with a provision or provi- sions of Article 2 or 4, in which event the provisions of this article shall govern such sale or lease. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2202, § 2.) § 39400. Failure of Compliance by school district; validity of transfer or con- veyance Failure by the school district to comply with the provisions of this article shall not invalidate the transfer or conveyance of real property to a purchaser or en- cumbrancer for value. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2202, § 2.) § 39401. Exemption of surplus school sites Notwithstanding the other provisions of this article, any school district governing board may designate not more than two surplus school sites as exempt from the provisions of this article for each planned school site acquisition if the school district has an immediate need for an additional school site and is actively seeking to ac- quire such an additional site, and may exempt not more than one surplus school site if the district is seeking immediate expansion of the classroom capacity of an existing school by 50 percent or more. The exemption provided for by this section shall be inapplicable to any school site which, under a ' • ' lease ' • ' executed on or before July 1, 1974, with a term of 10 years, was leased to a city of under 100,000 population for park purposes, was improved at city expense, and • • • used • ' ' for public park purposes. (Added by .Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2202, § 2. Amended by Stats.1980, c. 1354, p. 4859, § 37.23, urgency, eff. Sept. 30, 1980, operative Jan. 1, 1981.) Underline indicates changes or additions by amendment 92 1980 Legislation. Section 68.3 of Stats.l provides: "Section 37.23 of thi: operative on January 1, : § 39402. Alternative a A school district hai native to sale or lease ticle, enter into other f, with any entity- enumei in specified, including, part of the school site erties at the end of ti open -space easement h if, the lessee or a grant era, an agreement regi tained by the school d ment, to the extent ti pliance with applicable (Added by Stats.1980, c § 39403. Limitation or (a) No more than 3( school district may be I cle. (b) The right of any pursuant to this article acreage within its jur school acreage within it suant to this article, wi by the school district w (c) For purposes of i means property which i eluding, but not limite school buildings that an subject to any lease or excess of six years, in i had use of the property the property. (d) Nothing in this see nit? to purchase at full Plus school acreage Wilk (Added by Stats.1981, c. 1981 Legislation. Former § 39403, added 736, P. 2203, § 2. amended 007• p . —. § 6, relating matter, was repealed by S). —,§8. 4 39404. Excluded schot This article shall not P"Pils in average daily a 'Added by Stats.1980, e. i Asterisks • • • Indicate EDUCATION CODE § 39404 M by school 1980 Legislation. Section 68.3 of Stats.1980, c. 1354, p. 4885. provides: -' thorsmit- operative on Januaryt1,11981 t. shall become § 39402. Alternative agreements for disposition of property A school district having a school site described in Section 39391 may as an alter- native to sale or lease of the land pursuant to the foregoing provisions of this ar- ticle, enter into other forms of agreement concerning the disposition of such property with any entity enumerated in Section 39394, In accordance with the priorities there- in specified, including, but not limited to: an agreement to lease to such entity all or part of the sqhool site for a specified term, with an option to purchase such prop- erties at the end of the term; an agreement granting to such entity a permanent open -space easement for recreational use over a portion of the leased site; and, if the lessee or a grantee under such an agreement is an entity having zoning pow- ers, an agreement requiring such entity to rezone any portion of the property re- tained by the school district in accordance with conditions specified in the agree- ment, to the extent that rezoning in accordance with such conditions is in com- pliance with applicable laws of the state. (Added by Stats.1980, C. 736, p. 2202, § 2.) § 39403. Limitation on rights of acquisition or lease by public agencies (a) No more than 30 percent of the total surplus school acreage owned by a school district may be purchased or leased by public agencies pursuant to this arti- cle. (b) The right of any public agency to purchase or lease surplus school property pursuant to this article shall exist only with respect to an amount of surplus school acreage within its jurisdictional boundaries which, when added to the surplus school acreage within its jurisdictional boundaries already purchased or leased pur- suant to this article, will not exceed 30 percent of the surplus school acreage owned by the school district which is within the jurisdictional boundaries of that agency. (c) For purposes of this section, "surplus school acreage" of a school district means property which is owned by a district and not used for school purposes, in- cluding, but not limited to, undeveloped property and property which contains school buildings that are not in use as a result of a school closure and which is not subject to any lease or agreement executed on or before July 1, 1974, for a term in excess of six years, in which any city containing a population of less than 100,000 had use of the property for park purposes on January 1, 1981, and had improved the property, (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to deny local agencies the opportu- nity to purchase at full market value all or part of the 70 percent of the total sur- plus school acreage which is not affected by this article. (Added by Stats.1981, c. 1113, p. —, § 9,) 1981 Leglsfatlon. Derivation: Former § 39403, added by Former § 39403, added by Stats.1980, c. Stats.1980, c. 736, p. 2203, § 2, amended by 736, P. 2203, § 2, amended by Stats.1981 5, 507, p. --, § 6, relating to same subject Library References p. matter, was repealed by Stats.1981, c. 1113, Schools efere —.§8. C.J.S. Schools and School Districts § 241 et sea. § 39404. Excluded school districts This article shall not apply to any school district having more than 400,000 Pupils in average daily attendance. (Added by Stats.1980, c. 736; p. 2203, § 2.) Asterisks • + • Indicate deletions by amendment 93 CITY OF SARATOGA AC= ,A BILL NO. 0 DATE: July 22, 1983 DEPARIMENT: City Manager SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH VOLUNTEER CENTER Issue Summary Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty C. In 1982, the City of Saratoga.and. the Volunteer Center of Santa Clara County entered into an agreement by which the Volunteer. Center provides services to the City in the coordination and management of the Saratoga Volunteer Rrogram.. During the past year, the program.has proved to be highly successful with as many as 18 volunteers working on.various projects along with City staff. During the first year the value of services received under this program has exceeded the cost to the City under the terms of the contract. The contract entered into in 1982 will expire on August 31, 1983. The 1983 -84 budget adopted by the City provides sufficient appropriations for continuation of this program and antici- pates renewal of the agreement. Attached is a copy of the renewal agreement for approval by the City Council. Recommendation By motion, approve renewal of the agreement between the City of Saratoga and the Volunteer Center of Santa Clara County; authorize Mayor to execute the agree- ment on behalf of the City. Fiscal Impacts Agreement provides for an $11,000 payment -by the City to the Volunteer Center of Santa Clara County. Appropriation has been made for this payment in the 1983 -84 budget. During the past year, the value of services received by the City in volunteer assistance amounted to $18,000. It is anticipated the value of services in the coming year will be greater resulting in a net gain to the City. Exhibits /Attachments 1. Renewal agreement between the City of Saratoga and Volunteer Center of Santa Clara County Council Action 8/3: Approved on Consent Calendar 5 -0. w A 1 TEER CENTER of Santa Clara County The Alameda . Suite A . San Jose, California 95126 • (408) 244 -5252 July 19, 1983 Mr. Wayne Dernitz City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Dear Wayne, RECEIVED JUL 4 () 1983 CITY MANAC-,Fp Inclosed is the proposed contract for Volunteer Saratoga which we are submitting for your review. I am very pleased that you have approved Jan Ross - Duffala for the Coordinator's position, and I'm certain that she will strive to do an excellent job for the City of Saratoga. Please remember that I am always available for comments and suggestions as we proceed with the Center's contract. Sincerely yours, 21 Stephen B. Crawford Program Director ey--leA United Way Agency CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO: �9,5 DATE: July 26, 1983 DEPARTMENT: Maintenance SUBJECT: Portable Office for Director of Maintenance Issue Summary Initial: Dept. Head: 1 /7 City Atty : City Mgr . With all the public maintenance responsibilities located in one Department, it is essential that the Department Head and Department Secretary be located at the Service Yard. In an effort to facilitate appropriate office space at the yard, we have reviewed the existing building, as well as considered several alternatives for adding the needed space. We have determined that the least expensive alternative is to bring in a small trailer having two offices. Various methods of acquiring the trailer have also been considered. Lease - purchasing appears to be preferable to either renting or outright purchase, since it only increases the monthly cost by approximately $50 over the existing rented trailer which is located north of the Community Development Departmeht wing. Since we no longer need the existing trailer, we will be returning it and utilizing the $2,400 which is in the current budget to fund most of the $3,000 annual cost. Under this lease - purchase agreement the new trailer will be paid off in four years. Recommendation Authorize the City Manager to execute the lease - purchase agreement. Fiscal Impact The funds will be from the General Fund, $2,400 has been budgeted and $600 will come from savings within the Building Maintenance Program. Exhibits /Attachments Council Action 8/3: Callon /Mallory rmved to approve. Passed 5 -0. AGENDA BILL No. 4 84 DATE: July 27, 1983 DEPARTMENT: City Manager CITY OF SARATOGA SUBJECT: MOSQUITO ABATEMENT ORDINANCE Issue Summary Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Atty. C. For many years, the community of Saratoga has relied upon the Santa Clara County Health Department to perform mosquito control and.abatement services through a postive program of surveillance, treatment and enforcement. Such efforts have been highly effective in reducing or eliminating public health.hazards and nuisances from mosquitos. However, this service is not mandatory under State law and, with recent budget cutbacks, the County has discontinued the treatment portion of the program. In the absence of effective treatment, the threat of health and nuisance hazards from mosquitos grows each year. Most cities and other public agencies have ini- tiated some treatment program on public property and facilities. There remains .the problem of obtaining better abatement and enforcement on private property. The County Health Department is responsible for.this effort. The County Health Director now requests each city to adopt an ordinance identical to one adopted by the County which provides appropriate authority and means to achieve the level of abatement needed. The provisions of the proposed ordinance are outlined in the attached letter from the Health Director. Recommendation 'Introduce and adopt the proposed ordinance for mosquito abatement on private property. Fiscal Impacts There are no known costs to the City for the adoption of this Ordinance. Admini- stration and enforcement remain a County function. Abatement costs are recover- able under the Ordinance. E;,.h ibi is /Attachments 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Letter of 6/28/83 from County Health Director Council Action 8/3: Callon /Clevenger moved to amend Paragraph 2, Section 8.102. Passed 5 -0. Clevenger /Fanelli moved to read by title only, waiving further reading. Passed 5 -0. Fanelli /Callon moved to introduce as amended. Passed 5 -0. 8/17: Fanelli /Callon moved to read by title only and adopt Ordinance 38.111. Passed 5 -0. el follows: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ADDING ARTICLE VII (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 8 -96) TO CHAPTER 8 OF THE SARATOGA CITY CODE, RELATING TO MOSQUITO ABATEMENT The City Council of the Citv of Saratoga does ordain as Section 1: Article VII (commencing with Section 8 -96) is added to Chapter 8 (Health and Sanitation) of the Saratoga Citv Code, to read as follows: "ARTICLE VII. MOSQUITO ABATEMENT Sec. 8 -96. Declaration of findings, intent and policy. The City Council expressly finds and declares that mosquito breeding places constitute "a hazard to public health. It is the intent of this Article to establish procedures for abating mosquito breeding places and provide legal means for recovering the cost of abatement. Sec. 8 -97. "Health Officer" and "Health Department" defined. As used in this Article, the term "Health Officer" means the Health Officer of the County of Santa Clara or any other person duly authorized to act in his behalf, and the term "Health Department" means the Health Department of the County of Santa Clara. Sec. 8 -98. Mosquito breedinq places. No person shall permit anv accumulation of water upon any premises in which mosquitoes breed. Any breeding place for mosquitoes is a public nuisance and a hazard to public health. The presence of mosquito larvae or pupae in any accumulation of water, whether upon the ground surface, pond, pool or container of any description shall constitute prima facie evidence that such a place is a breeding place for mosquitoes. -1- �. CITY OF SARATOGA p A=DA BILL NO. �4 DATE: July 27, 1983 DEPAR<iMENr= City Manager SUBJECT: MOSQUITO ABATEMENT ORDINANCE Issue Sutrmary Initial: Dept. Hd. C. Attv. /lam C. Mgr. V. For many years, the community of Saratoga has relied upon the Santa Clara County Health Department to perform mosquito control and.abatement services through a postive program of surveillance, treatment and enforcement. Such efforts have been highly effective.in reducing or eliminating public health.hazards and nuisances from mosquitos. However, this service is not mandatory under State law and, with recent budget cutbacks, the County has discontinued the treatment portion of the program. In the absence of effective treatment, the threat of health and nuisance hazards from mosquitos grows each year. Most cities and other public agencies have ini- tiated some treatment program on public property and facilities. There remains the problem of obtaining better abatement and enforcement on private property. The County Health Department is responsible for this effort. The County Health Director now requests each city to adopt an ordinance identical to one adopted by the County which provides appropriate authority and means to achieve the level of abatement needed. The provisions of the proposed ordinance are outlined in the attached letter from the Health Director. Recommendation Introduce and adopt the proposed ordinance for mosquito abatement on private property.. Fiscal Impacts There are no known costs to the City for the.adoption of this Ordinance. Admini- stration and enforcement remain a County function. Abatement costs are recover- able under the Ordinance. E-h i.bi is /Attachments 1. Draft Ordinance 2. Letter of 6/28/83 from County Health Director Council Action 8/3: Callon /Clevenger moved to amend Paragraph 2, Section 8.102. Passed 5 -0. Clevenger /Fanelli moved to read by title only, waiving further reading. Passed 5 -0. Fanelli /Callon moved to introduce as amended. Passed 5 -0. Sec. 8 -99. Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Health Officer to enforce the provisions of this Article; and in the performance of this duty, the Health Officer is hereby authorized to enter at any reasonable hour any premises as may be necessary_ in the enforce- ment of this Article. Sec. 8 -100. Notice to abate. Whenever a public nuisance specified in this Article exists upon any property, the Health Officer may notify in writing the owner and party in possession, or the agent of either, of the existence of the nuisance. The written notice may be served by any person authorized by the Health Officer in the same manner as a summons in a civil action. The contents of the written notice shall conform to the requirements of Section 8 -101. Sec. 8 -101. Contents of notice. The notice to abate shall: (a) State the finding of the Health Officer that a public nuisance exists on the property and the .location of such nuisance on such property. (b) Direct.the owner and party in possession to abate the nuisance within a specified time by destroying the larvae or pupae that are present. (c) Direct the owner and party in possession to per- form, within a specified time, any work necessary to prevent the recurrence of breeding in the places specified in the notice. (d) Inform the owner and party in possession that failure to comply with the requirements of subdivision (b) of this section shall subject the owner and party in possession to civil penalties of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) per day for each day the nuisance continues after_ the time specified in the notice for the abatement of the nuisance. (e) Inform the owner and party in possession that before complying with the requirements of the notice, the owner and party in possession may appear at a hearing before the Health Officer at a time and place stated in the notice. 1WM r__3 Sec. 8 -102. Hearing; appearance; order; penalties for failure to Comply. Before complying with the requirements of the notice to abate the owner and party in possession may appear at a hearing before the Health Officer at a time and place fixed by the Health Officer and stated in the notice. At the hearing the Health Officer shall determine whether the initial finding as set forth in the notice is correct and shall permit the owner and party in possession to present testimony on their behalf. If, after hearing all the facts, the Health Officer makes a determination that a nuisance exists on the property, the Health Officer shall order compliance with the requirements of the notice or with alternate instructions issued by the Health Officer. Any failure to comply with anv order of the Health Officer issued pursuant to this section shall subject the owner and party in possession to civil penalties as determined in the discretion of the Health Officer, which shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500) per day for each day in which the owner and party in possession fail to comply with such order, subject to right of appeal to the City Council of the City of Saratoga. Sec. 8 -103. Recurrence of nuisance. Any recurrence of the nuisance within 30 days of the time specified for abatement in the notice or at the hearing may be deemed to be a continuation of the original nuisance. Sec. 8 -104. Abatement by Health Department. In the event the nuisance is not abated within the time specified in the notice or at the hearing, the Health Department may abate the nuisance by destroying the larvae or pupae and by taking appropriate measures to prevent the recurrence of further breeding. Sec. 8 -105. Payment of cost by owner. The cost of abatement of a nuisance shall be repaid to the Health Department by the owner of the property. The owner shall not, however, be required to pay such cost unless, either prior or subsequent to the abatement by the Health Department, a hearing is held by the Health Officer at which the Dropertv owner is afforded an opportunity to be heard and it is determined by the Health Officer that a nuisance actually exists, or existed prior to abatement by the Health Department. Qc10 C, Sec. 8 -106. Lien on property. All sums expended by the Health Department in abating a nuisance or preventinq its recurrence, when notice of the lien is filed and recorded as provided in Section 8 -107, shall become a lien upon the property on which the nuisance is abated, or its recurrence prevented. Sec. 8 -107. Recordation of notice of lien; priority of lien. Notice of the lien, particularly identifying the prop- erty on which the nuisance was abated and the amount of such lien, and naming the owner of record of such property, shall be recorded by the Health Department in the office of the County Recorder within one year after the first item of expenditure by the Health Department of within 90 days after the completion of the work, whichever first occurs. Upon such recordation, such _lien shall have the same force, effect and priority as if it had been a judgment lien imposed upon real property which was not exempt from execution, except that it shall attach only to the property described in the notice of lien and shall continue for 10 years from the time of the recording of such notice unless sooner released or otherwise discharged. Sec. 8 -108. Action to foreclosure; time for commencement. An action to foreclose the .lien shall be commenced within six (6) months after the filing and recording of the notice of lien. Sec. 8 -109. Satisfaction of lien from proceeds of sale; disposition of balance. When the property is sold, enough of the proceeds to satisfy the lien and the costs of foreclosure shall be paid to the Health Department; and the surplus, if any, shall be paid to the owner of the property if known, and if not known, shall be paid into the court in which the lien was foreclosed for the use of the owner when ascertained. Sec. 8 -110. Exemption from lien provisions. The lien provisions of this Article do not appply to the property of the City of Saratoga, any district or other ublic corporation. However, the governing body of the city, district or other public corporation shall repay to the Health Department the amount expended by the Health Department upon any of its property upon presentation by the Health Department of a verified claim or bill." -4- Section ?: If anv section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be held invalid or unconstitutional. Section 3: This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage and adoption. The foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after waiting the time required by law, was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga on the day of 1983, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Citv Clerk -5- Mavor -., County of Santa Clara, California June 28, 1983 J. ;?a -vne .Dernetz, City Manager City of Saratoga 13,77 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 MOSQUITO ABATE` -ENT ORDINANCE i Health Department 2220 Moorpark Avenue San Jose, California 95128 The Board of Supervisors approved a Mosquito Abatement Ordinance (copy enclosed) on June 14, 1983. This ordinance applies to unincorporated areas of the county and will become effective as of July 14, 1983. In the past, the Health Department has utilized the California Penal Code as a legal basis for abating mosquito problems. Since the Penal Code does not specity mosquitoes per se, implementation of this code has been awkward and, at times, ineffective. The Santa Clara County Mosquito Abatement Ordinance was patterned after the mosquito abatement laws in the California Health and Safety Code. The ordinance will provide the basis for a more effective mosquito abatement progrom for the following reasons: 1. The ordinance specifically states that mosquito breeding places constitutes a public nuisance and a hazard to the public health. 2. The ordinance establishes procedures for abating mosquito breeding places and provides the legal means to insure compliance, 3. The ordinance provides the legal means for recovering the cost of mosquito abatement. It is not the intent of this ordinance to charge homeowners for the cost of treat - in; minor "backyard" sources. A land owner may also abate a mosquito problem on his own property, as long as such abatement can be done promptly and without hazard to the public health. In order that the Health Department can provide a. uniform and effective mosquito abatement program throughout the county, we are requesting that your city adopt the ordinance. We ark available 'discuss this matter further at your convenience. t. ' --' BERNICE GIANSIP1,'1CUS.A, M.D. . . DIRECTOR OF FUBLIC HEALTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARZIE y'T BG :Kn':ml ® An Equal Opportunity Employer Li5zt 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 887 -3438 City Clerk Ben -doe Gizmsiracusa, M.D. Director of Public Health Santa Clara County Health Department 2220 Moorpark Avenue San Jose, California 95128 u-. Giansiracuaa: In response to your letter of June 28 concerning mosquito abatement ordinance, attached is such an ordinance passed by the Saratoga City council on August 17, 1983. 1 understand that it is "similar to the ordinance passed by the County, but in Section 8 -102 a provision for appeal to the Saratoga City Council is iu- .cluded . Please let me know if you have any questions about this ordinance. Sincerely, ,Y y� Grace E. Cory Deputy City Clerk CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO: 4 F? Initial: Dept. Head DATE: July 21, 1983 laity Atty DEPARTMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maintenance City Mgr - - - - -- SUBJECT: Pierce Road Storm Drain - "Notice of Completion" Issue Summar The City Council, at their meeting of December 15, 1982, awarded the contract of "Pierce Road Storm Drain" to J.M. Inman Co., Inc. The work has now been completed satisfactorily. The final cost of the project was under the contracted amount by $1,131.19, however, the contract was under - budgeted by $8,100.00. The total contract cost was $38,303.80. Recommendation Accept the work completed and authorize the filing of the "Notice of Completion ", authorize the appropriation of $8,100 from Storm Drain funds to cover the amount under - budgeted. Fiscal Impact Due to under - budgeting, $8,100 must be appropriated from the Storm Drain funds. Exhibits /Attachments Resolution of Appropriation of Funds Notice of Completion Final Progress Payment Council Action 8/3: Fanelli /Clevenger moved to approve Res. 1099.17. Passed 5 -0. tint, im Ur �7' {. � , i / J 4Ja ne Dernetz iV�1�Tr....25 hereby giz�elr tlal� .._ ..................._....., i,ac swadersic/ l2ed,.........:...._... y............ ............................... j� _ ............................................................................................................ ............................... the agent of It r; oze„ner...._.......o th ...............certain lot......... iece.......... or parcel......... land situated in ti......4i.tY...of Sarato. 9. a .............._...................................... ........................Coccnty o *' ff Santa elara .............. .............. ............................................ : .............. .S'tale of Californla, crud described as follows, to -zent: III i I I� PIERCE ROAD STORM DRAIN nil I 1 III i That..................... ..... _......... ............................... ........... ............................................... ............ .......................... as oze ner.........o of said land, did, on tl7e..... �..th......._ day of .......... December ..... 19.. S2. enter into a contract with ............ .................. ......._....................... J.: "•M ......Inman .Co: , Iric: ................................. ............................... r ........................._. ...................Construction of Pierce road.... Storm... Drain..........................._.... ....._............._........... o uI .. ......................................................................................................................................... upon the land above described, which contract was fled in the office of the coill recorder of the............................. .........................County of.............................................................. ............................... State of California. on the........................... ............................... day of...... ............................... 19...............; That on the ................... .8.�fi......... July.................' 83 day of .............. y.. 19............. the said contrast r rk of im.pr vcnaent, as a whole, was actually completed by the said Jc. oM.vinman Co., Qnc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . That the name ......... and address ..................of all the ozemer.........of said property are as follows: - - - ............ ..__...._ .......................... ............................... beiug� duly sworn . ............................ ................................................................................................ am ........ _ ....................._the al7ent Of] * the ozuucr......07 tn.: p7rorer"h' deer; "lb('d in td /C l Ul'Cr0 / /1gJ 110!(C'c. I haze read the foregoing rnoticc (m d kuozz, the c;:!trral.c Ulercof.'In;1 the slt;c(• is t!"lW of burr o"l knowledge. Srtbscribcrl and sizmrn- to before me this 1 .clay of ............................................ .............19................ I .. 'UM.i.. w 1, m brackens if o«ner signs. Cowder,'s Form No. 774— NOTICE OF COMPLETION i CWN ER. (C. C. P. Cx. 1193.1) ?ROJECT: PIERCE ROAD STORM DRAIN )ATE: June 17, 1983 EST. NO. 2 ?ROM: June 2, 1983 TO: June 17, 1983 PROGRESS PAY ESTIMATE CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVE. SARATOGA, CALIF. 95070 Sheet 1 of 1 CONTRACTOR: J.M. Inman Co, Inc. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 57 opperopo is, CA 95228 Dire,6for of- Maintena ce ` TOTAL WRK•.DONE PREVIOUS EST. WRK. DONE THIS EST. TOTAL WRK,DONE UNIT PRICE TOTAL DUE %WORK DONE REMARKS BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE Install 18" R.C.P. 507 L.F. 17.97 9,110.97 465 L.F, 25 L.F. 490 L.F. 8,805.30 96.6% 0 35 L.F. 38.00 1,330.00 100% Install 24" C.M.P. 35 L.F. 38.00 1,330.00 35 L.F. 0 20 L.F. 40,00 800.00 133% 1 Install 12" R.C.P. 15 L.F. 40,00 600.00 20 L.F. 0 5 Each 8 4,900.00 100% Construct Manholes 5 Each 980.00 4,900.00 5 Each Construct Dropinlet 1 Each 750.00 '750.00 0 1 Each 750.00 100% i Construct Dropinlet 1 Each 750.00 750.00 0 1 Each 1 Each 750.00 750.00 100% 74.10 10,003.50 0% 7 1 112" A.C. Overlay 112 Tons 74.10 8.299.20 0 . 1350.0 1350.0 S. F. 2.20 2,970.00 0% 3 Repair Failure Sect 2500 S.F. 2.20 5,500.00 0 I Install Rip Rap 15 C.Y. 533.00 7,995.00 0 15 C.Y. 15 C.Y. 7,995.00 100% RECORD OF PREVIOUS PAYMENTS TOTAL DUE $38,303.80 , LESS 10% RETENTION •$3,830138 1 Progress Payment 15 $13,847.45 TOTAL PAYMENT $34;473:42 ' Made By: A.I. LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS $13,847.45 e ke7dB PAYMENT DUE THIS EST. - $20,625.97 TOTAL $13,847,45 App '. d by.' / i i Dire,6for of- Maintena ce ` ?ROJECT: PIERCE ROAD STORM DRAIN )ATE: 6/06/83 EST. NO. 1 ?ROM: 5/23/83 TO: 6/01/83 UNIT BID ITEM QUANTITY PRICE 1 Install 18" R.C.P. 507 L.F. 17.97 2 3 4 Install 20" C.M.P. 35 L.F. 38.00 Install 12" R.C.P. 15 L.F. 40.00 Construct Std. Manholes 5 Each 980.00 5 Construct City Std. Drop Init 1 Each 750.00 6 7 8 Construct Drop_Inlet 1 Each 750.00 1 112 " A.C. Overlay 112 Tons 74.10 Repair Failure Sect 2500 S.F-. 2.20 9 Install Rip Rap 15 C.Y. 533.00 RECORD OF PREVIOUS PAYMENTS PROGRESS PAY ESTIMATE CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVE. SARATOGA, CALIF. 95070 WRK'.DONE WRK. DONE TOTAL TOTAL PREVIOUS THIS EST. WRK.DONE EST. Sheet I of 1 CONTRACTOR: J.M. Inman Co, Inc. ADDRESS: P.O. Box 57 UNIT PRICE TOTAL DUE 9,110.97 0 507 L. 35 L.F. 465 L.F. 35 L.F. 17.97 38.00 81356.05 1,330.00 1,330.00 0 20 L.F. 20 L.F. 40.00 800.00 600.00 0 5 Each 5 Each 980.00 4,900.00 4900.00 p 750.00 0 0 0 750.00 0 750.00 0 0 0 750.00 0 0 74.10 0 8,299.20 0 0 0 0 12.20 0 5,500.00 0 0 0 533.00 0 7,995.00 0 TOTAL DUE' 15,386.05 LESS 10% RETENTION 1,538.60 TOTAL PAYMENT 1 13,847.45 Made By: f%. Z LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS 0.0 cked By. PAYMENT DUE THIS EST. $13,847.45 tp e "y� //// V D rector of Mai n.enance %WORK DONE 91.5% 00.0% 33.0% 00.0% 0 0 0 0 0 REMARKS CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO: �qo Initial: / Dept. Head. DATE: July 26, 1983 City Atty DEPARTMENT: Maintenance City Mgr :K -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- SUBJECT: Pierce Road Slide Repair - Award of Contract Issue Summary Bids have been called for on the subject project and will be received and opened on August 2, 1983. This project will repair the landslide which occured during the 1981 -82 winter on Pierce Road above the Sutton property. Included in the current budget is $50,000 for this project. As of this date 12 sets of plans and specifications have been taken out by contractors and we anticipate good competitive bidding. We will present you with the bid summary along with the name of the low bidder at the meeting of August 3, 1983. Recommendation Award contract to the lowest bidder. Fiscal Impact This project is included in the 1983 -84 fiscal year budget and will come from the Gas Tax Fund. Exhibits /Attachments Bid Summary will be distributed Wednesday night. Council Action 8/3: FANELLI /MOYLES MpvED TO APPROVE AGREEMENT IN CONCEPT. Passed 5 -0. FANELLI/M3YLES MOVED TO AkABD BID TO PACIFIC WITH CONDITIONS. Passed 5 -0. ATKINSON • FARASYN ATTORNEYS AT LAW PAUL B. SMITH 660 WEST DANA STREET J. M. ATKINSON, (1892 -1982) ERIC L. FARASYN P.O. BOX 279 L. M. FARASYN, (1915 -1979) LEONARD J. SIEGAL HAROLD S. TOPPEL MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA 04042 STEVEN G. BAIRD (415) 967 -6941 JACK L. BRIDGE GREGORY A. MANCHUK MEMORANDUM TO: Saratoga City Council FROM: Paul B. Smith DATE: July 29, 1983 RE: PIERCE ROAD LANDSLIDE - SUTTON PROPERTY Attached is a draft agreement between the City of Saratoga and Lawrence and Muriel Sutton which I have prepared for your consideration and approval as to form. A copy of the draft has also been sent to Mr. and Mrs. Sutton for their consideration and approval as to form. I discussed this draft agreement with Mr. Sutton by telephone on July 28, 1983. At that time, Mr. Sutton indicated that he was in general agreement with the form but that further information needed to be developed with regard to the extent of repair work which needs to be done to their patio, walkways, and small retaining wall on their property. (This is generally described as "Property Owners' repair work" and appears in Paragraph 6 on page 5 of the draft agreement.) Mr. Sutton prefers to have this information firmly developed before indicating his final approval of this agreement. The basic format of the agreement with the Suttons and the City is as follows: 1. City will contract to have corrective grading done in the area of the Pierce Road right -of -way and continuing downslope onto the Sutton's property. This corrective grading would consist of removing slide debris down to and below the slide plane, temporarily relocating it on other parts of the Sutton property to dry out. Next, an extensive subdrain system, both along the inboard edge of Pierce Road and along the base of the excavated area, would be installed. This subdrain system would capture subsurface ground water through perforated pipes and drain the captured water through a drain system on the Sutton property into a creekbed. After the subsurface drainage system has been installed and the excavated material has sufficiently dried, it would be replaced as a compacted soil buttress on the slide area at no more than a two -to -one ratio. 2. The cost of the corrective grading, installation of the internal drainage system and replacement of compacted fill is estimated to be $40,000 to $50,000 by the City Geologist. In addition, the Property Owners have on -site repair work to be done to their concrete patio, sidewalks, and retaining wall as indicated above. At the meeting of April 20, 1983, Property Owners and Memorandum to Saratoga City Council July 29, 1983 Page Two representatives of the City estimated that the cost of Property Owners' repair work would be approximately $4,000 to $6,000 but in no event more than $10,000. This cost, when added to the cost of the corrective grading, drainage system and compacted fill, gives us a total cost originally estimated to be approximately $50,000 to $60,000. Of this total cost, the City is to pay 80% and the property owners are to pay 20 %. Property Owners would be responsible for construction of all Property Owners' repair work and the cost of such repair work would be borne solely by Property Owners and offset against Property Owners' 20% responsibility. 3. The drainage system is to be permanently maintained and monitored by the Property Owners at the sole expense of the Property Owners. 4. The cost of any future replacement or additions to the system will be borne 80% by the City and 20% by the Property Owners. 5. Property Owners will grant a slope easement to the City covering that portion of the Sutton property on which corrective grading has occurred. 6. Property Owners would grant a drainage easement to the City to allow delivery of ground water and surface runoff water from Pierce Road and the project area across the Sutton property to a natural creekbed. 7. Each party agrees to indemnify and hold the other party harmless from any liability, injury or loss growing out of the work to be performed by each party. 8. The agreement is binding on.the parties, their heirs, beneficiaries, and successors in interest and is to attach to and run with the land. The agreement shall be recorded after execution. In the event Mr. and Mrs. Sutton are not in a position to indicate their agreement to the form of the contract by the date of your meeting on August 3, I would suggest that it either be continued to the next regular meeting on August 1.7 or to an adjourned regular meeting on August 9, the date of your Committee -of- the -Whole meeting. The latter suggestion would save time which is an important factor in order t allow the roject to get underway as soon as possible. j t Pau B. Smith PBS /d Att. CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. Initial: Dept. Hd. DATE: July 27, 1983 C. A DEPARrTDEPARTMENT: T': City Manager C. Mgr. SUB, =, : GENERAL LIABILITY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE Issue Summary The City maintains a comprehensive insurance policy providing general liability protection and property coverage. Combined liability coverage limits are main- tained at $10 million. The City utilizes Saratoga Insurance Service to handle placement of policies and assure competitive rates. Policies are renewed annually at July 1. This year, the amount of $56,070 was budgeted for policy renewal. The Saratoga Insurance Service has obtained a proposal from the current carrier for a com- bined $55,900. However, premiums from United Pacific Company have been quoted at $50,697, nearly 10% below the current carrier. Saratoga Insurance Service reports that policy coverages, exclusions and terms are identical in either case, being standard form policies. The City Attorney and.City Manager have reviewed the consequences of changing carriers and foresee no problems with doing so. United Pacific is a large com- pany with ample reserves and covers other municipal and governmental agencies. Recommendation By motion, approve the award of insurance coverage for the year ending June 30, 1984, for the City's liability and casualty coverage with United Pacific at a total premium of $50,697. Authorize the City Manager to execute the insurance contract on behalf of the City. Fiscal Impacts The above action improves the City's insurance coverage over the year previous, with no increase in premium. The cost of this protection is $5,000 less than budgeted for 1983 -1984. Exhibits /Attachments Letter of July 20, 1983, from Saratoga Insurance Service Council Action 8/3: Fanelli /Callon moved to award contract according to staff recommendation. Passed 5 -0. J SARATOGA INSURANCE SERVICE INCORPORATED 14363 SARATOGA AVENUE, SUITE 204 POST OFFICE BOX 928 SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 TELEPHONE (408) 867 -3532 July 20, 1983 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Attention: Wayne Dernetz, City Manager Dear Wayne: Enclosed are the bills for the City of Saratoga's annual policies. This year after surveying the markets we were able to place both the package and umbrella policies with a single company at a very competitive premium. The United Pacific Insurance Company came in with the most favorable package for the City. They have been in business for over 50 years and are a very stable and highly regarded company. They have a local office in San Jose and are looking forward to handling the insurance needs for the City. After increasing the building and property coverages 10% here is a breakdown of the City's coverages: Liability Property: Building Contents Office Equipment Contractor's Equipment Two Way Radios Honesty Bond: Crime: INA /Aetna Premium United Pacific Chicago United Pacific $48,900.00 $43,947.00 $10,000,000. 2,513,700. 194,600. 150,000. 20,800. 19,500. 50,000. (Blanket) 250. (Money) $ 7,000.00__ Umbrella $ 6,750.00 Last year the City's premium for these two policies ran $49,749. This year, with a 10% increase in building and property covers e n the ddition of a number of a tos tr �p a cam in gnly �h' er. Ctrw�`3 W� feel it is to our advantage twoave both the umbre a and package policy with the same carrier. This way we will only be dealing with one company and there can never be any questions incoverage. • City of Saratoga - Cont. -Page 2- It has been our pleasure to have handled the City's insurance all these years and we are looking forward to be of service again. Should there be any questions, please give us a call. Very truly, Dan S. Abbey Saratoga Insurance Services, Inc. DSA /bav cc: