Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-07-1993 CITY COUNCIL AGENDASARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 2 3.3 % AGENDA ITEM t MEETING DATE: July 7, 1993 CITY MGR. APPROVAL 6�A ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance Prohibiting Targeted Picketing of Residences in Saratoga Recommended Motion(s): Approve ordinance prohibiting the targeted picketing of residences in Saratoga. Report Summary: At the request of Sheriff Gillingham I have asked the City Attorney to draft an ordinance similar to that adopted by the City of San Jose and the County of Santa Clara to respond to the threat of targeted picketing by pro -life groups in this County this summer. I am not asking that this be an urgency measure at this time as the Sheriff has no specific intelligence that residents of Saratoga are potential targets.,- Rather this is a precaution in the event that the ordinances "-in other jurisdictions make Saratoga a more attractive target. If it appears a problem is developing, Council can then consider adopting the ordinance. Fiscal Impacts: Unknown at this time. Follow Up Actions: Adopt the ordinance after second reading. It would go into effect in 30 days, or adopt it as an urgency measure when it would go into effect immediately. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: City would only have existing means to limit picketing which the Sheriff feels would not be adequate. � SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. Z 3 3 MEETING DATE: July 7, 1993 ORIGINATING DEPT. Public Works AGENDA ITEM —1 C..., CITY MGR. SUBJECT: Warner Hutton House Improvements, Capital Project No. 9301 - Award of Construction Contract Recommended Motion(s): 1. Move to declare Progressive Pacific of Scotts Valley to be the lowest responsible bidder on the Warner Hutton House Improvements. 2. Move to award the attached construction contract with Progressive 'Pacific in the amount of $18,975. 3. Move to authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $3,000. Report Summary: Sealed bids for the interior remodel work at the Warner Hutton House, which is part of the Warner Hutton House Improvements, Capital Project No. 9301,. were opened yesterday afternoon.. Progressive Pacific of Scotts Valley submitted the only bid on the project for $18,975 which is 5.1% under the Engineer's Estimate of $20,000. Although only one bid was received, staff has carefully checked the bid and the contractor's references, and the bid appears to be responsive to the Notice Inviting Sealed Bids dated June 16. Consequently, it is recommended that the Council declare Progressive Pacific to be the lowest responsible bidder on the project and award the attached construction contract to them in the amount of $18,975. Further, it is recommended that the Council authorize staff to execute change orders to the contract up to $3, 000 to cover any unforeseen circumstances which may arise during the construction. Fiscal Impacts: The adopted FY 93 -94 budget _contains sufficient funds in Project No. 9301, Account No. 4510 to cover the base contract amount and the recommended change order authority. Funding for this project is through the City's CDBG program and will be reimbursed through the HCDA Fund. Follow Up Actions: The contracts will be executed and the contractor will be authorized to begin work. The project should be complete within 6 -8 weeks. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The Council must either accept or reject the bid. If the bid is rejected, staff would presumably rebid the project. r 10 CITY OF SARATOGA BID SUMMARY PROJECT: WARNER HUTTON HOUSE IMPROVEMENTS, CAPITAL PROJECT NO. 9301 BID DATE: JULY 6, 1993 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE PROGRESSIVE PACIFIC ITEM # ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CONSTRUCT DISABLED ACCESS MODIFICATIONS 1. LS - $20,000.00 - $18,975.00 AT THE WARNER HUTTON HOUSE GRAND TOTAL $20,000.00 GRAND TOTAL $18,975.00 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. Z 3 AGENDA ITEM. MEETING DATE: July 7, 1993 CITY MGR. i ORIGINATING DEPT. Engineering SUBJECT: Warner Hutton House Improvements,. Capital Project No. 9301 - Award of Construction Contract Recommended Motion(s): None at this time. Report Summary: Sealed bids for the interior remodel work at the Warner Hutton House will be opened on Tuesday afternoon, July 6. Depending on the number of bids received and whether clearance from the County HCDA coordinator can be obtained before your meeting, it ;may be possible to award the construction contract at your meeting. If a recommendation for contract award is forthcoming, it will be presented to you at your meeting. Otherwise, the recommendation will be deferred until your next meeting on August 4. Fiscal Impacts: Unknown at this time. Follow Up Actions: N/A Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: N/A 0 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 23 2"` AGENDA ITEM 41:— MEETING DATE: July 7; 1993 - X,,ITY MGR. ORIGINATING DEPT. Maintenance t-,-' SUBJECT: INSTALLATION OF VOICE MAIL Recommended Motion(s): Staff recommends that City Council approve the Purchase Order to Advantage Telecom in the amount of $9,201 for the installation of Voice Mail. Report Summary: Due to the recent budget restraints, the resulting reduction in clerical staff and the increase in workload on those remaining, it is felt that Voice Mail is needed to assist in attempting to achieve "business as usual. ", Over the past several months, staff met with three vendors and received two written proposals and one verbal estimate on the cost of Voice Mail. Our present telecommunications vendor, Advantage Telecom, was the lowest bidder as their equipment could be added on, and is compatible with our present Toshiba Perception II. AT &T and Voice Plus, who quoted $52,815 and $30,000 respectively, both proposed completely new systems and equipment. From our inquiries, we determined that any system we installed would be comparable to any other. Our experience with Advantage Telecom is that they are reliable and less expensive than their competitors. Fiscal Impacts: The total price of $9,201 is under the budgeted amount of $10,000. Follow Up Actions: None required.. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: If Voice Mail is not added to our present system, staff will have a more difficult time in attempting to keep up their duties and responsibilities in addition to those who have been layed off. Attachments: 1) Purchase Order to Advantage Telecom 2) Proposal Information CLAIM ND. PURCHASE ORDER CITY OF SARATOGA PURCHASE 13777 FRUITVALE AVE. PHONE 867 -3438 ORDER NO. SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 [ (� We will not assume responsibility for marterial shipped not. 5 J 5 J covered by this order or not shipped according to instructions. DATE June 18,: 1993. TO r DELIVERY TO CITY OF SARATOGA Advantage Telecom 13777 FRUITVALE AVE. 683 E. Brokaw Road SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95071 San Jose,, CA 95112 L_. DEPARTMENT NAME ORGANIZATION ACCOUNT NO. PROJECT Maintenance 8083 4530 QUANTITY ARTICLES AND DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE AMOUNT Refurbished AVT' Voice Mail System per attached. Capacity 8 ports /4 hours $ 8500.00 Sales Tax 701.00 "TOTAL $ 9201.00 (Reduced budget /manpower necessitates more efficient clerical staff time.usage) ORDERED BY THIS ORDER NOT VALID UNLESS APPROVED CITY - I CERTIFY THAT THERE IS A SUFFICIENT UNENCUMBERED BALANCE IN THE VE �ACCT THE OUNT OF THIS ORDER. AND THAT ERE I FUNDS A HAVE SUF BEEN SET ASIDE FOR THE PAYMENT THER F. M. Tate Adm Secretar Harr Peacock City Manager Dan rinidad irector TITLE FINANCE DIRECTOR INSTRUCTIONS TO VENDORS 1. SEND TWO COPIES OF INVOICE. 2. ACKNOWLEDGE THIS ORDER PROMPTLY, ADVISING WHEN SHIPMENT WILL BE MADEOR.WORK PERFORMED. 3. SHOW PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER ON ALL INVOICES, PACKAGES, DELIVERY SLIPS AND ALL CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO THIS ORDER. vantage Advantage Telecom, Inc. 683 E. Brokaw Road f Telecom Inc. San Jose, CA 95112 Phone ) Y Outside CA 800 7778882 FAX (408) 453 -5447 QUOTE FOR CITY OF SARATOGA JUNE 4, 1993 CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE SARATOGA CA 95070 FIRM NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION= Install (1) Refurbished AVT Voice Mail System capacity is 8 ports and 12 hrs System is equipped for 8 ports and 4 hours SYSTEM ITEMIZATION (1) Call Express AVT 8 ports and 4 hours (1) DSTU - Analog Card Interfaced with Voice Mail SYSTEM PRICE..... ....... ............................... 8,500.00 SALES TAX ............. ............................... 701.00 TOTAL PRICE .................... ....................... 9,201.00 Total price includes installation and (1) year warranty on parts and labor. ADVANTAGE TELECOM, INC. I��n /vim Signature UV\E -4 -°I3 Date CITY OF SARATOGA Signature Date Authorized TOSHIBA Dealer Member: National Association of Telecommunication Dealer, Western Association of Equipment Lessors June 10, 1993 CITY OF SARATOGA Marlene Tate Operations 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Marlene, AT &T 224 Airport Parkway Suite 500 San Jose, CA 95110-1018 Thank you for allowing AT &T the opportunity to analyze the communications needs of your organization. Based on the in- formation you provided us, we are recommending the Merlin Legend with Audix Voice Power to best suit the needs of your business for both now and in the future. AT &T's recommendation for City of Saratoga provides you with a solution that covers all.of your concerns that were ex- pressed in our discussions. Our solution will provide your company with: Increased client satisfaction with improved call han- dling. Increased employee productivity through better message handling. Complete on -site management of your communications sys- tem with the flexiblity to easily make changes as needed. Protection of investment with continued support. We look forward to the successful implementation of AT &T's solution for your company. If you should have any questions after reviewing the attached communications proposal, please do not hesitate to call me. 0eyy l y, cPh erson Account Executive 408 - 452 -6268 MERLIN LEGEND for CITY OF SARATOGA EQUIPMENT CONFIGURATION ( 1) CONTROL UNIT ( 1) EXPANSION UNIT ( 1) ATTENDANT CONSOLE W /ADMINISTRATION CONTROL & BLF (59) 10 BUTTON DISPLAY SETS WITH BUILT IN SPEAKERPHONE ( 1) INTEGRATED SOLUTION III - AUDIX VOICE POWER 4 PORTS 4 HOURS STORAGE - SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION ( 1) MUSIC ON HOLD INTERFACE (60) RE -USE WIRE RUNS INSTALLATION PROGRAMMING TRAINING ONE YEAR WARRANTY OPTIONS (1) DID CIRCUIT PACK (1) 4 PORT VOICE BOARD INSTALLED CAPACITY (16) 2 WAY TRUNK LINES (64) DIGITAL TELEPHONES MAXIMUM CAPACITY (80) LINES (144)PHONES INVESTMENT ANALYSIS Merlin Legend Equipment Installation Shipping Subtotal Free Installation Total Investment FINANCE OPTIONS $ 50,776.00 $ 5,245.50 $ 119.88 $ 56,141.38 $< 3,325.50 > $ 52,815.88 1) Outright Purchase The City of Saratoga may provide their own financing arrange- ments or buy the system outright. Upfront cost in this case would be approximately 35% upfront, 35 % installation, and balance due net 30. Above prices do not reflect any appli- cable sales taxes that would apply. Maintenance (parts and labor) are included in purchase price for the first year. Multi -year maintenance (parts and labor) is available for $ 460.39 a month. Coverage is 8 -5 p.m. Mon- day through Friday. Maintenance price is a guaranteed fixed rate for 4 years. 2) 3rd Party Financing The City of Saratoga may finance the Merlin Legend through AT &T Credit Corporation which provides special pricing and interest rates for AT &T's Merlin Legend. Upfront cost is one months payment. Tax is not included. 60 Month FMV Lease $ 1,100.68 CITY OF SARATOGA MAINTENANCE PURCHASE /REQUISITION ORDER REQUEST DATE REQUESTED BY: /L% 147£ ORGANIZATION 4093 ACCOUNT # 34r,30 PROJECT# REASON FOR REQUEST: VEHICLE /EQUIPMENT# QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT AMOUNT .� AvT Af 70 /- ���,� yaps- COMPANY NAME: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP: r.� qs PHONE NUMBER: FED ID # /SS# CO dAE�e- "=O e 16 /,p S) - -j;f3o10oo.60 ,4,6 t1,-ti -.4 C,E - 4 37---:240/. OD SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM 7A- MEETING DATE: July 7, 1993 CITY MGR. ORIGINATING DEPT. City Manager 01061 SUBJECT: Parking Citations: Adoption of Schedule for Late Payment Fees, and Adoption of Procedures for City Adjudication of Contested Citations and Hearing Officer Recommended Motion(s): 1. Adopt Schedule for Late Payment Fees 2. Adopt Procedures for City Adjudication of Contested Parking Citations and Hearing Officer Report Summary: Last year the State legislature passed AB408 which decriminalizes parking violations and passes on responsibility for administering and collecting parking penalties to cities and other citing agencies. The law requires that the schedule of penalties for parking violations, late payment penalties, administrative fees, and other related charges for parking violations be established by the governing body of the jurisdiction where the notice of violation is issued. The City Council adopted a new bail /fine schedule for Municipal Code violations in May which went into effect June 1, 1993. New fees for violations of the City parking regulations were included. These fees incorporate administrative costs associated with processing and collection of parking violation penalties. Council is now requested to adopt the attached schedule for late payment penalties for citations for City Code and other State Vehicle Code violation delinquencies. AB408 also requires that cities establish written procedures to ensure a fair and impartial review of contested parking violations. Proposed procedures and a job description for the position of Hearing Officer are attached. In anticipation of a small volume of contested citations staff recommends that the City Manager designate a city management employee as the hearing officer to conduct administrative reviews. It is further recommended that the Assistant to the City Manager, Carolyn King, be designated. Fiscal Impacts: We have been doing in -house processing of parking citations issued within the City for several years. Revenue in 1992 was approximately $11,000. It is anticipated that the new penalty schedule will recover costs for the additional adjudication requirements of AB408, and provide at least the same level of revenue. Follow Up Actions: Implement all phases of AB408 as required. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: City will not be in compliance with legislation.. Attachments: 1. Municipal parking penalty schedule adopted in May 2. Proposed late penalty schedule 3. Procedures to ensure a fair and impartial review of contested parking violations. 4. Job description for Hearing Officer EFFECTIVE -6 /1/93 SARATOGA, CITY OF- PARKING VIOLATIONS SECTION -------- - - - - -- OFFENSE _ ---------------------------------------------------------------- BAIL COURT JAIL 9- 15.050 - - - - -- Parking where prohibited (red zone or posted signs) - - -- 35 - - - -- 2.50 - - -- 2.50 9- 15.060 Parking over posted time limit 30 2.50 2.50 .9- 15.090 Parking in a` commercial zone (, yellow zone ) 35 2.50 2.50 9- 15.100 Parking in a passenger loading zone ( white zone) 35 2.50- 2.50 9- 15.130 Parking in mail deposit zone 35 2.50 2.50 9- 25.010(a) __ Parking on-public street over 72 hrs 50 2.50 2.50 9- 25.020(a) Displaying vehicle for sale on public street 35 2.50 2.50 9- 25.020(b) Repairing vehicle on public street (emergency repair only) 35 2.50 2.50 9- 25.030 Parking com.veh. over 2011ong or over 8' high btwn 2000 -800 on street 50 2.50 2.50 9- 35.010 Drive, stop or park car upon road as to obstruct emergency vehicle 100 2.50 2.50 9- 40.050 Parking a commercial truck over 5 tons on residential street 100 2.50 2.50 15- 12.160(b)l Parking vehicle /boat /trailer over 120 hrs. within front yard setback 50 µ2.50 2.50 15- 35.110(a) Parking vehicle for sale on commercial property 40 2.50 2.50 July 7, 1993 Current and Proposed Late Payment Schedule Parking Citations Current Proposed Deliquent after 30 days $10 $15 Deliquent after 60 days 15 35 July 7, 1993 PROCEDURES FOR REVIEW OF CONTESTED PARKING REGULATIONS AB408 provides for a three -step process for administrative adjudication of contested parking citations. Requirements of AB408 are included in the following procedures. 1. Within 21 days after issuance 'of a citation, or 10 days from the mailing of a delinquency notice, the person receiving the citation may request that City staff conduct an investigative review. This request may be made in writing, by telephone, or in person, and must include an explanation of the reasons for contesting the parking violation. 2. Following a request for an investigative review, City staff (the Public Services Assistant, Community Service Officer, or other staff designated by the City Manager) will review the citation, DMV records if applicable, and the person's explanation to make a determination. If it is determined that the violation did not occur, or that the registered owner was not responsible for the violation, the City will cancel the notice of parking violation, and clear the records. 3. The Public Services Assistant, or other designated staff, will then communicate the results of the investigation by mail to.the person requesting the investigation. 4. If the person contesting the notice of violation or notice of delinquent parking violation is not satisfied with the results of the investigative review, the person may, within 15 days of the mailing of the results of the investigation, pay the City the amount of the parking penalty and request an administrative review. 5. The person requesting an administrative review shall complete the Request for Administrative Review form and mail or deliver it to the City. 6. The Hearing Officer designated by the City Manager will conduct an administrative review based upon the information provided by the contestant, and the City's records. If the contestant specifically requests an in- person hearing, an appointment will be scheduled at a mutually convenient time. 7. The City's final decision will be sent by first class mail to the person requesting the hearing. If the decision is in favor of the contestant, the amount paid for the parking penalty will be returned. 8. Within 20 days after the mailing of the City's final decision, the contestant may file an appeal to the municipal court. The fee paid to the court for filing for an appeal is $25. The appellant must provide a copy of the notice of appeal to the City, either in person or by first class mail. If the appellant prevails in the appeal to the court, the $25 fee and the amount of the harking penalty paid will be refunded by the City in accordance with the judgment of the court. 9. Payment for parking penalties may be made by cash, personal check, or money order. Personal check will only be accepted if made payable to the City of Saratoga, and submitted along with the person's address, and other identification as may be required by City staff. July 1, 1993 City of Saratoga Position Description HEARING OFFICER The parking hearing officer is designated by the City Manager, and is a management employee of the City of Saratoga. The hearing officer's continued employment, performance evaluation, compensation and benefits are not directly or indirectly linked to the amount of fines collected by the City. Qualifications: Ability to conduct an administrative review in accordance with established written procedures; ability to understand and apply rules, regulations, ordinances, statues, policies and guidelines to the matter at hand; ability to deal in stressful proceedings while adhering to the adjudicatory requirements; skill and ability to communicate in writing and orally in an effective manner and to exercise control over hearing proceedings. Experience in dealing with the public and a commitment to providing a fair opportunity to be heard; experience in evaluating evidence and using objective thought processes in rendering decision. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 2-334 AGENDA ITEM: MEETING DATE: July 7, 1993 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Planning CITY MGR. APPROVAL SUBJECT: St. Archangel Michael Church - Parking Lot Lighting Response to Council Direction of May 5, 1993 Recommended Motion: Determine if light standards are to be removed and direct staff to take appropriate action. Report Summary: On May 5, 1993, the City Council received and filed a staff report recommending delay in removing non - permitted lighting standards located in the church parking lot. The delay was to allow the Church Board time to file a development application which would include the parking lot lighting. The City Council requested this item be tabled to July 7 for further consideration if an application was not filed. The Council felt that a directive to remove the light standards should come from the Council itself and not from staff. As of June 30, 1993, no application has been filed nor have the light standards been removed. Staff is requesting Council direction on the removal of the lighting standards. Fiscal Impacts• None Follow Up Actions: Dependent upon City Council direction to staff. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: The light standards will remain, although not allowed to be used for parking lot lighting. cc: Rev. Fr. Rade Stokich SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. MEETING DATE: May 5, 1993 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Planning AGENDA ITEM: CITY MGR. APPROVAL SUBJECT: St. Archangel Michael Church - Parking Lot Lighting Response to Oral Communication of April 7, 1993 Recommended Motion: Receive and file letter to Reverend Fr. Rade Stokich. Report Summary:. The City Council has received complaints regarding the use of parking lot lights at the church located at 18870 Allendale Avenue. The Planning Director met with Father Stokich to discuss the use of the lights and the appropriate process to request their retention. The attached letter was sent to Father Stokich summarizing our conversation. Staff feels these agreed -to conditions are reasonable. The primary objective of not using the lights will be adhered to while the application process allows the church to request an overall review of lighting needs for the property. Fiscal Impacts: None Follow Up Actions: Staff will monitor application process. If application is not submitted by June 28, 1993, staff will direct light standards to be removed. Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: If City Council feels that the light standards should be removed immediately and not considered as part of a new church application request, staff will direct church to remove standards. U 4 C�B�4 Qq BOO C�L� 137.77 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson April 28, 1993 Ann Marie Burger Willem Kohler Reverend Fr. Rade Stokich Victor Monia St. Archangel Michael Church Karen Tucker 18870 Allendale Avenue _ Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Parking Lot Lighting Dear Father Stokich: This is to follow up our meeting of April 27, 1993, regarding the church parking lot lighting. As we discussed, City files do not indicate approval of the location or height of the light standards used to illuminate the parking lot. Therefore, the lights must not be used and the light standards must be removed. As we discussed, you have the right to request approval of the lighting by the Planning Commission as part of an application process. You indicated that the Church Board is finalizing plans for submittal to the Planning Commission for the construction of a new church facility. It is anticipated that these plans will be submitted to the City within the next sixty days. We agreed to the following: • The lights will not be turned on for any purpose until approval by the City or part of a formal review process. • The light standards can remain provided they are included with the new application that will be submitted to the City within the next sixty days. • If the new application is not submitted within sixty days (that is, by June 28, 1993), the light standards must be removed. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, PAUL L. URTIS Planning Director PLC:cw Printed on recycled paper. City Council Minutes 4 May 5, 1993 Mayor Anderson stated it is important to have language in the petition regarding the up -front costs. Mr. Perlin stated this topic will be returned to the Council at their first meeting in June. 2) Report from City Engineer on Status of Hakone Gardens Water System Project City Engineer Perlin stated bids will open in June. He noted the contractor will be working certain hours sous not to interfere with the rentals. 3) Report from Planning Director on Complaint about Lighting,at St. Michael Archangel Church Mayor Anderson stated the Council has to decide if the lights should be removed or not.. Councilmember Tucker asked if someone put up the lights without a permit, does the-property owner have- thee.right.to_apply for the permit without removing the lights. Planning Director Curtis stated the property owner does have the right to apply for the permit without removing the lights, noting there may be some modifications when an application is filed. He stated he feels confident that the lights will stay off. He noted the review will take place as part of a new application and modifications may be requested. He stated if an application is not filed within 60 days, the light standards should come down. MONIA /TUCKER MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN JULY. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Kohler absent). B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Bert Martel, 14420 Fruitvale, expressed concern about the wildlife sanctuary at West Valley College. He asked the City Council to look into this - matter.. Mr. Martel noted he has spoken to the West Valley College Board, but got no response. Mr. Martel presented his comments to the Council in- writing. ' - Mr. Dare Newmark, 19165 Austin Way, stated he is the ASB President Elect at West Valley College and would like to work with Mr. Martel on this matter. Mayor Anderson suggested Mr. Newmark attend the meeting with the Stream Keepers. Mr. Peacock stated staff has not set up a meeting at this time. He stated the major issues for discussion are the protocols and training basis which have been established. Councilmember, Monia suggested staff find out what agency, is responsible for the creek area that goes through the College. C. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1) Aaron Katz, P.O. Box 116, concerning legal costs associated with Public Nuisance near 14272' Saratoga Avenue.- Receive and file. TUCKER /BURGER MOVED TO RECEIVE AND FILE. PASSED 4 -0 -1 (Kohler absent) . 2) . Stan Bogosian, 20630 Lomita Ave., resigning from Planning Commission. Staff recommends that the City Council accept the resignation and determine whether to appoint applicants from previous recruitment or re- advertise. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. Z 3 3 S MEETING DATE: ORIGINATING DEPT. City Manager AGENDA ITEM CITY MGR. .P.� SUBJECT: Revision to City Lay -Off Policy and Procedures Recommended Motion(s): Report Summary: Adopt policy and procedures At the June 16, 1993, Council meeting, Council gave direction to staff to add the extension of two months of medical insurance benefits to the City's existing policy and procedures statement regarding work force reduction lay -offs. The attached statement of policy and procedures makes that change. Fiscal Impacts: Impact will vary depending on the existing medical insurance coverage choice and amount of established City contribution to premium at the time of lay -off. Follow Up Actions: Incorporate policy and procedures statement into City personnel and administrative manual and employee handbook Consequences of Not Acting on the Recommended Motions: Council direction will not be formalized O:\exec.sum (rev.2 -3 -93) :r April 22, 1993 Revised June 17, 1993 CITY OF SARATOGA Lay -Off Policy and Procedures Section 2- 40.020 of the Personnel Ordinance defines Lay -Off as: the separation of employees from the active work force due to lack of work or funds, or to the abolition of positions by the City' Council for the above reasons, or due to organization changes. The City's adopted personnel rules include the following: 10.01 Statement of Intent: Whenever, in the judgment of the City Council, it becomes necessary to abolish any position or employment, the employee holding such position or employment may be laid off or demoted without disciplinary action and without right of appeal. 10.02 Notification: Employees to be laid off shall be given, whenever possible, at least fourteen (14) calendar days prior notice. Lay offs will be made on a department by department basis. In addition to elimination of a position, lay off can include reclassification to a position at a lower rate of pay, and /or reduction in hours. The names of employees who are laid off or demoted in accordance with the personnel rules will be kept on a reemployment list. Names on this reemployment list will be carried for one year from the date of the lay off. This list will be used when a vacancy arises in the same or a lower class of position. Employees who are offered and refuse reemployment will be dropped from the list. Employees reemployed in a lower class, or on a temporary basis, will be continued on the list for the higher position for the one year. The customary procedures for termination of employment will be used for employees who have been laid off, with the following exception: The City will extend medical insurance benefits for two months to an employee who has been laid off. During this two month period, the City will continue to pay the pre- viously established contribution for the employee's medical insurance premium. SARATOGA //CITY COUNCIL / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY N04 2- AGENDA b AGENDA ITEM � v MEETING DATE: July 8, 1993 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: City Manger's Office SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Execution of Joint Powers Agreement for Participating in CDBG Program in Santa Clara County for Fiscal Years 1994- 1996. Recommended Motion: Approve Resolution authorizing. execution of Joint Powers Agreement for Saratoga to continue participation in the Urban County Community Development Block�Grant Program for fiscal years 1994 - 1996. Report Summary: The purpose of the JPA is to create a legal entity out of smaller jurisdictions in'Santa Clara County so that these jurisdictions are eligible for Community Development Block Grant funds under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974. Saratoga has participated in the program as a member of the urban county since the program's inception. The terms of the Joint Powers Agreement remain unchanged from the previous. Agreement for fiscal. years 1991- 1993. Distribution of funds and other related policies and procedures are not included in the JPA.. These items will be included as part of the City /County contract for each fiscal year. Fiscal Impacts: Saratoga will.receive annual allocations of CDBG funds based upon distribution formula agreed upon-by the participating agencies. Follow Up Actions; Forward Cooperation Agreement for fiscal years 1994- 1996 to the County of Santa Clara.. Conseauences of Not,Actina on the Recommended.Motions: The City of Saratoga would be ineligible -to apply directly for CDBG funds and therefore.would lose these funds. Attachments: 1. Resolution Authorizing Execution of the JPA 2. Cooperation Agreement for Fiscal Years 1994 -.1996 Motion and Vote: