The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-04-2009 City Council Agenda Packet AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL March 4, 2009 SPECIAL MEETING – 5:00 P.M. – ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM – 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE. CALL MEETING TO ORDER – 5:00 P.M. REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA (Pursuant to Gov’t. Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on February 27, 2009.) COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC Oral Communications on Non-Agendized Items Any member of the public will be allowed to address the City Council for up to three (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. Oral Communications - Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION PERS RE-OPENER WITH COUNCIL – Conference with Labor Negotiators (Gov’t Code 54957.6): Agency designated representatives: Barbara Powell, Assistant City Manager and Monica LaBossiere, Human Resources Manager Employee Organization: SEA, SMO, and Millmen and Industrial Carpenters, Local 262 CALL JOINT MEETING TO ORDER – 5:30 P.M. – SAUNDERS ROOM – COMMUNITY CENTER – 19655 ALLENDALE AVENUE 1. Joint Meeting with the Saratoga School Districts Recommended Action: Informational only. 1 2 ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the Community Development Department Director at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City Website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerk at the time they are distributed to the City Council. 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 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. 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 II). Certificate of Posing of Agenda: I, Ann Sullivan, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga was posted on February 27, 2009, at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us Signed this 27th day of February 2009 at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC, City Clerk REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. – CIVIC THEATER/COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE 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 February 27, 2009) 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 (3) minutes on matters not on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the council from discussing or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Council Direction to Staff. Oral Communications - Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Oral Communications. Communications from Boards and Commissions Council Direction to Staff Instruction to Staff regarding actions on current Communications from Boards & Commissions. ANNOUNCEMENTS CEREMONIAL ITEMS 1. Commendation Honoring Redwood Middle School Band & Auxiliary Units Recommended action: Present commendation. 2. Appointment of Heritage Preservation Commissioner and Oath of Office Recommended action: Adopt resolution appointing Joan Gomersall to the Heritage Preservation Commission and direct the City Clerk to administer the Oath of Office. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Wednesday, March 4, 2009 1 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 3. Presentation by Kelly Ferguson, Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. Recommended action: Accept presentation by Kelly Ferguson, Ph.D., P.E., LEED® AP, Business Development Manager, Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. 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 may speak to an item on the Consent Calendar at this time, or request the Mayor remove an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Public Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. 4. City Council Minutes – June 20, 2007 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 5. Minutes – City Council Retreat – January 30, 2009 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 6. City Council Minutes – February 4, 2009 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 7. City Council Minutes - February 18, 2009 Recommended action: Approve minutes. 8. Treasurer’s Report for the Month Ended January 31, 2009 Recommended action: The City Council review and accept the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended January 31, 2009. 9. Review of Accounts Payable Registers Recommended action: That the City Council accepts the Check Registers for Accounts Payable cycles: February 12, 2009 February 19, 2009 (None) 10. Adoption of Ordinance Regarding Terms for City Commissions Recommended action: Waive the second reading of the proposed ordinance regarding terms for City Commissions. 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 2 maximum for closing statements. Items requested for continuance are subject to Council’s approval at the Council meeting 11. FY 2009/10 Community Development Block Grant and Community Grant Funding Allocations Recommended action: Conduct the Public Hearing and make a decision regarding allocations. OLD BUSINESS 12. 2009 Spring Issue of The Saratogan Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. NEW BUSINESS 13. Energy Management Program for City of Saratoga Recommended action: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Chuck Page Hakone Foundation Executive Committee Peninsula Division, League of California Cities SSC Cities Association Board SCC Cities Association Selection Committee Valley Transportation Authority PAC West Valley Sanitation District West Valley Mayors and Managers Association Council Finance Committee Council Finance Standing Committee City School Ad-Hoc Vice Mayor Kathleen King Hakone Foundation Board West Valley Flood Control Zone & Watershed Advisory Committee SSC Cities Association Executive Board SCC Cities Association – Joint Economic Development Policy Committee (JEDPC) City School Ad-Hoc Councilmember Jill Hunter Historical Foundation Library Joint Powers Association Santa Clara County Valley Water District Commission Village AdHoc Councilmember Howard Miller Chamber of Commerce KSAR Santa Clara County Emergency Council West Valley Solid Waste Joint Powers Association Council Finance Standing Committee 3 Councilmember Susie Nagpal ABAG Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study Policy Advisory Board (PAB) County HCD Policy Committee SASCC Sister City Liaison Village AdHoc CITY COUNCIL ITEMS CITY MANAGER’S REPORT ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, copies of the staff reports and other materials provided to the City Council by City staff in connection with this agenda are available at the office of the City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California 95070. Note that copies of materials distributed to the City Council concurrently with the posting of the agenda are also available on the City website at www.saratoga.ca.us. Any materials distributed by staff after the posting of the agenda are made available for public review at the office of the City Clerk at the time they are distributed to the City Council. 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 II) Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Ann Sullivan, City Clerk for the City of Saratoga, declare that the foregoing agenda for the meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga was posted on February 27, 2009, at the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Ave., Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us Signed this 27th day of February 2009 at Saratoga, California. Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 4 NOTE: To view current or previous City Council meetings anytime, go to the City Video Archives at www.saratoga.ca.us 3/18 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Supervisor Liz Kniss 4/1 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Library Commission and Friends of the Saratoga Libraries 4/15 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Youth Commission 5/6 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Mt. Winery 5/20 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Montalvo Arts 6/3 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Parks and Recreation Commission 6/17 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with HOA Presidents 7/1 Regular Meeting – 7/15 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with SASCC 8/5 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Saratoga Ministerial Association 8/19 SUMMER RECESS – NO COUNCIL MEETING 9/2 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Hakone Foundation 9/16 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with West Valley Board of Trustees 10/7 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Traffic Safety Commission 10/21 Regular Meeting – Joint Meeting with Historical Foundation & Heritage Preservation Comm. 11/4 Regular Meeting – Saratoga Village Development Council 11/18 Regular Meeting - 12/1 Council Reorganization 12/2 Regular Meeting - 12/16 Regular Meeting - CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR 2009 5 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DEPT HEAD: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: Commendation Honoring Redwood Middle School Band & Auxiliary Units RECOMMENDED ACTION: Present commendation. REPORT SUMMARY: The attached commendation honors the Redwood Middle School Band and Auxiliary Units on its selection to participate in the historic 56th Inaugural Parade in Washington D.C. on January 20, 2009. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Copy of the commendation. 6 CITY OF SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL HONORING THE REDWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL BAND WHEREAS, the Redwood Middle School Marching Band and Auxiliary Units were invited by the Inaugural Committee of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden to march in the historic 56th Inaugural Parade on January 20, 2009; and WHEREAS, in recognition thereof, it is appropriate to extend to them the special honors and highest commendations of the community of Saratoga; and WHEREAS, the Redwood Marching Band and Auxiliary Units that performed in the Inaugural Parade included students from the sixth, seventh and eighth grade at Redwood Middle School – for a total of 116 band members and 35 members from the Auxiliary Units at Redwood Middle School in Saratoga. These are students who enjoy music and the performing arts, and bring honor and distinction to themselves by having been selected from more than 1,382 applicants; and WHEREAS, the Redwood Middle School Band and Auxiliary Units compete annually in various California music festivals, including the Santa Cruz Band Review, the Foothill Band Review in Pleasanton, the San Jose Veterans’ Day Parade, the Los Gatos Children’s Holiday Parade, and the Heritage Musical Festival in Anaheim, consistently taking top honors and ratings; and WHEREAS, the dedication, professionalism, and combined music talents of Vicki Wyant, Director and Coordinator of Music for the Saratoga Union School District and the Assistant Director, Jonathan Jow, have made it possible for the children of our community to discover a love of music and appreciation for the arts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Saratoga, does hereby congratulate and commend the members of the Redwood Middle School Band, Auxiliary Units and the Saratoga Union School District for this outstanding achievement and honor to participate in the historic 56th Inaugural Parade in Washington D.C. on January 20, 2009. WITNESS MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA on this 4th day of March 2009. Chuck Page, Mayor City of Saratoga 7 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: Appointment of Heritage Preservation Commissioner and Oath of Office RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the attached resolution appointing one member to the Heritage Preservation Commission and direct the City Clerk to administer the Oath of Office. REPORT SUMMARY: Interviews were conducted on February 18, 2009 to fill one Heritage Preservation Commission vacancy. The attached resolution appoints Joan Gomersall to the Heritage Preservation Commission. The term for this position will expire on April 1, 2012. Upon direction from the City Council the Oath of Office will be administered by the City Clerk and signed by the new Commissioner. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Appointment would not be made to Heritage Presrevation Commission. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: Update City’s Official Roster. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: 8 Posting of the agenda. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Resolution of Appointment Attachment B – Oath of Office 9 RESOLUTION 09 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPOINTING ONE MEMBER TO THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, City Council conducted interviews on February 18, 2009 and appointed one new member to the Heritage Preservation Commission to fill one vacancy on this commission; and WHEREAS, the term for this position will expire on April 1, 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves that the following appointment was made to the Heritage Preservation Commission: JOAN GOMERSALL The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 4th day of March 2009 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________________ Chuck Page, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 10 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA I, Joan Gomersall, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. __________________________ Joan Gomersall, Member Heritage Preservation Commission Subscribed and sworn to before me on This 4th day of March 2009. __________________________ Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 11 12 Page 1 of 1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Barbara Powell DIRECTOR: Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Presentation by Kelly Ferguson, Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept presentation by Kelly Ferguson, Ph.D., P.E., LEED® AP, Business Development Manager, Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. REPORT SUMMARY: Ms. Ferguson will present information about a proposed Energy Management Program for the City of Saratoga. The City Council will then have an opportunity to ask Ms. Ferguson questions about the program. Under “New Business” on the meeting agenda, Council will have an opportunity to discuss whether to pursue entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with Siemens, for the purpose of undertaking the proposed Energy Management Program. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): None ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: N/A 13 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: City Council Minutes – June 20, 2007 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the June 20, 2007 City Council meeting. 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 from June 20, 2007 – City Council meeting. 14 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: Minutes – City Council Retreat – January 30, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the January 30, 2009 City Council Retreat. 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 from January 30, 2009 – City Council Retreat 15 1 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL RETREAT HAKONE GARDENS JANUARY 30, 2009 Mayor Chuck Page called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Mayor Chuck Page, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Councilmembers Susie Nagpal, Jill Hunter, Howard Miller ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Dave Anderson, City Manager Barbara Powell, Assistant City Manager Richard Taylor, City Attorney Ann Sullivan, City Clerk Crystal Morrow, Administrative Analyst II Mary Furey, Administrative Services Director John Cherbone, Director of Public Works John Livingstone, Community Development Director Michael Taylor, Recreation Director Chris Riordan, Senior Planner REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA FOR JANUARY 30, 2009 Ann Sullivan, City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of January 30, 2009 was properly posted on January 26, 2009. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS No one requested to speak. 1. MIXED USE IN COMMERCIAL AREA OVERLAY Senior Planner Christopher Riordan, presented the staff report. The current Mixed Use Overlay in the City’s Commercial Areas restricts dwelling units to rentals of not more than 1,250 square feet. According to the City’s Housing Element Consultant, the rental requirements can be eliminated, but the housing requirements for affordability overall, city- wide would still need to be met. Options for backfilling affordable units from the mixed use overlay would be: § Inclusionary housing § In-lieu fees § Increasing the density from maximum 20 units (current) to minimum 20 units 16 2 § Increasing the Density Bonus Public Input: Kip Knight and Jeff Wyatt both spoke about their current homes and the fact that given the overlay in their district, if their homes were destroyed, they would be restricted to rebuilding a maximum of 1,250 square foot rental unit as a replacement dwelling. Discussion: Rental/Square Footage Requirement: Councilmember Hunter § Okay with 1,250 square feet requirement Vice Mayor King § Option to have rental or owner-occupied housing in commercial areas § Preserve senior housing Councilmember Miller § Remove rental requirement Councilmember Nagpal § Don’t be specific on rental or owner-occupied, just indicate “housing” § Size should be flexible Mayor Page § No rental requirement § Be flexible § Promote senior housing CH2 District: Councilmember Hunter § Keep flexibility in the CH2 District – okay with commercial, food-related, and professional Vice Mayor King § The CH2 will not be a viable commercial district – change it to residential Councilmember Miller § Retain commercial designation in CH2 Councilmember Nagpal § Retain commercial designation in CH2 Mayor Page § Modify CH2 – allow more housing and commercial uses 17 3 Non-conforming Use Ordinance: Councilmember Hunter § Fix Non-conforming Use Ordinance § Analyze results Vice Mayor King § Fix Non-conforming Use Ordinance Councilmember Miller § Fix Non-conforming Use Ordinance Councilmember Nagpal § Fix Non-conforming Use Ordinance Mayor Page § Fix Non-conforming Use Ordinance Inclusionary Housing: Councilmember Hunter § Look at inclusionary housing Vice Mayor King § Seek expert advice on the best way to meet the fair share housing numbers Councilmember Miller § Look at inclusionary housing Councilmember Nagpal § Look at inclusionary housing Mayor Page § Look at inclusionary housing Density: Councilmember Hunter § Look at density increase Vice Mayor King § Add a minimum required density Councilmember Miller § State density bonus – keep current; § Discuss minimum/maximum density 18 4 Mayor Page § Discuss minimum/maximum Density Second Units: Councilmember Hunter § Improve second unit code to increase more units Vice Mayor King § Improve second unit code to increase more units Councilmember Miller § Improve second unit code to increase more units Councilmember Nagpal § Improve second unit code to increase more units Mayor Page § Continue to support second units Zone change at Odd Fellows: Consensus to change the zoning at Odd Fellows. COUNCIL DIRECTION: § Consensus to have the Housing Consultant include the above directions in the Housing Element. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) REVIEW Community Development Director John Livingstone presented the staff report. Public Input: Jeff Wyatt, Emily Lo, and Marilyn Marchetti, representatives from the Chamber of Commerce spoke about providing an exception to enable the Chamber to be located with a frontage along Big Basin Way. Issues related to CUPs § Cost of CUPs § Approval Time § Uncertainty of Approval Discussion: Vice Mayor King § What would be the effects on personal service use on Big Basin with a change to the CUP process? 19 5 § Food uses do better in bad times. More choices attract more people. § Perhaps we could change the food-related (restaurants & markets) CUP to an over-the- counter permit: § Would that satisfy residents? § Would this support franchises? § Prefers not to increase the number of nail salons. § Chain stores could be done right (correctly) with Design Review. Councilmember Hunter § Are Tattoo Parlors considered “personal service”? § The costs of building restaurants could discourage their inception. § Is there reduction in building permit activity? Will there be less revenue coming in? § Restaurants are hurting. § We need a market in the Village. § Would support: o Elimination of CUP fees. o Over-the-counter review with adequate knowledge of Saratoga values. § If we lessen the CUP-related fees, we need to know what kind of permitted uses we want. Councilmember Nagpal § What are the commercial vacancy rates? § Does the current CUP process discourage applicants? § There is a need to structure the CUP process to obtain a greater mix of uses. § Is there a consensus on administrative review of CUPs? Director Livingstone § Uses currently requiring a CUP include ice cream shops and wine tasting. The CUP process pertains to: o Allowing permitted uses. o Providing for a review by the Planning Commission for uses that require a Conditional Use Permit. § Restaurants do well – we need more mix of uses. Councilmember Miller § We have to send a message that Saratoga welcomes business. § We could change the list of permitted uses § We could change the review process to make it easier, cheaper & quicker Mayor Page § Favors relaxing CUP process for restaurants (restaurants contribute to downtown vitality) § Supports the Chamber location in the Village – it acts as a visitors’ center. § A market in the Village isn’t viable – too expensive to operate a market (it’s a business with only 1% profit margin.) It’s the kind of business that would ask for subsidies to come into the Village area. § Suggests staff bring a list of possible permitted uses to the Council (work with the chamber to develop the list). § Create a task force to create a new CUP review process. 20 6 COUNCIL DIRECTION: § Make CUPs less expensive § Increase the certainty for CUP applications § Reduce the time involved in CUP review § Discuss additional specifics at the City Council meeting on February 4, 2009 3. COMMUNITY OUTREACH Discussion: Councilmember Hunter § More visibility is better. § Supports outreach. Suggested some venues: Historical Foundation, SVDC, the Village Gardeners, and the Heritage Tree Society. § Supports speaking to HOAs, being easy to contact, providing a home number on the City’s website. Councilmember Nagpal § Agrees with importance of community outreach, especially beyond the immediate “circle” is a great idea. § Favors liaison and mentorship about building relationships with other elected officials and agencies outside Saratoga. § Favors organized outreach such as Council coffee meetings. Councilmember Miller § “Structured” outreach could be beneficial so that the public knows where to meet up with the Council. § The website could be used to inform the public, particularly using “push e-mail”. § Can we use blogs? § Supports building relationships with other elected officials and agencies and being more personally proactive. Vice Mayor King § Important to have meetings in the North Campus area. § Outreach to neighborhoods where Council members don’t live. § If holding meetings at the North Campus or other neighborhood locations, it would be nice to provide residents with the option to submit questions about the meetings via the web. § Outreach outside Saratoga to other elected officials. § Assign each Council member to develop relationships with other elected officials and other agencies. § Mentor new Council members in creating relationships with other elected officials. § Favors weekend meeting times and structured outreach so Council can contact groups they don’t normally reach. Coffee/restaurant meetings and go to locations both in and outside the Village. § Meeting times could also be uploaded to Artsopolis. Would staff be available for outreach meetings? 21 7 Mayor Page § Could use Facebook. § Conduct outreach to the Homeowners’ Associations (HOAs). Create partnerships with other agencies. § Rotate locations – can do various days and times. § Suggests outreach to HOAs. § Supports sharing outreach strategies – what works and doesn’t? City Attorney Taylor § A Council member may blog as long as it is clear that the Council is not using the blog(s) or a networking site(s) to discuss City business. City Manager Anderson § Staff can add scheduled meetings to the website. “Meet Your Council” at date, time, location. § The City Council would need to decide on the level of staff involvement. The following people requested to speak on this item: Emily Lo: Noted Council booths at public events with information about the City would be valuable. Marilyn Marchetti: Information could be provided about groups with an interest in sustainability in the City. Vance Nelson: The City of Campbell does this type of outreach and provides information about programs and more. COUNCIL DIRECTION: § Each Council member will take these ideas into account in their own interactions with the community. 4. SUSTAINABLE (ENVIRONMENT) DEVELOPMENT & PROGRAMS – (taken out of order on the agenda) The informational materials provided to the Council concern three areas of sustainability: § Economy § Society § Environment The City has been undertaking a number of sustainability improvements that can be easily implemented and are relatively inexpensive. These can be considered “low hanging fruit”. If the Council desires to undertake additional improvements to City buildings and facilities, these would likely be more costly. 22 8 Discussion: Councilmember Hunter § Interest in potential to obtain LEED points for historical designation and for diversion of demolition debris. § Are there federal grants available for sustainability improvements to buildings over 50 years old? § Desires discussion about other means to be sustainable, such as: o Use of gray water systems o Banning polystyrene containers o Holding an Anti-litter Day Councilmember Nagpal § Inquired about the status of the City’s Baseline Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory for the community. § Perhaps have green/sustainable materials display in the Community Development Department lobby § Research available tax credits, such as for environmentally-friendly building demolition § Are there grants available for sustainability projects that are ready to go? § Educate the community § Provide information about materials that can be recycled § On the safety side, provide more community connectivity to schools, parks, homes via enhancing walking/biking opportunities. Perhaps also pursue the potential of having donated bikes that can be used by the community. Assistant City Manager Powell § The City is currently completing the GHG Inventory for City operations, made some previous progress on the community-wide inventory, but needs to go back and complete it based upon current standards established by the Air Resources Board Vice Mayor King § Wants to provide feedback to the County’s Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission about the single use, carryout bag issue. § Saratoga should take the lead on eliminating single-use, carryout bags § Check with PG&E to find out whether residents can pay an additional fee and have the proceeds go to the City for sustainability projects § Suggestion for the Chamber: Hold a Saturday symposium for residents with information/company representatives about dual pane windows, tankless water heaters, etc. § Apply for award regarding holding paperless meetings § Not in support of the Corporation Yard solar installation § Is concerned that City efforts might not be viable approach to promote walking/biking Assistant City Manager Powell & Mayor Page provided an overview of the single use, carryout bag issue to attendees. § Proposal to levy a 25 cent per bag fee up to $2.00 total on carryout bags, including plastic and paper (except bags for produce/meats, take away food). Five cents would go to the store and the remainder would go to the jurisdiction and/or to the regulatory agency 23 9 Councilmember Miller § Suggests sustainability approaches that are visible to the public and provide an example to residents § Desires to separately track City-related sustainability efforts and community-related sustainability efforts § Solar – install in visible locations § Possibly incorporate solar hot water in the Library HVAC system § Potentially adopt the LEED residential checklist instead of or in combination with the GreenPoint Rated residential checklist § Provide good information to home builders/developers Mayor Page: § Supports Saratoga taking the lead on sustainability efforts § Suggests that Public Works incorporate composting at City Parks and educate the community about the value of composting – could provide compost to residents § Supports gaining more information on single use, carryout bags COUNCIL DIRECTION: § Agendize single use, carryout bag issue to obtain more information. § Potentially have a speaker come from the Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission. 5. ECONOMY & BUDGET Mary Furey, Administrative Services Director, provided an overview to the Council about revenue and expenditure trends and anticipated numbers for 2009/10. COUNCIL DIRECTION: § Provide additional information about salary and benefit increase percentages compared to percentage increases in revenues over time. § Provide data about Community Development Department-related revenue activity in comparison with expenditures. 6. PRIORITIZATION & GUIDELINES OF ORDINANCE LIST Richard Taylor, City Attorney, and John Livingstone, Community Development Director, provided the Council with an overview of Community Development-related ordinances that could potentially be updated. Director Livingstone noted that in 2008 the Planning Commission had identified three ordinances they felt were priorities: § Sign § Non-conforming use § Fence In 2008, there were five ordinances that were addressed: 24 10 § Blight § Newsracks § Party hosting § Appeals § Building code changes Council discussed the following ordinance priorities: § Sign § How height is defined § Noise (possible combination with an update of the General Plan Noise Element § Story pole § Increased neighborhood noticing § Installing large signs on pending projects (additional noticing about projects) § Restrict paint reflectivity on hillsides § Expedited planning process § Santa Clara Valley Water District stream guidelines (note was made that a proposed State law may address this) § Carports § Conditional use permits Council also discussed the following administrative ordinances and their potential timeframes for completion: § Non-conforming Use 6 months (with Planning Commission review) § Heritage Resource 3 months (if no Planning Commission review) § Toxic Gas 3 months (if no Planning Commission review) § Massage 3 months (if no Planning Commission review) § Wireless 6 months (with Planning Commission review) § Miscellaneous items Attorney Taylor noted his priority ranking for ordinance updates would be: § Sign § Noise § All administrative ordinances COUNCIL DIRECTION: After lengthy discussion, the Council agreed upon the following ordinance update priorities: § Conditional Use Permits (it was noted this could be administrative, depending upon the process used § Administrative ordinances (as they can be completed § Sign § Noise 7. ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER City Attorney Richard Taylor presented the report. 25 11 Under the City’s Municipal Code, the City Council is supposed to use Robert’s Rules of Order to conduct its meetings. Robert’s Rules are quite complicated and not particularly useful for small organizations. As an alternative, Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, appear to be more straight forward and less cumbersome. If the Council chooses to adopt Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, the Municipal Code would have to be amended. After lengthy discussion, the Council agreed to “try out” Rosenberg’s Rules of Order at one or more Council meetings to determine whether they would provide a better framework for conducting business at Council meetings. COUNCIL DIRECTION: § Attorney Taylor to provide an abbreviated list of procedures/action steps under Rosenberg’s Rules. § The Mayor would determine the date of a Council meeting at which the Council would use Rosenberg’s Rules. The Council would provide feedback to Attorney Taylor about whether they prefer to retain Robert’s Rules or adopt Rosenberg’s Rules. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business Mayor Page adjourned the meeting at 4:45 p.m. and thanked everyone for coming. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 26 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: City Council Minutes – February 4, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the February 4, 2009 City Council meeting. 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 from February 4, 2009 – City Council meeting. 27 MINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 2009 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a Joint Meeting at 6:00 p.m. with the Planning Commission. Mayor Page called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Jill Hunter, Howard Miller, Susie Nagpal, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page ABSENT: None ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Richard Taylor, City Attorney Debbie Bretschneider, Acting Deputy City Clerk Barbara Powell, Assistant City Manager John Cherbone, Public Works Director John Livingstone, Community Development Director Chris Riordan, Senior Planner REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Debbie Bretschneider, Acting Deputy City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of February 4, 2009, was properly posted on January 30, 2009. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak tonight: Kathy Forte addressed the Council regarding a permit that was granted for the removal of Coastal Redwood trees near her Gate House property. She noted the Gate House Board of Directors received the permit to remove the trees and inquired as to why she was not aware of the request to remove trees. She noted that based on the City’s website, property owners that are within 150 feet of protected trees would receive a notice from the City that a tree removal permit has been granted. Vice Mayor King asked Ms. Forte if the Board of Directors could submit a tree removal request without the input of the members of the Gate House properties association. Ms. Forte stated that the tree removal request was submitted by a representative of the condominium management company; however the property owners were not notified. 28 2 Councilmember Hunter inquired about the 150 feet noticing requirement for condominium property homeowners after the permit to remove trees is granted. City Manager Dave Anderson stated that when the ordinance was adopted it was assumed that the homeowners association would communicate with the property owners and act as one voice. He noted that apparently this section of the tree removal ordinance needs to be revised to accommodate this type of situation, whereby, all the members in a homeowners association are notified of a submitted tree removal permit request. Janice Gamper addressed the Council regarding the June 9th “Wear Your Helmet” day and asked Council for their support in helping to promote this important safety event. Sumit Dutta addressed the Council regarding tree trimming near electrical power lines and asked who would be responsible for this procedure. Mayor Page stated PG & E was responsible for trimming trees near electrical power lines and suggested Mr. Dutta contact PG&E regarding tree trimming schedules. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Vice Mayor King asked staff to contact Kathy Forte about her concerns regarding tree removal permit grants and the required notification of homeowners within 150 feet of trees being removed. Councilmember Hunter stated she would contact Ms. Gamper regarding her request for Council’s support for the June 9th “Wear a Helmet” day. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Prior to this evening’s Regular Meeting, Council had a Joint Meeting with the Saratoga Planning Commission. Chair Manny Cappello was present to provide a status report of their joint meeting. He noted they discussed the 2009 work plan the Planning Commission has for 2009, which includes: o Conditional Use Permit update (CUP) o Housing Element discussions by the Planning Commission o Study Session with Council and Planning Commission in March – followed by a public hearing o Administrative changes and clarifications regarding specific ordinances Mr. Cappello also thanked the Council for agendizing the CUP on the January 30th Council Retreat. Mayor Page thanked Mr. Cappello and the members of the Planning Commission for all the volunteer work the Commission does for the community. ANNOUNCEMENTS 29 3 Councilmember Miller announced that tickets are still available for the Chamber of Commerce Crab Feed on Saturday, February 7th at 6:30PM. He noted people could purchase their tickets at the Saratoga Senior Center, Chamber of Commerce and at various businesses in Saratoga. Councilmember Hunter reminded everyone about the “Saratoga Love Notes” that is occurring and invited everyone to participate by submitting a Love Note. She noted that the Love Notes would be displayed in shop windows throughout the Village and she thanked Foothill School for participating in the Love Note program. Councilmember Nagpal stated the Sister City Board is looking for residents that would be interested in hosting specialized gardeners from Japan from February 23 through February 27th. She noted interested residents could contact her for more information. Mayor Page announced that Saratoga High School is presenting the musical show “Grease” from February 5th through the 8th and invited everyone to attend and support their local high school. CEREMONIAL ITEMS None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. MINUTES – CH-2 STUDY SESSION – JANUARY 12, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Mayor Page removed this item for a clerical correction regarding the first and last name of Commissioner Rishi Kumar. PAGE/HUNTER MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES – CH-2 STUDY SESSION – JANUARY 12, 2009 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – JANUARY 21, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Councilmember Hunter removed this item to clarify her wording describing the 2008 holiday shopping season in the Village from “very good” to “fairly good”. 30 4 NAGPAL/HUNTER MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – JANUARY 21, 2009 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 3. REVIEW OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE REGISTERS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accepts the Check Registers for Accounts Payable cycles: January 15, 2009 January 22, 2009 NAGPAL/MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CHECK REGISTERS FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CYCLES JANUARY 15, 2009 AND JANUARY 22, 2009. MOTION PASSED 5-0- 0. 4. ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROGRAM – AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Move to declare Guerra Construction Group to be the lowest responsible bidder on the Annual Concrete Repair and Replacement Program. 2. Award a construction contract for the Annual Concrete Repair and Replacement Program to Guerra Construction Group in the amount of $237,465 and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. 3. Authorize staff to execute change orders to the construction contract in the amount of $40,000. 4. Adopt Budget Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 budget. RESOLUTION NO. 09-006 NAGPAL/MILLER MOVED TO 1) DECLARE GUERRA CONSTRUCTION GROUP TO BE THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER ON THE ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROGRAM; 2) AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROGRAM TO GUERRA CONSTRUCTION GROUP IN THE AMOUNT OF $237,465 AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SAME; 3) AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXECUTE CHANGE ORDERS TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000; 4) ADOPT BUDGET RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 BUDGET. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS RELATED TO FENCES, WALLS, AND HEDGES & NEGATIVE DECLARAATION, 31 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council open the public hearing, accept public testimony, close the public hearing, approve the attached ordinance, waive the First Reading and direct staff to schedule this item for a Second Reading for adoption on the consent calendar at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Mayor Page asked Senior Planner Chris Riordan to describe the reasons why the Council had prioritized the Fence Ordinance over other Ordinances before he presented the staff report. Community Development Director John Livingstone came forward and stated that Council had asked the Planning Commission to prioritize the ordinances and bring that prioritized list to Council for review. Mr. Livingstone noted that the Fence Ordinance was in need of review by the Council due to changes in the type of fence products used, which included fence lattices, fence height, and the resulting code enforcement issues that have surfaced as a result of the new fence products available to home owners. Senior Planner Chris Riordan presented the staff report noting that the Planning Commission has held nine (9) meetings, which included both Study Sessions and Public Hearings to discuss these changes. Mayor Page opened the public hearing and invited public comment. The following people requested to speak on this item: Sumit Dutta thanked City Manager Dave Anderson for inviting him to the Public Hearing and stated that he was in support of the proposed changes to the Fence Ordinance. In addition, he thanked Mr. Livingstone for all his efforts in modifying the Fence Ordinance to help provide security and privacy to the Saratoga home owners. Steve de Keozer addressed the Council by stating 10 suggestions for updating the Fence Ordinance: 1) Keep it simple; 2) do not legislate against the freedom of expression; 3) do not legislate something that is not enforceable; 4) hillsides are different from the city proper and treat them that way; 5) do not encourage wild animals to wander freely within city limits; 6) the exception process is a very good idea; 7) use a line item veto for each councilmember and commissioner – then compare notes and eliminate all but the essentials; 8) specific suggestions can be pointed out from a list during the permit process, but left to home owners discretion; 9) do not legislate your sense of esthetics upon other people; 10) don’t try to rush the ordinance changes through as no one will remember how long it took to implement the changes, rather – how well it was accomplished. No one else was present to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public hearing and invited Council discussion. Councilmember Hunter inquired as to what assurances would be in place regarding staff knowledge reflecting the value system when granting fence permit applications. City Manager Dave Anderson responded that they would be rule-based – as they currently are, and the exception process would be decided by the Planning Commission. 32 6 Vice Mayor King asked if it would be similar to two-story home applications that had gone through the Planning Commission process, appealed, and then brought to the City Council for findings, discussion and a final decision made by the Council. Mr. Riordan concurred that would be the process. Councilmember Nagpal asked Mr. Riordan if this proposed fence ordinance was adopted, would it allow for the 15% or 6,000 square feet fence enclosure. Mr. Riordan confirmed that it would. Vice Mayor King asked if the fence along the front was 3 feet, would the gate be allowed to go up to 5 feet. Mr. Riordan confirmed that the gate could be 5 feet. Vice Mayor King asked if an applicant could go through the Planning Commission to apply for a higher front fence and higher front gate exception. Mr. Riordan confirmed that an applicant could do that. Mayor Page had a question on the section that states wrought iron entrance gates within the front setback area designed with openings to permit visibility through the same, may extend to a height not exceeding 5ft and shall be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the street pavement and asked if that only applied to wrought iron gates within the front setback area. Mr. Riordan confirmed that this requirement applies only to wrought iron gates or a see-through gate, within 20 feet from the edge of the street pavement; solid gates cannot be 5 feet tall; they can only be 3 feet tall, and if the gate is not in the front setback, they could be taller than 3 feet. Councilmember Miller inquired about the policy for “grandfathering in” existing structures, fences, and gates in the community. Mr. Riordan stated that the “grandfathering in” section of the ordinance states that any existing fence can remain the way it is, however, the fence will be required to be brought up to code if 50% of the fence is removed. Councilmember Hunter had a question regarding “front elements” with regard to the height of pilasters or pillars between the fence sections. Mr. Riordan stated that pilasters or pillars can be 2 feet more than the height of the fence. Councilmember Hunter acknowledged that that would make it a total of 5 feet in the front. Mr. Riordan stated that was correct. 33 7 Vice Mayor King noted that the number one issue regarding code enforcement in the City pertains to fences. She stated she was very pleased with the amount of work the Planning Commission put into updating the Fence Ordinance; feels that the proposed updated fence ordinance is very well written and supports everything that is proposed in the new Fence Ordinance. Councilmember Miller also acknowledged all the effort the Planning Commission put into revising the Fence Ordinance; however he hopes that when a property owner applies for exceptions, there will be a fair amount of flexibility regarding existing fences in order to maintain privacy. Councilmember Nagpal noted she participated in a great number of Planning Commission meetings when she was on the Commission and stated that it was not an easy compromise. In addition, she questioned if maybe the exception process should be an administrative policy rather than going through the Planning Commission and suggested the exception issue be monitored for a year to see how it is working. Ms. Nagpal acknowledged the Planning Commission for all their hard work and stated she supported the proposed updates to the Fence Ordinance. Councilmember Hunter stated she is not in favor of 8 foot fences and is against spikes; has concerns about the free movement of wildlife; does not support modification of hedges, except for where views are affected; and feels that when fence regulations are not adhered to by property owners, it does not make it right to give property owner’s permission to do what they have been doing. Mayor Page also thanked the Planning Commission for their long arduous work in revising the Fence Ordinance and feels that the proposed fence ordinance will be enforceable as well as allow for changes in life styles and behavior that come about over time – while still preserving the environment that we want in Saratoga. Mayor Page acknowledged that the hillsides are different, but feels that the proposed revision of the fence ordinance accommodates those needs based on the lot size. He also stated he is very pleased to see that there is an exception process included in the revised fence ordinance and supports the proposed revised fence ordinance. RESOLUTION NO. 09-007 NAGPAL/KING MOVED TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. NAGPAL/KING MOVED TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED ORDINANCE, WAIVE THE FIRST READING AND DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE THIS ITEM FOR A SECOND READING FOR ADOPTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS 34 8 6. REVIEW THE FEES REQUIRED FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (CUP) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct Staff Accordingly. Community Development Director John Livingstone presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited public comment. The following person requested to speak on this item: Van Nelson, President of Saratoga Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council stating that the Chamber has a great interest in promoting commerce and to improve the business climate in the City of Saratoga. He stated some of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) restrictions and requirements should be reviewed in order to make the City of Saratoga more business friendly. He noted that a successful business would bring in more tax dollars than the fees charged to provide services for the permit. Mr. Nelson also suggested creating a brochure instructing people how to go through the permit process. In addition, Mr. Nelson recommended having a permitted use for the Chamber of Commerce that opens onto Big Basin Way, which would serve their purpose as the visitor’s center for people wanting to know what is happening in Saratoga. Mayor Page closed the public comment and invited Council discussion. Councilmember Miller feels that expediency to make the City more business friendly is important; noting that this item was agendized mainly to discuss the fees for the CUP, however he feels there is more to discuss based on public input and discussions from the recent Council Retreat. Additionally, he feels it is important to create an administrative process to speed up the permit process by putting certain types of businesses on a permitted use list. Vice Mayor King asked for clarification on the savings of a CUP fee if the permit process became an administrative process. Director Livingstone responded it would be an approximate savings of $1,000.00 depending on Council’s desire to have a zoning administrative hearing or a letter of notification of approval and appeal rights. So the cost of the CUP permit would go from $4,700 to $3,700. Vice Mayor King noted that someone could file an appeal for $700.00; which would give that applicant a longer period of time, but pay no additional money. Director Livingstone responded that would be correct, however, if a new administrative process was implemented, that could be addressed specifically. Councilmember Miller agreed that the administrative process could define the permitted uses. 35 9 Councilmember Nagpal noted that the first decision Council should make is the permitted use versus conditional use, along with additional changes to the existing permitted use list. She also noted she would like the conditional use permit process made easier for those businesses that require the CUP, rather than remove those businesses completely from the CUP list and put them into the permitted use list. Councilmember Nagpal also noted that with regard to the process of the use permit, she supported going to the administrative process because it will reduce the time and cost involved. Additionally, she supports an incentive program with a specified date for specific businesses – at a reduced permit fee; and if the City pays for the difference in the permit fee – where would the funding come from. Vice Mayor King stated she is comfortable with restaurants and/or retail for the use permits and feels that with the parking moratorium in effect for three more years now is the perfect time to combine incentives, such as restaurant versus retail, without a use permit change as an incentive. She also supports the option where you pay your administrative use fee; and if you are declined, your use fee will be refunded. She believes Saratoga needs different ways to incentivize businesses to come to Saratoga and make it as easy as possible. Councilmember Miller stated the process to change the permitted uses could be rather lengthily, if they chose to do so; and asked if they chose to implement an administrative review process, could this be done in a shorter amount of time. City Attorney Richard Taylor concurred it could be done in a shorter amount of time. Councilmember Miller noted that it would require time and caution in making changes to the permitted use process and that maybe the administrative process could be accomplished more quickly, with some additional guidance as to the types of businesses that we would encourage and with constraints if necessary. Vice Mayor King concurred and stated she would like to withdraw some of what she said earlier, in that she supports the administrative approach with only one step appeal to the Council or to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Nagpal noted it is important to identify the types of permitted uses that we want and incentivize those uses rather than making it a market driven process. Councilmember Hunter noted that much of these concerns relate to the businesses in the Village as that is where many of the concerns are. Councilmember Hunter stated she supports expediency as well as the incentive program; lowering the use permit fees; and feels that most people would like to see more retail in the Village. Mayor Page asked City Attorney Taylor how specific they would have to be to relax the conditional designation. City Attorney Richard Taylor stated that when you change the uses you have to consider why are the uses that are required to have a use permit different from the uses that are not required to have a use 36 10 permit. You would have more flexibility because you are legislating and not making a specific decision, however, it may present some challenges. Vice Mayor King inquired if this process would require a negative declaration. City Attorney Taylor stated it would. Mayor Page supports relaxing the permit requirements in order to encourage more businesses; however he doesn’t support refunding permit fees if someone isn’t approved. In addition, he questions if someone filed an appeal and they were overturned, would their appeal fee be refunded. He noted that there are a number of concerns that need to be addressed. He does believe the restaurants in Saratoga have helped make it what it is and supports “specific use” restaurants – such as a “breakfast” restaurant or a “lunch” restaurant and supports a given number of such restaurants for a limited period of time. Councilmember Nagpal asked if the permit process was left the same – discretionary action but through a zoning administrator instead of the Planning Commission – and if that would that be a relatively easier change. City Attorney Taylor replied that it would because there wouldn’t be any changes made to the standards, therefore the discretion remains and the public is still protected in the exercise of that discretion by the zoning administrator. Councilmember Nagpal asked her fellow councilmembers if they would be interested in this concept, which would help to lower the processing time and decrease the cost of the permit fees. Vice Mayor King noted she supports Councilmember Nagpals suggestion but with the incentive program encouraging specific uses and the fees paid for through a specific fund and with only one level of appeal. City Attorney Taylor noted this could be done without requiring an environmental review of the specific fund. Councilmember Nagpal stated she would be in support of having an administrative process with one level of appeal and specific funding to incentivize certain types of businesses if she knew where the funding would come from – if it was reasonable; and if it supported the types of businesses that they would encourage. Councilmember Miller noted that the fees are only one element of the CUP process and another issue is the indeterminate process. He would prefer that focus is directed to the administrative process and possibly include some type of grant process. We should determine which businesses would be allowed to go through the administrative process, i.e. by size – such as anything fewer than 3,000 square feet for a specific type of business, and the rest would go through the normal CUP process. He also supported the one level of appeal and to increase the cost recovery fee to $1,700 for an appeal fee in order to cover costs incurred by staff time. 37 11 City Attorney Taylor concurred with Councilmember Miller and noted the administrative process would still be discretionary. Councilmember Nagpal was not supportive of increasing the appeal fee to $1,700. Vice Mayor King asked if a one level appeal could only be appealed to the Planning Commission or could an appeal be brought to the Council as well. City Attorney Taylor stated that if Council wanted that to be the case they would need to specify that in the ordinance by saying that any member of the Planning Commission or the City Council may request to send the permit application to the appeal body. Councilmember Miller noted he would prefer that they reach a level whereby staff would be able to make the correct decision 99% of the time and not have the permit pulled by the Planning Commission or the Council. Discussion continued regarding the specific types of restaurants to be included in the “restaurant” category that would be handled by the zoning administrator. City Attorney Taylor voiced his concern regarding Council’s selection process to determine the criteria that would place a specific type of restaurant in the zoning administrator level and recommended Council use a straight forward approach and designate which category would go to the zoning administrator and then use other economic development efforts, other than the zoning code to state the specifics. COUNCIL CONSENSUS: Zoning Administrator: Council supports zoning administrator to determine businesses in the community such as family- style restaurants, bakeries, ice cream parlors: Vice Mayor King, Councilmember Nagal, Councilmember Miller support restaurants under 3,000 square feet and establishments that engage in sale of alcoholic beverages in CH-1 district. Councilmember Hunter was unsure about supporting restaurants. Mayor Page supports restaurants under 3,000 sq. feet; establishments that engage in sale of alcoholic beverages in CH-1 district and community facilities, such as a visitors center. Level of Appeal: Council concurred with one level of appeal to the Council. DIRECTION TO STAFF: 38 12 o Provide Council with any additional uses that may not have been discussed this evening in the next staff report, including cost recovery model and available funding in the discretionary budget. o Include the Chamber of Commerce in this evening’s decisions. o Agendize economic development incentive. 7. POTENTIAL 2009 WORK PLAN PRIORITIES FOR THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY CITIES ASSOCIATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and recommend potential 2009 work plan priorities for the Santa Clara County Cities Association (SCCCA), and authorize staff to return these suggestions to the SCCCA Board of Directors. Assistant City Manager Barbara Powell presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited council members to state what they would prioritize on the Potential Work Plan Priorities for 2009 to forward to the Cities Association for consideration at the February meeting. Councilmember Miller: Prepayment of PERS & Realized Savings, Retirement: Medical Benefits and Retirement at 55, and Emergency Communications Best Practices. Councilmember Nagpal: Countywide Green Building Standards and Countywide Streamlined Solar Power Policy and Solar Permitting Process. Vice Mayor King: Sharing best practices on Solar, Water Conservation Best Practices, and Health Issues – how to keep the community healthier. Councilmember Hunter: Water Conservation Best Practices. Mayor Page: Best practices on Solar Power Policy and Solar Permitting Process, Water Conservation Best Practices, Email Policy and Public Records Requests – Electronic Communications and the Brown Act. COUNCIL CONSENSUS ON THREE (3) MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES: o Water Conservation Best Practices o Countywide Solar Assessment Districts and Best Practices o County-wide Green Building Standards ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Chuck Page – reported: West Valley Mayors and Managers Association – met and discussed the single-use bag issue and the mayors are leaning towards not participating in any discussions at this point and are waiting to see what happens with Legislative Bill AB 68. 39 13 Vice Mayor Kathleen King – had nothing to report. Councilmember Jill Hunter – reported: Library Joint Powers Association – Milpitas opened their new library, which was an addition to the back of their elementary school and California Governor Schwarzenegger has not indicated that there will be financial cuts to their library; they have concerns about the $125K survey regarding the issue of why people don’t visit their community libraries. Friends of Saratoga Library donated $93K and commended Mary Jean Finn for her years of volunteer efforts for the library. Santa Clara County Valley Water District Commission – met last week and voiced concerns about the water shortage articles written by the Mercury News and the fact that they stated the Water District would be making decisions in March about the water shortage, rather than waiting until the April 22 meeting to make a decision. There may be a 20% rationing due to the water shortage if the water situation doesn’t improve. Bill 1881 is a bill that should be closely observed. Councilmember Howard Miller – nothing to report. Councilmember Susie Nagpal – reported: Sister City Liaison – she attended the board meeting on February 2nd and encouraged members of the community to contact her if they were interested in becoming a member of the Sister City. The Sister City has extended an invitation to anyone who is interested in hosting the gardeners from Japan and they discussed the upcoming 25th anniversary and the delegation that will be arriving in November; and recommended agendizing for discussion in April. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Miller asked for clarification regarding the single-use bag agenda item and Council’s decision at the January Council Retreat to agendize single-use bag for informational discussion rather than for discussion on Council policy and direction. Mayor Page noted that at the Council Retreat, Council agreed to agendize a presentation on the single- use bag issue. Councilmember Hunter asked to agendize the water shortage issue and Mayor Page seconded the request. In addition, Hunter voiced a concern about the Hillbrook School banner that is currently on display at Blaney Plaza advertising a Los Gatos school. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT City Manager Dave Anderson noted that he would be traveling out of state for the upcoming weekend and Assistant City Manager Barbara Powell would be Acting City Manager during his absence. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Page asked for a motion to adjourn the Regular Meeting. 40 14 NAGPAL/KING MOTIONED TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING AND PROCEED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM FOR CLOSED SESSION ITEMS. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Council adjourned the Regular Council Meeting and proceeded to the Administrative Conference Room for Closed Session at 10:00PM. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk 41 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Sullivan, City Clerk DIRECTOR: Dave Anderson SUBJECT: City Council Minutes – February 18, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve minutes. REPORT SUMMARY: Approve minutes as submitted for the February 18, 2009 City Council meeting. 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 from February 18, 2009 – City Council meeting. 42 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Finance & Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Ann Xu, Accountant DEPT HEAD: Mary Furey SUBJECT: Treasurer’s Report for the Month Ended January 31, 2009 RECOMMENDED ACTION The City Council review and accept the Treasurer’s Report for the month ended January 31, 2009. REPORT SUMMARY California government code section 41004 requires that the City Treasurer (the Municipal Code of the City of Saratoga, Article 2-20, Section 2-20.035, designates the City Manager as the City Treasurer) submit to the City Clerk and the legislative body a written report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances. Section 41004. Regularly, at least once each month, the City Treasurer shall submit to the City Clerk a written report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances. He shall file a copy with the legislative body. The following attachments provide various financial data and analysis for the City of Saratoga’s Funds collectively as well as specifically for the City’s General (Operating) Fund, including an attachment from the State Treasurer’s Office of Quarterly LAIF rates from the 1st Quarter of 1977 to present. FISCAL IMPACT Cash and Investments Balance by Fund As of January 31, 2009, the City had $131,831 in cash deposit at Comerica bank, and $15,940,159 on deposit with LAIF. Council Policy on operating reserve funds, adopted on April 20, 1994, states that: for cash flow purposes, to avoid occurrence of dry period financing, pooled cash from all funds should not be allowed to fall below $2,000,000. The total pooled cash balance as of January 31, 2009 is $16,071,991 and exceeds the minimum limit required. Cash Summary Unrestricted Cash Comerica Bank 131,831$ Deposit with LAIF 15,940,159$ Total 16,071,991$ 43 CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION The City would not be in compliance with Government Code Section 41004. ALTERNATIVE ACTION N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT N/A ATTACHMENTS A – Cash Balances by Fund B – Change in Total Fund Balances by Fund C – Cash and Investments by CIP Project D – Change in Total Fund Balances by CIP Project E – Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Quarterly Apportionment Rates 44 ATTACHMENT A The following table summarizes the City’s total cash and investment balances by Fund. Fund Types Fund Description Cash & Investment Balance at January 31, 2009 General General Fund Reserved: Petty Cash Reserve 1,300$ Designated: Designated for Operations 2,808,164$ Designated for Economic Uncertainty 1,300,000$ Designated for Development Services 782,380$ Designated for Environmental Services 679,917$ Designated for Uncollected Deposits 289,454$ Designated for Carryforward 58,386$ Undesignated:2,202,305$ Special Revenue Landscape and Lighting Districts 367,815$ CDBG Federal Grants -$ SHARP Program 117,587$ Capital Project Street Projects 2,194,460$ Park and Trail Projects 1,266,690$ Facility Improvement Projects 847,967$ Administrative Projects 192,847$ Tree Fund 85,348$ CIP Grant Fund (24,813)$ Gas Tax Fund 367,168$ Debt Service Library Bond 420,554$ Internal Service Equipment Replacement 97,413$ IT Replacement 352,546$ Facility Maintenance 327,783$ Equipment Maintenance 76,359$ Information Technology Services 211,678$ Office Stores Fund 49,540$ Liability/Risk Management 155,656$ Workers Compensation 102,647$ Trust/Agency Library Fund 699,316$ KSAR - Community Access TV 41,524$ Total City 16,071,991$ 45 ATTACHMENT B CHANGES IN TOTAL FUND BALANCE The following table presents the ending Fund Balances for the City’s major fund types as at January 31, 2009. This table excludes Trust and Agency funds where the City acts merely as a third party custodian of an outside party’s funds. Fund Description Fund Balance 07/01/08 Increase/ (Decrease) Jul-Dec Current Revenue Current Expenditure Transfers Fund Balance 1/31/09 General Undesignated Unreserved Balance 2,216,238 (1,674,100) 2,423,063 1,980,784 984,417 Reserved Fund Balance: Petty Cash Reserve 1,300 - - - 1,300 Designated Fund Balances:- - Designated for Operations 2,808,164 - - - 2,808,164 Designated Economic Uncertainty 1,500,000 (200,000) - - 1,300,000 Designated for Development 782,380 - - - 782,380 Designated for Environmental 679,917 - - - 679,917 Designated for Uncollected Deposits 289,454 - - - 289,454 Designated for Carryforward 58,386 - - - 58,386 Special Revenue Landscape/Lighting Districts 209,821 (6,675) 175,652 10,814 367,985 CDBG Federal Grants - - - - - SHARP Loan 93,877 1,488 - - 95,365 Capital Project Street Projects 2,432,995 (205,451) 58,930 7,897 - 2,278,577 Park and Trail Projects 1,497,834 (105,633) - 166,910 - 1,225,290 Facility Improvement Projects 994,315 (113,763) 4,770 68,741 - 816,582 Administrative Projects 219,841 (25,702) - 1,292 - 192,847 Tree Fund 129,566 (32,179) - 12,039 - 85,348 Grant Fund - 103,108 - 68,117 - 34,991 Gas Tax Fund - 173,264 35,092 30,000 - 178,355 Debt Service Library Bond 853,620 (643,400) 557,063 346,728 420,554 Internal Service Fund Equipment Replacement 98,109 (43,710) 59,025 16,012 97,412 Technology Replacement 316,310 23,550 12,826 139 352,546 Building Maintenance 101,361 73,723 201,771 54,073 322,783 Equipment Maintenance 13,412 29,388 62,500 16,468 88,832 Information Technology Services 122,541 19,080 100,987 30,930 211,678 Office Stores Fund 32,616 2,504 15,000 580 49,540 Liability/Risk Management 128,689 (30,591) 71,567 14,009 155,656 Workers Compensation 47,736 34,592 65,230 44,911 102,647 Total City 15,628,482 (2,620,509) 3,843,476 2,870,444 - 13,981,006 46 ATTACHMENT C CASH AND INVESTMENTS BALANCES BY CIP PROJECT The following table details the cash balances for each project in the Streets, Parks & Trails, Facility Improvements, and Administrative Project Program Funds. CIP Funds/Projects Cash & Investment Balance at January 31, 2009 Street Projects Traffic Safety 11,757 Highway 9 Safety Project 82,460 Annual Street Resurfacing Project 423,025 Sidewalks Annual Project 120,075 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road Resurfacing (114,321) Traffic Signal @ Verde Vista Lane 90,000 Fourth Street Bridge 100,000 Highway 9 and Oak Place Pedestrian Sign (16,188) Quito Road Bridge Replacement Design 9,730 Quito Road Bridge Construction 115,726 Village Newsrack Enclosure 23,384 Village Façade Program 19,430 Solar Power Radar Feedback Signs 24,158 El Quito Area Curb Replacement 37,552 Sobey Road Culvert Repair 150,000 Village Trees & Lights at Sidestreets 31,965 Village Pedestrian Enhancement 115,000 Prospect Road Median 201,556 City Entrance Sign/Monument 23,788 Village-Streetscape Impv 540,665 Saratoga-Sunnyvale ADA Curb Ramps (2,525) Saratoga-Sunnyvale/Gateway Sidewalk 57,224 Pedestrian Refuge @ Quito/McCoy 150,000 Total Street Projects 2,194,460$ Parks & Trails Hakone Garden Koi Pond 50,000 EL Quito Park Improvements 118,209 Wildwood Park - Water Feature/Seating 7,199 Historical Park Landscape 37,200 Hakone Garden Retaining Wall & D/W 142,829 Hakone Garden Upper Moon House Foundation 125,000 Wildwood Park Improvement (4,543) DeAnza Trail (77,802) Kevin Moran Improvements 846,689 West Valley Soccer Field (51,412) Park/Trail Repairs 21,130 Heritage Orchard Path 6,153 Trail Segment #3 Repair 7,912 Teerlink Ranch Trail 22,242 CIP Allocation Fund 15,885 Total Parks & Trails 1,266,690$ Facility Improvements Civic Center Landscape 13,385 Warner Hutton House Improvements 5,868 Facility Projects 39,735 Fire Alarm at McWilliams & Museum 11,371 North Campus Improvements 296,846 North Campus - Bldg Removal 75,000 City Hall - Cool Roofs 44,000 Multi-Purpose Room Fund 250,000 Corp Yard Solar Project 100,000 McWilliams House Improvement 10,000 Historical Park Fire Alarm System 1,762 Total Facility Improvements 847,967$ Administrative Projects Financial System Upgrade 8,516 Document Imaging Project 65,331 CDD Document Imaging Project 60,000 Website Development Project 50,000 KSAR Equip Upgrades 9,000 Total Administrative Projects 192,847$ Tree Fund Tree Fund 85,348$ CIP Grant Fund CIP Grant Fund (24,813)$ Gas Tax Fund Gas Tax Fund 367,168$ Total CIP Funds 4,929,667$ 47 ATTACHMENT D FUND BALANCES BY CIP PROJECT The following table details the fund balances for each project in the Streets, Parks & Trails, Facility Improvements, and Administrative Project Program Funds. CIP Funds/Projects Fund Balance 07/01/08 Increase/ (Decrease) Jul-Dec Current Revenue Current Expenditure Transfers Fund Balance 1/31/09 Street Projects Traffic Safety 11,757 (6,998) - - 4,759 Highway 9 Safety Project 82,460 (12,331) - - 70,129 Annual Street Resurfacing Project 782,980 (166,792) 58,930 (49,933) 725,051 Sidewalks Annual Project 46,436 (2,709) - 33,186 10,542 Saratoga Sunnyvale Road Resurfacing (178,292) - - - (178,292) Traffic Signal @ Verde Vista Lane 90,000 - - - 90,000 Fourth Street Bridge 100,000 - - - 100,000 Quito Road Bridge Replacement Design 9,730 - - - 9,730 Quito Road Bridge Construction 115,726 - - - 115,726 Village Newsrack Enclosure 23,384 (77) - - 23,307 Village Façade Program 19,430 - - - 19,430 Solar Power Radar Feedback Signs 24,158 - - - 24,158 El Quito Area Curb Replacement 37,553 - - - 37,553 Sobey Road Culvert Repair 150,000 - - - 150,000 Village Trees & Lights at Sidestreets 31,965 - - 7,790 24,175 Village Pedestrian Enhancement 115,000 (9,341) - 12,355 93,304 Prospect Road Median 201,556 (7,204) - 4,500 189,853 City Entrance Sign/Monument 23,788 - - - 23,788 Village-Streetscape Impv 540,665 - - - 540,665 Saratoga-Sunnyvale ADA Curb Ramps (2,525) - - - (2,525) Saratoga-Sunnyvale/Gateway Sidewalk 57,224 - - - 57,224 Pedestrian Refuge @ Quito/McCoy 150,000 - - - 150,000 Total Street Projects 2,432,995 (205,451) 58,930 7,897 - 2,278,577 Parks & Trails Hakone Garden Koi Pond 50,000 - - 850 49,150 EL Quito Park Improvements 118,209 (13,787) - 24,943 79,479 Wildwood Park - Water Feature/Seating 7,199 - - - 7,199 Historical Park Landscape 37,200 - - - 37,200 Hakone Garden Retaining Wall & D/W 142,829 - - - 142,829 Hakone Garden Upper Moon House 125,000 - - - 125,000 Wildwood Park Improvement (4,543) - - - (4,543) DeAnza Trail (77,802) (18,891) - 2,595 (99,289) Kevin Moran Improvements 982,259 (41,564) - 135,457 805,238 West Valley Soccer Field (58,507) (7,528) - - (66,035) Park/Trail Repairs 21,130 (10,317) - 3,065 7,748 Heritage Orchard Path 6,153 (6,153) - - - Trail Segment #3 Repair 7,912 - - - 7,912 Teerlink Ranch Trail 22,242 (7,392) - - 14,850 CIP Allocation Fund 118,552 - - - 118,552 Total Parks & Trails 1,497,834 (105,633) - 166,910 - 1,225,290 Facility Improvements Civic Center Landscape 13,384 (2,561) - 3,568 7,255 Warner Hutton House Improvements 5,868 - - - 5,868 Facility Projects 39,735 10,690 4,770 - 55,195 Fire Alarm at McWilliams & Museum 11,371 - - - 11,371 North Campus Improvements 443,195 (121,892) - 65,173 256,131 North Campus - Bldg Removal 75,000 75,000 City Hall - Cool Roofs 44,000 44,000 Multi-Purpose Room Fund 250,000 250,000 Corp Yard Solar Project 100,000 100,000 McWilliams House Improvement 10,000 10,000 Historical Park Fire Alarm System 1,762 - - - 1,762 Total Facility Improvements 994,315 (113,763) 4,770 68,741 - 816,582 Administrative Projects Financial System Upgrade 8,516 (4,982) - - 3,534 Document Imaging Project 92,325 (9,343) - - 82,981 CDD Document Imaging Project 60,000 (8,378) - 1,292 50,330 Website Development Project 50,000 - - - 50,000 KSAR Equip Upgrades 9,000 (2,998) - - 6,002 Total Administrative Projects 219,841 (25,702) - 1,292 - 192,847 Tree Fund Tree Fine Fund 129,566 (32,179) - 12,039 85,348 CIP Fund CIP Grant Fund - 103,108 - 68,117 34,991 Gax Fund Gas Tax Fund - 173,264 35,092 30,000 178,355 Total CIP Funds 5,274,550 (206,356) 98,792 354,996 - 4,811,990 48 ATTACHMENT E 49 Dave Anderson Melanie Whittaker Mary Furey RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council review and accept the Check Registers for the following Accounts Payable payment cycles: REPORT SUMMARY: Attached are the Check Registers for: Date Ending Check No. 02/12/09 111520 111593 73 130,846.22 2/12/2009 2/5/2009 111519 02/19/09 None 0 0.00 2/19/2009 2/12/2009 111593 AP Date Check No. Issued to Dept.Amount 02/12/09 111532 Public Works 39,561.26 02/12/09 111576 Public Works 13,986.06 02/12/09 111592 Public Works 17,977.00 The following are Accounts Payable checks that were voided or manually issued: AP Date Check No.Amount 2/12/2009 None - 2/19/2009 None - Description General & CIP - Parks Accounts Payable Ross Recreation Equipment Issued to Vista Landscape Picnic Area - Quito Park Fund Purpose David Gates & Assoc CIP - Streets Village Pedestrian Project CIP - Parks Table - Quito Park Accounts Payable The following is a list of Accounts Payable checks issued for more than $10,000 and a brief description of the expenditure: SUBJECT: Review of Accounts Payable Check Registers. February 19, 2009 Type of Checks Date Starting Check No. Ending Check No.Total Checks February 12, 2009 Amount Checks Released DEPARTMENT:Finance & Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: PREPARED BY:DEPT. DIRECTOR: Prior Check Register SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE:March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: 50 The following is a list of cash reduction by fund: Fund #AP 02/12 AP 02/19 Total 111 General 44,078.45 44,078.45 231 Village Lighting - 241 Arroyo de Saratoga Landscape - 242 Bonnet Way Landscape - 243 Carnelian Glen - 244 Cunningham/Glasgow Landscape - 245 Fredericksburg Landscape - 246 Greenbriar Landscape - 247 Kerwin Ranch Landscape - 248 Leutar Court Landscape - 249 Manor Drive Landscape - 251 McCartysville Landscape - 252 Prides Crossing Landscape - 253 Saratoga Legends Landscape - 254 Sunland Park Landscape - 255 Tricia Woods Landscape - 271 Beauchamps Landscape - 272 Bellgrove Landscape - 273 Gateway Landscape - 274 Horseshoe Landscape/Lighting - 276 Tollgate LLD - 411 CIP Street Projects 43,507.64 43,507.64 412 CIP Parks Projects 30,242.09 30,242.09 413 CIP Facility Projects 621.86 621.86 421 Tree Fine Fund 2,317.55 2,317.55 431 Grant Fund - CIP Streets 4,545.70 4,545.70 611 Liability/Risk Mgt 108.03 108.03 612 Workers' Comp 491.91 491.91 621 Office Stores Fund 638.58 638.58 622 Information Technology 370.93 370.93 623 Vehicle & Equimpent Maint 1,834.74 1,834.74 624 Building Maintenance 2,088.74 2,088.74 632 - 130,846.22 - 130,846.22 ALTERNATIVE ACTION: N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION: N/A ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Check Registers in the A/P Checks By Period and Year report format IT Equipment Replacement TOTAL Fund Description 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Crystal Morrow DIRECTOR: Barbara Powell Administrative Analyst II Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Adoption of Ordinance Regarding Terms for City Commissions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Waive the second reading of the proposed ordinance regarding terms for City Commissions. BACKGROUND: On February 18, 2009, the City Council held a public hearing on the ordinance regarding terms for City Commissioners (Attachment A) and directed staff to place the second reading and adoption of the ordinance on the consent calendar for the March 4, 2009 City Council meeting. This ordinance would amend the City Code to allow the City Council to make Commission appointments for terms of more or less than four years to ensure that Commission terms are staggered so that roughly equal numbers of terms expire each year. FISCAL IMPACTS: There are no financial impacts. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: The City’s Commission terms would not be staggered in accordance with the Municipal Code. Further, term expirations for all City Commissions would continue to occur in April, resulting in ongoing administrative challenges. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction and publish a comprehensive summary of this ordinance in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption. 59 Page 2 of 2 ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Proposed ordinance regarding terms for City Commissions 60 Ordinance No. _____ 1 ORDINANCE _______ AN ORDINANCE REGARDING TERMS FOR CITY COMMISSIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. A. The City of Saratoga has established a number of commissions to advise the City Council in reviewing, establishing, and implementing City policy in a number of areas. Commissioners provide an invaluable service to the City and their participation in these civic affairs goes to the very heart of representative democracy at the local level. B. The City Council has established common requirements regarding qualifications, attendance, removal, vacancies, meetings, and rules of procedure for all City Commissions including provisions to promote even staggering of Commission terms. C. In order to allow flexibility in providing for even staggering of Commission terms the City Council may, from time to time, find it necessary to establish terms that are shorter or longer than the standard term. Therefore, this ordinance amends the Saratoga City Code to allow a Commissioner to be appointed to a term of greater or less than four years in order to facilitate compliance with the term staggering rules of the City Code. Section 2. Adoption. Section 2-12.030 of the Saratoga City Code regarding Commissioner terms is hereby amended as set forth below. Text to be inserted is shown in bold italics (example) and text to be deleted is shown in strikeout (example). 2-12.030 Term. (a) Each Commissioner shall serve a term of four years unless an alternate term is specified by the resolution or ordinance establishing the Commission. (b) No Commissioner shall serve more than two full consecutive terms on a single Commission. A partial term served as a result of an appointment to fill an unexpired term is not considered a full term. A Commissioner who has served two full consecutive terms on a Commission may not be reappointed to that Commission for at least one year 61 Ordinance No. _____ 2 following the expiration of his or her term. The limitations set forth in this Subsection(b) shall not apply to the Youth Commission. (c) For each Commission, the terms of the Commissioners shall be staggered such that each year the four year terms of approximately an equal number of the Commissioners shall expire. Where a Commission has seven Commissioners, the terms of two Commissioners shall expire each year except that in the year after the first six Commission terms have expired, only one term shall expire. The limitations set forth in this subsection (c) shall not apply to the Youth Commission. (d) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section and section 2-15.020 regarding Planning Commissioner terms, where the terms of Commissioners on a Commission do not comply with subsection (c) of this section, a Commissioner may be appointed to a term of greater or less than four years for the purpose of making the terms of the Commissioners on the Commission comply with subsection (c). No term shall be reduced after a Commissioner is appointed to serve the term, except as otherwise provided by this Code. For purposes of subsection (b) of this section, a term of less than four years established pursuant to this paragraph is not a full term and a term that is more than four years at the time of appointment pursuant to this subsection (d) is a single term. This paragraph shall be of no further force and effect after December 31, 2006. Section 3. Publication. This Ordinance shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Saratoga within fifteen days after its adoption. [Continued on Next Page] 62 Ordinance No. _____ 3 The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the ___ day of ___ 2009 and adopted by the following vote following a second reading on the ___ day of ___ 2009: AYES: __________________________________________ NOES: __________________________________________ ABSENT:________________________________________ __________________________________________ CHUCK PAGE MAYOR, CITY OF SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: ___________________________ ANN SULLIVAN CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ RICHARD TAYLOR CITY ATTORNEY 63 Page 1 of 3 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Community Development CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Cynthia McCormick, Assistant Planner DIRECTOR: John Livingstone SUBJECT: FY 2009/10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND COMMUNITY GRANT FUNDING ALLOCATIONS RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct the Public Hearing and make a decision regarding allocations. BACKGROUND: On June 18, 2008, the Council decided to institute a priority ranking process for the allocation of grants. On December 17, 2008, the Council approved the attached evaluation criteria. On February 18, 2009 the Council heard testimony from seven (7) applicants requesting funds under the City of Saratoga Community Grant Program and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The total amount of funding requested for all Community Grant applications was $126,231. However, three of the requests totaling $55,164 may be partially funded with CDBG Public Service funds while one of the requests totaling $50,450 may be partially funded with CDBG rehabilitation funds, as discussed in the February 18, 2009 staff report. The three applications that are not eligible for CDBG funding totaled $20,617. The City also received two (2) applications for CDBG ADA Public Improvement funding, totaling $46,391. Each year an additional $13,000 is requested to fund Santa Clara County’s administration of the SHARP program and $15,000 to fund City of Saratoga’s administration of the CDBG Program. The total amount requested is $200,622. The total amount available is estimated to be $183,1351, including approximately $54,068 in community grant funding; $27,057 in CDBG public service funding; $74,010 in CDBG rehabilitation and ADA public improvement funding; $13,000 in SHARP administration funds; and $15,000 in CDBG administration funds. The total shortfall is estimated to be $17,487. 1 NOTE: The final CDBG funding amount has not been confirmed but is expected to be announced prior to the beginning of FY 09/10 (July 1, 2009). On February 26, 2009 staff was informed that the distribution of CDBG funds may be different than originally estimated. While the expected total amount has not decreased, the amount that can be spent on public services is expected to be less ($27,057 vs. $32,000), and the amount that can be spent on ADA Public Improvements and Rehabilitation is expected to be more ($74,010 vs. $69,000). The public service fund cap is formula based and subject to change. 64 Page 2 of 3 DISCUSSION: Applications will be evaluated in five categories: 1. Presentation (30 points): Applications and presentations from the February 18th Public Hearing will be evaluated on content (10 points), clarity (5 points), and brevity (5 points). 2. Target Benefit (20 points): This category rewards programs that serve a large number of Saratoga residents as a whole (10 points) and as a percentage of their entire clientele (10 points). CDBG applications will be also evaluated on the number of low-income beneficiaries in their program (see attached evaluation criteria for breakdown). 3. Cost/Benefit (20 points): To be more successful in this category, requested funds should be proportional to the target beneficiaries served (i.e., Saratoga residents). 4. Leveraging (20 points): Applicants should show that they are currently seeking matching funding (10 points). Applicants will receive additional points for demonstrated fundraising success (10 points). 5. Outreach (10 points): Applicants will be evaluated on both their current (5 points) and proposed (5 points) outreach efforts to attract new Saratoga residents. FISCAL IMPACTS: CDBG funds are federal Housing and Urban Development funds administered by Santa Clara County and allocated to participating cities fiscal year 2009/10. There is no impact from CDBG recommendations on General City funds. Community Grant funds have been budgeted for fiscal year 2009/2010. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City’s FY 2009/10 CDBG allocation will remain with the County. Saratoga will not meet its goals related to providing continued housing assistance, rehabilitation and human services to low income and disabled residents in the City. Furthermore, the City will not meet its goals related to community needs in Saratoga. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: NA FOLLOW UP ACTION: Forward Council’s CDBG recommendations to the County of Santa Clara and execute contracts with agencies receiving funding. 65 Page 3 of 3 ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: The availability of grant funds was listed on the City Website and publicized in the Saratoga News on December 9, 2009. The allocation of grant funds was publicized in the Saratoga News on February 17, 2009 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Resolutions Attachment B – Evaluation Worksheets Attachment C – February 18, 2009 Staff Report Attachment D - December 17, 2008 Staff Report and attachment Cc: Applicant agencies 66 RESOLUTION NO. _____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSALS FOR FUNDS FROM SANTA CLARA COUNTY UNDER THE FEDERAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/2010 WHEREAS, the City previously entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with Santa Clara County to form an Urban County under the Housing and Community Development Act; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the following proposals represent the community development needs in Saratoga; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Community Development Department is hereby authorized to submit a proposal for the expenditure of FY 2009/10 CDBG funds in the amount of $129,067 for the following allocations: Agency Type Project Amount Requested Amount Available Amount Granted SASCC CDBG (Public Services) Adult Day Care Program $35,000 West Valley Community Services CDBG (Public Services) West Valley Community Services Food Pantry and Emergency Services $15,164 Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County CDBG (Public Services) Long Term Ombudsman Program $5,000 SUBTOTAL $55,164 $27,057 Mid-Peninsula Housing CDBG (non-public service) Saratoga Court Pedestrian Safety Program $50,450 City of Saratoga CDBG (non-public service) ADA Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road Curb Ramp - Phase II $41,927 City of Saratoga CDBG (non-public service) ADA Automatic Door City Hall Public Bathroom $4,464 SUBTOTAL $96,841 $74,010 City of Saratoga CDBG Program Administration $15,000 $15,000 County of Santa Clara CDBG Urban County Rehabilitation Services $13,000 $13,000 GRAND TOTAL $180,005 $129,067 67 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 4th day of March 2009 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________________ Chuck Page, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 68 RESOLUTION NO. _____ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AUTHORIZING ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR THE COMMUNITY GRANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/2010 WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that the following proposals represent the community needs in Saratoga; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Saratoga hereby authorizes the expenditure of FY 2009/10 Community Grant funds in the amount of $54,068 for the following allocations: Agency Project Amount Requested Amount Available Comm. Grant Allocation C.D.B.G. Allocation Foothill Club Historic Landmark Foundation Architectural Drawings for ADA improvements to the Clubhouse $13,500 n/a Shady Shakespeare Theater Company Free Performances held in Sanborn County Park $2,500 n/a KSAR15, Saratoga Community Access Cable TV Foundation Saratoga High School Media Arts Mentoring Program $4,617 n/a SUBTOTAL $20,617 n/a SASCC Adult Day Care Program $35,000 West Valley Community Services West Valley Community Services Food Pantry and Emergency Services $15,164 Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County Long Term Ombudsman Program $5,000 Mid-Peninsula Housing Saratoga Court Pedestrian Safety Program $50,450 SUBTOTAL $105,614 GRAND TOTAL $126,231 $54,068 69 The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 4th day of March 2009 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ______________________________ Chuck Page, Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________ Ann Sullivan, City Clerk 70 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: ____________________________________________________________ Eligible for CDBG Yes ______ No ______ Eligible for CG Yes ______ No ______ Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) § Content (20) § Clarity (5) § Brevity (5) Outreach (10 points) § Applicant’s current outreach efforts are feasible to attract new Saratoga residents (5) § Additional outreach plans are well thought out with reasonable assumptions for funding such efforts (5) Leveraging (20 points) § Applicant is seeking funding from other sources for its activities/services/improvements (10) § Applicant has demonstrated success in securing additional funds through other fund raising efforts as shown in previous years financial statements (10) Cost / Benefit Analysis (20 points) § The funds requested is proportional to the target beneficiaries served (20) Community Grant Target Benefit (20 points) § The total number of unduplicated Saratoga resident beneficiaries (10) § The percentage of total unduplicated clients served that are Saratoga residents (10) -OR- CDBG Target Benefit (20 points) § The total number of unduplicated lower-income beneficiaries (5) § The percentage of total unduplicated clients served that are lower-income (5) § The total number of unduplicated Saratoga resident beneficiaries (5) § The percentage of total unduplicated clients served that are Saratoga residents (5) TOTAL: 71 EVALUATION CRITERIA EVALUATION CRITERIA Presentation (30 points) § Content (20) § Clarity (5) § Brevity (5) Outreach (10 points) § Applicant’s current outreach efforts are feasible to attract new Saratoga residents (5) § Additional outreach plans are well thought out with reasonable assumptions for sourcing (5) Leveraging (20 points) § Applicant is seeking funding from other sources for its activities/services/improvements (10) § Applicant has demonstrated success in securing additional funds through other fund raising efforts as shown in previous years financial statements (10) Cost / Benefit Analysis (20 points) § The requested funds are proportional to the target beneficiaries served (20) - AND - Target Benefit - Community Grant (20 points) § The total number of unduplicated Saratoga resident beneficiaries (10) § The percentage of total unduplicated clients served that are Saratoga residents (10) -OR- Target Benefit - CDBG (20 points) § The total number of unduplicated lower-income beneficiaries (5) § The percentage of total unduplicated clients served that are lower-income (5) § The total number of unduplicated Saratoga resident beneficiaries (5) § The percentage of total unduplicated clients served that are Saratoga residents (5) 72 EVALUATION SUMMARY EVALUATION SUMMARIES Agency Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost/Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) Total Points Amount Requested CDBG Allocation Com. Grant Allocation Foothill Club $13,500 n/a KSAR $4,617 n/a Shady Shakespeare $2,500 n/a SASCC1 $35,000 West Valley Community Services $15,164 Catholic Charities $5,000 Mid- Peninsula Housing 2 $50,450 Total: $27,057 $74,010 $54,068 1 SASCC, West Valley Community Services, and Catholic Charities are eligible for CDBG public service funds up to a maximum of $27,057 total 2 Mid-Peninsula Housing is eligible for CDBG Rehabilitation funds up to a maximum of $74,010 which is also being considered for up to $46,391 in ADA projects. 73 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: Foothill Club Amount Requested $13,500 Eligible for CDBG: No Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 74 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: KSAR Amount Requested: $4,617 Eligible for CDBG: No Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 75 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: Shady Shakespeare Amount Requested: $2,500 Eligible for CDBG: No Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 76 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: SASCC Amount Requested: $35,000 Eligible for CDBG (Public Services): Yes Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 77 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: West Valley Community Services Amount Requested: $15,164 Eligible for CDBG (Public Services): Yes Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 78 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: Catholic Charities Amount Requested: $5,000 Eligible for CDBG (Public Services): Yes Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 79 EVALUATION WORKSHEET AGENCY NAME: Mid-Peninsula Housing Amount Requested: $50,450 Eligible for CDBG (Rehabilitation): Yes Criteria Score Presentation (30 points) Outreach (10 points) Leveraging (20 points) Cost / Benefit (20 points) Target Benefit (20 points) TOTAL /100 80 Page 1 of 10 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 18, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Community Development CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Cynthia McCormick, Assistant Planner DIRECTOR: John Livingstone SUBJECT: FY 2009/10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND COMMUNITY GRANT FUNDING APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing and accept public testimony presentations from applicants. 2. Continue the Public Hearing to March 4th and make a decision regarding allocations. BACKGROUND: Each year the City allocates grant funding to programs and services that benefit City of Saratoga residents. Changes to the FY 2009/2010 grant funding process have been implemented including combining the application process for both Community Grant Programs & Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) programs and adding evaluation criteria to help prioritize the increasing number of grant applications the City receives. Applicants for the City of Saratoga Community Grant Program do not have to meet CDBG eligibility requirements. CDBG proposals must comply with HUD and Urban County program eligibility requirements with priority given to projects that provide affordable housing and other housing related activities such as rehabilitation of affordable housing. However, CDBG funding has traditionally been available for non-housing public service projects which primarily serve lower income clients, and for public improvements to ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Last year the City received three requests for CDBG public service funds, totaling $54,164. The request exceeded the available funding by $21,432 and Council voted to fund the excess amount with money from the Council’s discretionary fund. Additionally, the City allocated $72,482 in CDBG funds for three public improvement projects: ADA accessible signals throughout the City, an ADA accessible ramp at the Historic Museum, and ADA Seating in the Civic Theater. As in previous years, $13,000 was provided to the County to administer the SHARP Loan program and $15,000 was allocated towards administration of the CDBG program. DISCUSSION: The availability of 2009-2010 fiscal year grant funds was publicized on the City Website and in the Saratoga News. Prior to the writing of this staff report, staff received seven (7) applications for Community Grant funding, three (3) of which are eligible for CDBG Public Service funding and one (1) of which is eligible for CDBG Rehabilitation funding. The City also received two (2) applications for CDBG ADA Public Improvement funding. 81 Page 2 of 10 Community Grant Funding In the past, Council Discretionary Funds have been used to supplement CDBG funds. Saratoga’s Community Grant funding was established to match the CDBG public service funding of $32,000. In addition, this year’s distribution will include a one-time carry forward of $22,068 of prior year Council Discretionary funds to bring the Community Grant distribution up to $54,068. The total amount of community grant funding requested for all applications is $126,231. However, requests from Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC), West Valley Community Services (WVCS), and Catholic Charities may also be funded with CDBG Public Service funds as discussed below. Furthermore, a request from Mid-Pen may also be funded with CDBG Rehabilitation funds as discussed below. The three applications that are not eligible for CDBG funding include requests for 13,500 from the Saratoga Foothill Club Historic Landmark Foundation, $4,617 from the KSAR Saratoga High School Media Arts Mentoring Program, and $2,500 from the Shady Shakespeare Theater Company. The total requested from these three applications is $20,617. The maximum amount available for community grant funding is $54,068. CDBG Public Service Funding The three applications that are eligible for CDBG Public Service funding include requests for $35,000 from SASCC, $15,164 from WVCS, and $5,000 from Catholic Charities. All three agencies applied for and received funding last year. Last year for simplicity, the Council decided to fund SASCC with CDBG funds while West Valley Community Services and Catholic Charities were funded from the Council’s Discretionary funds. The total amount requested for these three applications is $55,164. The maximum amount available for CDBG public service funding is $32,000. CDBG Rehabilitation Funding and CDBG ADA Public Improvement Funding The Mid-Peninsula Housing Saratoga Court Pedestrian Safety Program is eligible for CDBG rehabilitation funding and is requesting $50,450. Two (2) applications are eligible for CDBG public improvement funding and include requests for $41,927 to implement Phase II of the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road ADA curb ramp project and $4,464 to install an ADA automatic door in the City Hall public bathroom. The total amount requested is $96,841. The maximum amount available for FY 2009- 2010 CDBG public improvement and rehabilitation funding is $69,000. However, $8,150 in prior- year balance rollover CDBG funds may be transferred to Phase I of the Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road ADA curb ramp project to help off-set the costs of Phase II. SHARP / CDBG Administrative Funding Each year an additional $13,000 is allocated to Santa Clara County to administer the SHARP program and $15,000 is allocated for CDBG administration costs. 82 Page 3 of 10 1 SASCC, WVCS, Catholic Charities, and Mid-Pen Housing applied for both CDBG funds and Community Grant funds. For simplicity, these projects have been placed under the appropriate CDBG category. However they may also be funded by the Community Grant program. PRIMARY FUNDING CATEGORIES1 Agency Community Grant CDBG Public Service CDBG Rehabilitation CDBG Public Improvements SHARP Administration CDBG Administration TOTALS Foothill Club $13,500 $13,500 KSAR $4,617 $4,617 Shady Shakespeare $2,500 $2,500 Catholic Charities $5,000 $5,000 SASCC $35,000 $35,000 WVCS $15,164 $15,164 Mid-Peninsula Housing $50,450 $50,450 Recreation $4,464 $4,464 Public Works $41,927 $41,927 Community Development $15,000 $15,000 Santa Clara County $13,000 $13,000 Total Requested $20,617 $55,164 $96,841 $13,000 $15,000 $200,622 Total Available $54,068 $32,000 $69,000 $13,000 $15,000 $183,068 Surplus / (Deficit) $33,451 ($23,164) ($27,841) 0 0 ($17,554) 83 Page 4 of 10 FY 2009/10 APPLICATION SUMMARIES: Summaries of each application are listed below. Applications are provided in Attachment A. Additional information (e.g., audit, financial statements) are available upon request. Per previous Council discussion, priority will be given to agencies that primarily serve Saratoga residents and that seek matching funds from other sources. KSAR – Saratoga High School Media Arts Mentoring Program KSAR15, Saratoga Community Access Cable TV Foundation submitted a proposal for support of a Saratoga High School Media Arts Mentoring Program. The program helps students start a TV broadcasting career through classes in TV production skills, internship opportunities, and resume and interview techniques. The program will support 120 Saratoga students which is equal to 100% of the students in the program. The estimated cost per client is $83.33. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $10,000. The requested funding is $4,617 which is approximately 46% of the cost to run the program. In-kind donations include volunteer participation by KSAR board members and the time and costs associated with planning, review and coordination by Saratoga High School teachers. This project is being considered under the Community Grant program. It is not eligible for CDBG funding since it does not primarily serve low-income participants. Saratoga Foothill Club Historic Landmark Foundation The Saratoga Foothill Club Historic Landmark Foundation (Foundation) submitted a proposal to improve disability access to the Foothill Club Clubhouse. The clubhouse hosts 3,000 guests annually including approximately 1,500 Saratoga residents which represent 50% of the total guests served. The estimated cost per client is approximately $4.50. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $6,750. The requested funding is $13,500 which is 200% of the cost to serve Saratoga residents and 100% of the total cost of the project. In addition to club fundraisers, the Foundation will apply for a professional services grant from the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The Club has successfully leveraged approximately $30,000 which would be used as a match to any Community Grant funding. This project is being considered under the Community Grant program. It is not eligible for CDBG funding since it does not primarily serve low-income participants and because it is a private club which is not open to the general public. Shady Shakespeare Theater Company The Shady Shakespeare Theater Company submitted a proposal to help fund performances held in Sanborn County Park. The theater hosts 4,200 guests annually including approximately 294 Saratoga residents which represent 7% of the total guests served. The estimated cost per client is approximately $19.05. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $5,600. The requested funding is $2,500 which is 45% of the cost to serve Saratoga residents and 3% of the total cost of the project. Information regarding leveraged funds was not available at the time of this staff report but will be provided by the applicant at the Public Hearing. This project is being considered under the Community Grant program. It is not eligible for CDBG funding since it does not primarily serve low-income participants. CDBG Public Service Eligible Projects 84 Page 5 of 10 Catholic Charities – Long Term Ombudsman Program Catholic Charities submitted a proposal for continued support of the Long Term Ombudsman Program which provides advocacy for the rights of residents in long term care. The program serves 8,000 unduplicated clients annually including a minimum of 288 Saratoga residents which represent 3.6% of the total clients served. Catholic Charities estimates a cost per client of $26.68. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $7,684. The requested funding is $5,000 which is approximately 65% of the cost to serve Saratoga residents or 2.3% of the total budget to operate the program. Catholic Charities has successfully leveraged funding through donations and funding at the federal and city level. Catholic Charities continues to apply for CDBG funding from several other cities it serves. This program received grant funding from Saratoga for the first time last year. This program is eligible for both Community Grant and CDBG Public Service funding. SASCC - Adult Day Care Program Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council (SASCC) submitted its annual proposal for continued support of the SASCC Adult Day Care Center Program which provides respite care and social activities for frail elders and their caregivers. The program serves 55 unduplicated clients annually including 18 Saratoga residents which represent 34% of the total clients served. SASCC estimates a cost per client of $5,156. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $92,820. Their requested funding is $35,000 which is approximately 38% of the cost to serve Saratoga residents or 12% of the total budget to operate the Adult Care Center. SASCC has successfully leveraged funding through donations and annual fundraising efforts in addition to sliding-scale fees. SASCC intends to apply for CDBG funding from the City of Campbell from which 6 clients are served. This program has received CDBG funding from Saratoga for the past 8 years. This program is eligible for both Community Grant and CDBG Public Service funding. West Valley Community Services – Food Pantry and Emergency Rental/Utility Assistance West Valley Community Services (WVCS) submitted a proposal for continued support of its Community Assistance Program which provides food pantry and emergency rental/utility services. The program serves 611 unduplicated clients annually including approximately 67 Saratoga residents which represent 11% of the total clients served. The estimated cost per client is approximately $414. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $27,715. The requested funding is $15,164, which is approximately 55% of the cost to serve Saratoga residents or 6% of the total budget to operate the program. WVCS has successfully leveraged funding through donations and funding at the federal, county and city level. WVCS continues to apply for CDBG funding from several other cities it serves. This program has received grant funding from Saratoga for the past 2 years. This program is eligible for both Community Grant and CDBG Public Service funding. CDBG Rehabilitation Eligible Projects 85 Page 6 of 10 Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition – Pedestrian Safety Program Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition submitted a proposal for a Pedestrian Safety Program for the Saratoga Court Senior Apartments. The project includes repaving the driveway and installing speed bumps within the Apartment complex. The Apartments provide housing to 25 Saratoga seniors which equal 100% of the residents in the complex. Mid- Peninsula Housing estimates a cost per client of $2,018. The total cost to serve Saratoga residents is $50,450. The requested funding is $50,450 which is 100% of the cost to complete the project. Mid-Peninsula Housing has replacement reserves available to match Saratoga funds as necessary. Mid-Peninsula Housing has successfully leveraged funding through donations and funding at the federal, state, county, and city level. In 1984, the City allocated $274,000 to assist in the acquisition of the Apartments. In addition to Community Grant funding, this project is eligible for CDBG rehabilitation funding because it primarily serves very-low income participants on private property. CDBG Public Improvement Eligible Projects City of Saratoga Public Works Department – Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road Improvements The City of Saratoga Public Works Department has submitted an application for Phase II of the previously approved project to install ADA compliant curb ramp upgrades to Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. The total amount requested is $41,927. City of Saratoga Recreation and Facilities Department – ADA Compliant Automated Door The City of Saratoga Recreation and Facilities Department submitted an application to install ADA compliant door openers and closers to improve bathroom access and egress for mobility impaired individuals using the public restrooms at City Hall. The amount requested is $4,464. Program Administration SHARP Revolving Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program At one time the City managed CDBG funds for low-income housing rehabilitation projects. The program is now administered by the Santa Clara County Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). HCD charges $13,000 per year to administer the program. The cost covers processing loan applications and paperwork, determining eligibility, and coordinating payments to the contractors doing the repair work. The maximum amount that may be allocated is $13,000. CDBG Program CDBG funds may be used to pay reasonable administration costs related to the planning and execution of community development activities assisted in whole or in part with funds provided under the CDBG program. Administration activities include preparing all related reports, contracts and correspondence; managing the annual CDBG allocation disbursement process, monitoring the grantees, and acting as a liaison between the City and the Urban County Program. The maximum amount that may be allocated is $15,000. 86 Page 7 of 10 COMMUNITY GRANT APPLICATION SUMMARIES Agency Total # of Clients # of Saratoga Residents Saratoga Residents % of total Total Cost of Project Cost per Client Total Cost to serve Saratoga residents Amount Requested Benefit / Cost Ratio2 Cost / Benefit Percent3 % of Matching Funds/ Resources Catholic Charities 8,000 288 4% $213,506 $26.68 $7,683.84 $5,000 1.54 65% 100% SASCC 53 18 34% $283,618 $5,156.6 9 $92,820.4 4 $35,000 2.75 36% 100% West Valley Community Services 611 67 11% $252,741 $413.65 $27,714.6 4 $15,164 1.83 55% 100% Mid- Peninsula Housing 25 25 100% $50,450 $2,018.0 0 $50,450.0 0 $50,450 1 100% 100% Foothill Club 3,000 1,500 50% $13,500 $4.50 $6,750 $13,500 0.5 200% 100% Shady Shakespeare 4,200 294 7% $80,000 $19.05 $5,600 $2,500 2.24 45% ? KSAR 120 120 100% $10,000 $83.33 $10,000.0 0 $4,617 2.17 46% 100% 2 The benefit/cost ratio is calculated by dividing the total cost to serve Saratoga residents by the total funds requested. The higher the number, the higher the benefit to Saratoga residents for every dollar requested. 3 The cost/benefit percent is calculated by dividing the total funds requested by the total cost to serve Saratoga residents. The higher the number, the lower the benefit to Saratoga residents for every dollar requested. 87 Page 8 of 10 88 Page 9 of 10 FISCAL IMPACTS: The CDBG funds for FY 2009/10 are federal Housing and Urban Development funds administered by Santa Clara County and allocated to participating cities. There is no impact from these recommendations on General City funds. The Community Grant funds have been budgeted for FY 2009/2010. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City’s FY 2009/10 CDBG allocation will remain with the County. Saratoga will not meet its goals related to providing continued housing assistance, rehabilitation and human services to low income and disabled residents in the City. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: NA FOLLOW UP ACTION: 1) Continue the Public Hearing to March 4th and make a decision regarding allocations. 2) Following the March 4th meeting, forward Council’s CDBG recommendations to the County of Santa Clara and execute contracts with agencies receiving funding. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: The availability of grant funds was publicized on the City Website and in the Saratoga News. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Applications Cc: Applicant agencies 89 Page 10 of 10 ATTACHMENT A Applications 90 Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 17, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Community Development CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Cynthia McCormick DIRECTOR: John Livingstone SUBJECT: EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR COMMUNITY GRANT & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PUBLIC SERVICES FUNDING RECOMMENDED ACTION: As directed by City Council. REPORT HISTORY: On June 18, 2008, the Council decided to establish a more formal Grant Program. The Council determined that the Community Grant (CG) program and the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program will be done simultaneously including noticing, application, and schedule. Applications for both programs will be reviewed at a preliminary Public Hearing prior to approval in March. Furthermore, the Community Grant Program would match the CDBG Public Service funding (estimated to be $32,000) and add $22,068 in funding leftover from the annual Contingency fund for a Community Grant fund total of $54,068. In addition to formally combining the two grant programs, the Council decided to institute a priority ranking process for the allocation of grants. Staff has prepared a draft evaluation criteria system for consideration and implementation. DISCUSSION: The evaluation criteria include five categories: presentation, target benefit, cost/benefit, leveraging, and outreach which are further broken down in the attached Worksheet. 1. Presentation (30 points): Applicants will be given three minutes during the Public Hearing to present their proposal; their presentation will be evaluated on content, clarity, and brevity. 2. Target Benefit (20 points): This category rewards programs that serve a large number of Saratoga residents as a whole and as a percentage of their entire clientele. CDBG applications will be further evaluated on the number of low-income beneficiaries in their program. 3. Cost/Benefit (20 points): To be more successful in this category, requested funds should be proportional to the target beneficiaries served (i.e., Saratoga residents). 4. Leveraging (20 points): Applicants should show that they are currently seeking matching funding. Applicants will receive additional points for demonstrated fundraising success. 5. Outreach (10 points): Applicants will be evaluated on both their current and proposed outreach efforts to attract new Saratoga residents. 91 Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACTS: None CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff and the Council will continue to review applications consistent with the current procedure. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: None FOLLOW UP ACTION: 1. Staff will make adjustments to the evaluation criteria. 2. Staff will schedule the public hearing: On February 18th, the applicants will make a three (3) minute presentation. The Council will accept the presentation and continue the hearing to March 4th at which time the Council will review and rank the applications according to the evaluation criteria. The scores will be compiled during the meeting and the Council will make a decision to allocate Community Grant funding and recommend CDBG funding. 3. Staff will forward the CDBG recommendations to the County for final approval. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Posting of the Agenda ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Evaluation Criteria Attachment B – Application Package Attachment C – Calendar 92 Page 1 of 2 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Crystal Morrow DIRECTOR: Barbara Powell Administrative Analyst II Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: 2009 Spring Issue of The Saratogan RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. BACKGROUND: After discontinuing publication of The Saratogan in 2004, the City of Saratoga began reissuing the quarterly publication in February 2008. The winter issue was mailed to residents in January 2009 and the spring issue will be sent in April 2009. The newsletter is used as a tool to improve communications with residents and ensure the public has access to important information. In the past it has been used to conduct public surveys and call attention to City services. The winter issue focused on the theme of renewal in Saratoga with stories about the development of Joe’s Trail at Saratoga DeAnza, the City’s new online community calendar powered by Artsopolis, the Community Development Block Grant and Community Grant programs, and renovations at Kevin Moran Park. Additionally, the winter issue included stories on the Youth Commission, the popular Ask Jana, the Village Streetscape Improvement meeting, digital television transition, emergency calls from mobile phones, and a thank you to Monte Sereno for the donation of State Park Bond funds. Staff has started developing article topics for next issue of The Saratogan. The stories are centered on “Sustainability” and will highlight stories on how the City and its residents can be environmental stewards. Below is a preliminary list of feature and supplementary articles. Feature Articles: · Citywide Garage Sale · Water conservation tips · Saratoga’s environmentally friendly park management practices Supplementary Articles: 93 Page 2 of 2 · Saratoga’s Arbor Day celebration · Waste reduction tips · Ask Jana · Meet the Traffic Safety Commission · Announcement for City Council joint meeting with Saratoga neighborhood associations To ensure The Saratogan meets the expectations of the City Council, staff is seeking input for the spring issue. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Staff will move forward without Council input on the theme, article topics, or other aspects of the spring issue of The Saratogan. ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: The Saratogan 2009 winter issue 94 SaratoganTheCITY o f S A RATOG A CALIF O R N I A1956 Winter 2009 Finding Renewal in Saratoga In October 2008, the City of Saratoga celebrated the groundbreaking of Joe’s Trail at Saratoga DeAnza. This new 1.6 mile pedestrian and bicycle trail will run between Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Saratoga Road on the PG&E right-of-way located adjacent to the railroad corridor in the City. For years, residents have enjoyed walking their dogs, bicycling, and running along the path next to the railroad tracks. Thanks to a generous donation from Saratoga resident Dee Sanfilippo, who provided funding for the trail on behalf of her late husband, Joe, an official trail will be built. Development of the trail embodies a process of renewal. This path, once cherished by Sanfilippo’s husband, will be transformed into a formal trail and added to the City’s expansive trail network that helps to keep Saratoga residents active and connected. Examples of renewal can be found throughout the City. Read more about them in this issue of The Saratogan. Community Event Calendar: Saratoga’s community events are a great way to escape the daily grind and recuperate. These wonderful events, which keep the community unified, are now a little easier to find with the City’s new online community calendar. Read about this new calendar below. Kevin Moran Park: Since the 1970s, Kevin Moran Park has been one of Saratoga’s most treasured parks and is now being renovated. Turn to page 2 for more! Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Community Grant Programs: Each year, CDBG and community grants are allocated to organizations that offer a new beginning to Saratoga residents during times of need. More information is on page 2. Get Connected! Need to know what’s happening in Saratoga? Just visit www.saratoga. ca.us/events.html to get the latest information about public events. The new community calendar is powered by Artsopolis, a regional non- profit established in 2000 to promote local arts and culture events. Since 2000, Artsopolis has become the most widely used online event calendar in Silicon Valley. Saratoga’s community calendar will feature events that are open to the public (whether free or for a charge) which are located within the 95070 zip code. To add events to the calendar, simply fill out the online submission form that is available on the Saratoga calendar and at www.artsopolis.com. Visit the Saratoga community calendar today to get connected with the Saratoga community! Groundbreaking of Joe’s Trail at Saratoga DeAnza 95 A Helping Hand in Saratoga Each year, the City of Saratoga has the opportunity to provide funds to organizations that help the City’s neediest residents through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. This program is funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to address the needs of lower income and special needs residents. The City is expected to receive close to $133,000 in CDBG funds. Approximately $32,000 is available in the public service category, which is typically allocated to social services agencies. Last year’s recipients included: Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council’s adult day care program• West Valley • Community Services’ community assistance program that offers low income residents food, rentals, and utility services in times of need Catholic Charities of • San Jose’s Long Term Ombudsman Program that aims to improve the quality of life for residents of assisted living facilities Another portion of the CDBG funds, about $72,000, is set aside for the non-public service category. This money is used by the City to upgrade facilities to meet accessibility requirements. In past years, the City has allocated the non-public service category monies to equip traffic signals with audio cues for the visually impaired and install fully accessible seating in the Civic Theater. In addition to the CBDG Program, the City has recently created a Community Grant Program. This year, $52,000 will be available for community based non-profit organizations that serve Saratoga. Applications for both the CDBG and Community Grant programs were due by January 20, 2009. The Council will discuss the applications in February and make a decision in early March. For more information, contact Cynthia McCormick at cmccormick@saratoga.ca.us or (408) 868-1230. Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council luncheon Renovations Underway at Kevin Moran Park Kevin Moran Park has held a special place in the hearts of many Saratoga residents since it was purchased and developed in the 1970s. To enhance this cherished park, renovations are underway and will include a new tennis court, bocce ball court, picnic area, restroom, meditation garden, and a small flat grass area. These improvements are the result of a community developed consensus plan. While the plan permits Saratoga youth sports groups to expand their available practice area at the park, no games are allowed. The park is named in memory of Kevin Moran, a Saratoga resident and University of California Santa Barbara student, who was killed during a riot in Isla Vista in April of 1970. Almost forty years later Saratoga residents honor his memory every day by playing and relaxing in the park that bears his name. The renovations are expected to be complete by summer 2009. For more information about this project, please contact the Public Works Department at (408) 868-1239. 96 Ask Jana Got Code Enforcement questions? Ask Jana! Send your questions to Jana Rinaldi at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga CA 95070 or by email to jrinaldi@saratoga.ca.us. Dear Jana, Every Saturday, my neighbor has his yard maintained by a landscape company. When the landscapers are done with their work, they leave the yard waste bin out on the street. Our garbage collection day isn’t until Wednesday. Is my neighbor allowed to leave his yard clippings out from Saturday to Wednesday? Grass Can Gran Dear Grass Can Gran, There are a couple of rules related to garbage, recycling, and yard waste containers that are important to remember. Garbage cans be placed at the curbside • after 12:00 p.m. on the day before your garbage collection day. Garbage cans must removed from the • curbside by 12:00 p.m. on the day after your garbage collection day. At all other times, garbage, recycling, and • yard waste containers may not be within public view. That means containers may not be stored in the front or side yard and need to be fully screened from public view by a fence, wall, landscaping, or some other structure. Jana Dear Jana, I was at Congress Springs Park on a Tuesday afternoon and noticed a woman with two dogs that were off-leash. I thought all dogs needed to be on a leash in the City’s parks. Can you tell me what the Code says about off-leash dogs? Day Tripper Dear Day Tripper, You’re right, dogs must be on a leash that is no more than six feet in length while in a public place—including our parks. A $75 fine can be issued to owners who have their dogs off-leash in parks and other public places. Jana Meet the Youth Commission Of the six commissions in the City of Saratoga, the Youth Commission is by far the largest and its members are the youngest. This sixteen-member commission is composed of teens from a wide range of backgrounds who share an interest in government and leadership. In their roles as commissioners, they advise the City Council on teen issues, represent the interests of Saratoga’s youth, and work to get teens involved in the community. The Youth Commission meets on the second Tuesday of every month at 7:00 p.m. at Saratoga City Hall, located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. Meetings are open to the public and teens interested in youth issues or in applying to join the commission are encouraged to attend. For more information, visit www. saratoga.ca.us/boards-commissions/youth/. Left to right: Staff Liaison Adam Henig, Sangita Annamalai, Kayvon Rezaii, Sammy Rao, Kia Fariba, Natalie Tkalcevic, Kaitlin Finch, Corey Rateau, Elena Rees, Tara Fatemi, Jacob Baker, Justin El-Diwany, Lauren Tang, Tiffany Tseng, Aditya Dev, Cynthia Zhao, and Sameer Kausar. 97 Postal Customer Local PRSRT STD U.S. Postage PAID Saratoga, CA Permit No. 136 ECRWSS The Saratogan 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 C I T Y o f S ARATO G A CALIFO R N I A1956 A Big Thank You to Monte Sereno Saratoga residents have Monte Sereno to thank for some of the City’s latest park improvements. On October 21st, the Monte Sereno City Council voted unanimously to give Saratoga $40,000 in State Park Bond funds to pay for the expense of installing a new bocce ball court at Kevin Moran Park and a petanque court at Azule Park. Local park lovers will appreciate this generous donation for years to come! Digital Television Transition It is hard to miss the many advertisements announcing the transition to digital television. This year, all broadcast television stations in the U.S. will switch from analog to digital broadcasts. Residents opting to buy a new digital television rather than a converter should be aware that it is illegal to throw away a television in California. Televisions contain metals such as lead, mercury, and cadmium that leak from landfills to contaminate California’s precious waterways. Check for local E-waste events or take advantage of West Valley Collection & Recycling’s (WVCR) free E-waste recycling service. For more information, call WVCR at (408) 283-9250. Mobile Emergency Calls Calls to 9-1-1 from mobile phones in Saratoga now go directly to the Sheriff’s Office! Most 9-1-1 calls from mobile phones used to go to the California Highway Patrol emergency call center before getting routed to local law enforcement agencies, which occasionally caused delays in response times. The City of Saratoga invites you to attend the Village Streetscape Improvement Meeting #2 Monday, February 2, 2009 @ 6:30 p.m.Saratoga Senior Center – 19655 Allendale Avenue, Saratoga The City has received a grant from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority to improve patron safety along Big Basin Way, taking into account the unique and historic environment of the Village. Primarily, work will be focused on pedestrian safety improvements and beautification of the Village. This is the second meeting at which members of the public will get to share their thoughts on improvements to the Village Streetscape and review conceptual drawings developed by Gates & Associates. Planned improvements include pedestrian bulb outs, crosswalk in-pavement lighting, hanging plant baskets, irrigation, sidewalk improvements, streetscape furniture, and more! For more information, please contact Macedonio Nunez with the City of Saratoga at mnunez@saratoga.ca.us. C I T Y o f S ARATO G A CALIF O R N I A1956 98 Page 1 of 4 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 4, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: City Manager’s Office CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Barbara Powell DIRECTOR: Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Energy Management Program for City of Saratoga RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept report and direct staff accordingly. REPORT SUMMARY: During the “Special Presentations” portion of the City Council meeting, the Council received a presentation by Ms. Kelly Ferguson, Ph.D., P.E., LEED® AP, Business Development Manager, Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. The Siemens’ program involves a no-cost Preliminary Study that evaluates potential energy savings through targeted facility improvements, together with a cash flow analysis indicating how the improvements can be paid through utility savings. As proposed, once the Preliminary Study has been approved, there would be an implied understanding that the City would enter into a Letter of Intent with Siemens. During this phase, Siemens would undertake a more detailed energy audit and would prepare a more detailed financial plan. Costs for this phase of the program, together with actual facility improvements, would be paid for through anticipated utility savings. Siemens’ program takes advantage of recent changes in State law allowing the City to use a “Design-build” approach, in which Siemens would act as the designer as well as the General Contractor for proposed facility improvements. Alternatively, the City could determine that it desires to independently bid the proposed facility improvements or to go out to bid for a design- build contractor; however, in either case the City would then be obligated to pay Siemens’ for the costs associated with the work performed up to that point. DISCUSSION: The City could enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Siemens to undertake the Preliminary Study, such as the one provided as Attachment “A”. Alternatively, the City could issue a Request for Proposals to solicit interest from other firms that undertake energy 99 Page 2 of 4 management studies and could then evaluate the relative merit of these proposals, together with the proposal provided by Siemens. FISCAL IMPACTS: N/A CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: N/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION(S): Implement Council direction ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Nothing additional. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment “A” – Memorandum of Understanding 100 Page 3 of 4 Memorandum of Understanding (‘MOU’) This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING is to confirm the interest of the City of Saratoga (COS) in working with Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. (SBT) to develop an energy management program. The program will be developed based on the process steps as attached. As a next step in developing the program, SBT will undertake a Preliminary Study of certain City facilities as described below. The following objectives and responsibilities of both parties, as well as the anticipated outcomes are defined below. COS Objectives: To implement clean energy projects in city facilities, with consideration of the following: · Modernizing facilities and equipment for energy efficiency · Generating renewable energy (in particular, solar photovoltaics) · Reducing greenhouse gas emissions · Conserving water resources · Upgrading energy efficiency of infrastructure and utilities · Optimizing operational expenditures and total life cycle cost of equipment ownership · Providing quality work and civic environments. SBT Solution Objectives: Conduct a preliminary study to identify clean energy opportunities related to energy and water conservation, as well as renewable energy generation. Preliminary Study Deliverables · Business Review · Incremental Cash Flow Analysis · Recommended Energy Projects · Potential for climate pollution reduction · Recommended Implementation Schedule · Preliminary Implementation Plan and Preliminary Agreement Terms Process To enable both parties to expeditiously evaluate the potential benefits of this MOU without excessive speculative investment by SBT, or speculative investment by COS, a process of progressive investment and commitment shall be undertaken. This process is as follows: 1. SBT to develop a Preliminary Study. This Preliminary Study shall list cost effective energy/utility improvement projects, showing the savings and costs for the recommended projects. SBT will develop a 15 year cash flow for NPV analysis. 2. Upon approval of the Preliminary Study, enter into a Letter of Intent (LOI) to fully explore and develop this Agreement that best meets the objectives stated above. The outcome of the LOI will include; exact scope of work, firm program costs, and a financial assessment. 101 Page 4 of 4 There will be no financial obligation due to SBT until the Letter of Intent (LOI) is executed by both parties. However, it is expected that there is a qualified commitment to the concept and to the partnership with SBT, assuming the Objectives, stated above, are met. Please refer to the attached process sheet for preliminary dates and milestones. This document represents the business intent of both parties and should be executed by the parties who would ultimately be signatory to the final agreement. Both parties are in agreement with the intent outlined by this Memorandum. Signature: Signature: Date: _ Date: Print Name: Print Name: Balachandar Jayaraman Dave Anderson General Manager, Energy & Environment City Manager Siemens Building Technologies City of Saratoga Hayward, CA Saratoga, CA Letter of Intent (LOI) Preliminary Study / Project Timeline for City of Saratoga 102