Santa Clara County Grand Nexus MOU Grand Nexus MOU Page 1 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE, AND
BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
FOR THE
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”), effective November 1, 2024, is entered into by
and among the City of Gilroy, the Town of Los Altos Hills, the Town of Los Gatos, the City of
Mountain View, the City of Santa Clara, the City of Sunnyvale, and Baird + Driskell + Abrams
Community Planning, dba Community Planning Collaborative, together referred to herein as the
"PARTIES."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Santa Clara County and the cities and towns in Santa Clara County have a strong history
of collaboration and resource sharing on various planning studies and initiatives as part of the Santa
Clara County Planning Collaborative, which includes the City of Gilroy, the Town of Los Altos Hills,
the Town of Los Gatos, the City of Mountain View, the City of Santa Clara, and the City of
Sunnyvale, among other jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, one such planning study initiated by the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative is the
Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study (“PROJECT”); and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this PROJECT is to study the feasibility and address the legal
requirements of inclusionary housing and commercial linkage fee requirements by sharing analysis
and resources for greater efficiency for the six jurisdictions participating in this collaborative effort,
which include the City of Gilroy, the Town of Los Altos Hills, the Town of Los Gatos, the City of
Mountain View, the City of Santa Clara, and the City of Sunnyvale (collectively, “PARTICIPATING
JURISDICTIONS”); and
WHEREAS, through competitive bidding and a request for proposal (“RFP”) process facilitated by
the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative, Strategic Economics (“CONTRACTOR”) was chosen
as the firm to provide consulting services for the outreach, analysis and planning associated with
the PROJECT; and
WHEREAS, Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning, the consulting firm for the Santa Clara
County Planning Collaborative, has served as the project manager (“PROJECT MANAGER”) for this
collaborative effort through initial formation and the RFP process to ensure that the voice of each
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION is heard and their needs are addressed; and
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 2 of 20
WHEREAS, Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will continue to serve as the PROJECT
MANAGER for the collaborative effort for the duration of the PROJECT; and
WHEREAS, the City of Sunnyvale will serve as fiscal agent (“FISCAL AGENT”) for the PROJECT and will
enter into a separate contract with CONTRACTOR and oversee the payment of invoices on behalf of
the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS; and
WHEREAS, all PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS enter into this Memorandum of Understanding with the
PROJECT MANAGER outlining the roles of each PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION, the CONTRACTOR, the
PROJECT MANAGER, and the funding obligations for the PROJECT;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the PARTIES agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
I.PURPOSE
The purpose of this MOU is to memorialize the understanding among the PARTIES that (1) the
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS wish to participate in the PROJECT, (2) the PARTICIPATING
JURISDICTIONS agree to the utilization of the CONTRACTOR and PROJECT MANAGER as the consulting
team, and (3) the City of Sunnyvale is serving as a FISCAL AGENT to facilitate the PROJECT.
II.EXHIBIT AND ATTACHMENTS
The following exhibits and attachments are attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this
Agreement by this reference:
Exhibit A – Strategic Economics Work Program and Cost Proposal
Exhibit B – Project Management Scope from Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning
Exhibit C – Project Budget and Agency Costs
III.PARTIES, ROLES, AND RESPONSIBILITIES
A.FISCAL AGENT: The City of Sunnyvale shall serve as the FISCAL AGENT for the project and
enter into a separate contract with CONTRACTOR. All payments and invoices shall be
reviewed and recommended for payment by the PROJECT MANAGER and paid by the FISCAL
AGENT on behalf of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS to the CONTRACTOR. The FISCAL
AGENT shall not be responsible for paying any reimbursement requests or other
expenditures that are not in compliance with this MOU or any other MOUs executed by
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS regarding the PROJECT. The FISCAL AGENT shall not be
responsible for determining the accuracy of each PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION’S invoices.
B.PARTICPATING JURISDICTION: The City of Gilroy, the Town of Los Altos Hills, the Town of
Los Gatos, the City of Mountain View, the City of Santa Clara, and the City of Sunnyvale shall
be “PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS” for the purposes of this MOU. Each of the
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 3 of 20
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS shall provide funding as outlined in Exhibit C for the PROJECT
and participate in obligations outlined in the Work Program set forth in Exhibit A, including
participation in the overall plan development and implementation.
C. PROJECT MANAGER: Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning, a California
corporation, shall serve as PROJECT MANAGER and shall manage and implement all aspects
of the PROJECT, in accordance with the Project Management Scope set forth in Exhibit B.
D. CONTRACTOR: Strategic Economics, Inc., a California corporation, shall serve as the
consultant team to carry out any or all aspects of the PROJECT as the CONTRACTOR, in
accordance with the Work Program set forth in Exhibit A.
IV. FUNDING AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. Each of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS agrees to pay the FISCAL AGENT for their
prescribed portion as set forth in Exhibit C, within 60 calendar days of the executed MOU.
1. The CONTRACTOR shall submit invoices to the PROJECT MANAGER on a monthly
basis for PROJECT activities. Monthly invoices shall include an itemized report of
costs incurred by each PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION. A brief narrative progress
report shall be included with each invoice.
2. The PROJECT MANAGER shall review and submit the CONTRACTOR’S invoices to
the FISCAL AGENT on a monthly basis for PROJECT activities.
3. Upon recommendation of payment by the PROJECT MANAGER, the FISCAL AGENT
shall pay CONTRACTOR’s monthly invoices.
4. The FISCAL AGENT and PROJECT MANAGER shall provide a quarterly accounting of
invoices, charged and remaining funds for each of the PARTICIPATING
JURISDICTIONS. A final accounting shall be submitted to all PARTICIPATING
JURISDICTIONS with any remaining funds returned or an additional invoice if
required.
B. The FISCAL AGENT agrees that it will not be entitled to reimbursement of its costs incurred
while performing its obligations as set forth in Section III.A above.
C. In the event that the actual costs of completing the PROJECT’s Work Program, as set forth in
Exhibit A, exceed the budget as outlined in Exhibit C (including the contingency budget
amounts), the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS shall confer and, if the majority of the
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS are in agreement, decide to either to reduce the PROJECT
Work Program and/or to provide additional funding based on mutual agreements in writing,
subject to approval by their respective legislative bodies if applicable. All PARTIES agree to
use best efforts in such case to reach agreement without causing a PROJECT delay.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 4 of 20
V. TERM
This MOU shall remain in effect from November 1, 2024 to June 30, 2026, unless terminated
sooner pursuant to Section XIII below.
VI.AMENDMENTS
A.This MOU may be amended only by the written agreement executed by all PARTIES unless
the change constitutes a minor modification as described herein. A contact, or designee,
from each of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS is authorized to make minor
modifications to Exhibits A or B regarding the Work Program or the scope of work to
respond to necessary changes as the PROJECT evolves, so long as the minor modification
(1) impacts only that PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION desiring the modification and (2) does
not exceed $5,000.00. Such minor modifications to the Work Program or scopes of work
shall be documented in writing, but shall not require an executed amendment to this
MOU, and such minor modifications shall be considered incorporated into this MOU.
B.If any of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS requires additional services that exceed the
approved total cost estimate in Exhibit C, then such services shall be subject to an
individual service agreement between that PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION and the
CONTRACTOR without the participation of the FISCAL AGENT. The FISCAL AGENT shall not
serve as the fiscal agent for any individual service agreements with the CONTRACTOR.
C.This MOU can be amended, modified, or supplemented only in writing(s) signed by all
PARTIES. No oral understanding or agreement, present or prior, not incorporated herein
shall be binding on any of the PARTIES and the terms of this MOU shall supersede any such
understanding or agreement.
VII.INDEMNIFICATION
A.Each PARTY shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the FISCAL AGENT and its officials,
officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives from any and all claims, suits, or
actions of every name, kind, and description brought by a third party which arise out of the
terms and conditions of this MOU (collectively, “Claims”); provided that such Claims are the
direct result from the acts or omissions of the PARTIES and/or its officials, officers,
employees, agents, and representatives.
B.Each PARTY shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the FISCAL AGENT and its officials,
officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives from and against any and all
claims for wages, salaries, benefits, taxes, and all other withholdings and charges payable to,
or in respect to, the PARTIES’ representatives for services provided under this MOU.
C.FISCAL AGENT shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the PARTIES and its officers,
employees, agents, and representatives from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every
name, kind, and description brought by a third party which arise out of the terms and
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 5 of 20
conditions of this MOU and which result from the acts or omissions of FISCAL AGENT and/or
its officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives.
D.The duty of each party to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the other as set forth herein
shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
E.In the event of concurrent negligence (or intentional acts) of FISCAL AGENT and/or its
officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and representatives on the one hand, and
the PARTIES and/or its officers, employees, agents, volunteers, and representatives, on the
other hand, then the liability for any and all claims for injuries or damage to persons and/or
property which arise out of terms and conditions of this MOU shall be apportioned
according to the California theory of comparative fault.
F.PARTIES’ responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations shall survive the
termination or completion of this MOU.
VIII.NOTICES
A.All notices and communications deemed by any party to be necessary or desirable must be
in writing and may be given by personal delivery to a representative of the other party or by
mailing the same, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
If to the City of Gilroy:
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
Sharon Goei, Community Development Director
408-846-0250
sharon.goei@cityofgilroy.org
If to the Town of Los Altos Hills:
Los Altos Hills
26379 Fremont Rd
Los Altos Hills, CA 94923
Arika Birdsong-Miller, City Clerk
650-941-7222
amiller@losaltoshills.ca.gov
If to the Town of Los Gatos:
Town of Los Gatos
110 E. Main Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030
Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
408-354-6879
jpaulson@losgatosca.gov
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 6 of 20
If to the City of Mountain View:
City of Mountain View: Affordable Housing Division
500 Castro Street
Mountain View, CA 94041
Julie Barnard, Affordable Housing Manager
650-903-6011
julie.barnard@mountainview.gov
If to the City of Santa Clara:
City of Santa Clara, Housing and Community Services Division
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Adam Marcus, Housing and Community Services Manager
408-615-2491
amarcus@SantaClaraCA.gov
If to the City of Sunnyvale:
City of Sunnyvale Housing Division
456 W. Olive Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Ryan Dyson, Housing Specialist
408-730-7466
rdyson@sunnyvale.ca.gov
If to Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning:
Community Planning Collaborative
2639 Benvenue Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94704
Joshua Abrams, Principal
510-761-6001
abrams@planningcollaborative.com
B. The address to which mailings may be made may be changed from time to time by notice
mailed as described above. Any notice given by mail shall be deemed given on the day after
that on which it is deposited in the United States Mail as provided above.
IX. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
The PARTIES agree and understand that the work/services performed by any of the PARTIES or any
consultant retained by any of the PARTIES under this MOU are performed as independent contractors
and not as employees or agents of the other party. Nothing herein shall be deemed to create any
joint venture between the FISCAL AGENT, PROJECT MANAGER, or any of the PARTICIPATING
JURISDICTIONS.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 7 of 20
X. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
No PARTY shall assign, transfer, or otherwise substitute its interest in this MOU, nor its obligations,
without the prior written consent of the other PARTY. All obligations created under this MOU shall be
binding on, and the rights established herein shall inure to the benefit of, any successors or assigns of
the PARTIES.
XI. COMPLIANCE
The PARTIES must comply with any and all laws, statues, ordinances, rules, regulations, or
requirements of the federal, state, and local governments, and any agency thereof, which relate to or
in any manner affect the performance of this MOU.
XII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The PARTIES agree that any dispute arising from this MOU that is not resolved within 30 days by the
PARTIES’ representatives responsible for the administration of this MOU shall be set forth in writing
to the attention of the FISCAL AGENT’s Director of Community Development Department for
resolution. In the event resolution cannot be reached, the PARTIES may submit the dispute to
mediation by a neutral party mutually agreed to by the PARTIES prior to initiating any formal action in
court.
XIII. TERMINATION
Any PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION may terminate its participation in this MOU, with or without
cause, upon thirty (30) calendar days' prior written notice to all PARTIES. Such PARTICIPATING
JURISDICTION who terminates its participation in this MOU shall be responsible for its pro rata share
of all Individual Task costs as set forth in Exhibit B that are incurred by the FISCAL AGENT up through
the effective date of termination. Any PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION who terminates its participation
in this MOU shall still be responsible for the entirety of its prescribed portion of all Shared Task costs
as set forth in Exhibit B. This MOU shall continue in effect among the remaining PARTIES.
In addition, the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS may terminate this MOU at any time, with or without
cause, by unanimous vote of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS. Any such action shall specify the
date on which the termination shall be effective.
XIV. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
If and when a PARTY identifies an actual or potential conflict of interest among one or more of the
PARTIES, that PARTY shall send written notification to all PARTIES. The PARTY with the actual or
potential conflict shall respond to the notice within three (3) business days. The response shall indicate
whether the PARTY agrees or disagrees that a conflict exists. If the PARTY agrees that a conflict exists,
then that PARTY may take appropriate action to cure the conflict, if possible, and shall describe its
corrective actions in its response. If the PARTY disagrees, or cannot cure an actual conflict, the PARTIES
shall follow the dispute resolution process provided under Section 12, Dispute Resolution, in an effort
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 8 of 20
to resolve the conflict. The applicable approving body/legislative body of the PARTY shall schedule a
special meeting if necessary to meet this timeline. All notices under this section shall be provided under
Section 8, Notices.
XV. COOPERATIVE DRAFTING
This MOU has been drafted through a cooperative effort of the PARTIES, and all PARTIES have had an
opportunity to have the MOU reviewed and receive advice by qualified legal counsel. No PARTY shall be
considered the drafter of this MOU, and no presumption or rule that an ambiguity shall be construed
against the PARTY drafting the clause shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this MOU.
XVI. COUNTERPARTS
This MOU may be executed in any number of counterparts, and each executed counterpart shall have
the same force and effect as an original instrument and as if all signing PARTIES had signed the same
instrument.
XVII. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this MOU is be deemed invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent
jurisdiction, that provision shall be reformed and/or construed consistently with applicable law as
nearly as possible to reflect the original intentions of this MOU; and in any event, the remaining
provisions of this MOU shall remain in full force and effect.
XVIII. GOVERNING LAW
This MOU shall be governed by the laws of the State of California as applied to contracts that are
made and performed entirely in California. Proper venue for legal shall be exclusively vested in a state
court in the County of Santa Clara. The parties agree that subject matter and personal jurisdiction are
proper in state court in the County of Santa Clara, and waive all venue objections.
XIX. NO WAIVER
No waiver of any default or breach of any covenant of this MOU by any PARTY shall be implied from
any omission by the PARTY to take action on account of such default, if such default persists or is
repeated. No express waiver shall affect any default not specified in the express waiver, and the
express waiver shall be operative only for the time or extent stated. The consent or approval by any
PARTY to or of any act by a PARTY requiring further consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive
or render unnecessary consent or approval to any subsequent, similar acts.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have executed this MOU as follows:
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 9 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
CITY OF GILROY
By: ____________________________
Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
ATTEST:
By:_________________________________
Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ____________________________
Andy Faber, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 10 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
By: ____________________________
Peter Pirnejad, City Manager
ATTEST:
By:_________________________________
Arika Birdsong-Miller, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ____________________________
Steven Mattas, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 11 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
TOWN OF LOS GATOS
By: ____________________________
Joel Paulson, Community Development Director
ATTEST:
By:_________________________________
Wendy Wood, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ____________________________
Gabrielle Whelan, Town Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 12 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
By: ____________________________
Kimbra McCarthy, City Manager
ATTEST:
By:_________________________________
Heather Glaser, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ____________________________
Jennifer Logue, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 13 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
By: ____________________________
Jōvan D. Grogan, City Manager
ATTEST:
By:_________________________________
Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ____________________________
Glen R. Googins, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 14 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
CITY OF SUNNYVALE
By: ____________________________
Tim Kirby, City Manager
ATTEST:
By:_________________________________
David Carnahan, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ____________________________
Rebecca Moon, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Grand Nexus MOU Page 15 of 20
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
AMONG
CITY OF GILROY, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CITY
OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
and BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
for the
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY
The individuals executing this MOU represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
The undersigned approve the terms and conditions of this MOU.
BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS
COMMUNITY PLANNING
By: ____________________________
Joshua Abrams, Principal
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
EXHIBIT A
WORK PROGRAM and COST PROPOSAL
from Strategic Economics
Exhibits A and B from Contract dated November 1, 2024 between City of Sunnyvale
and Strategic Economics
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 1
SANTA CLARA COUNTY GRAND NEXUS AND
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Final Scope of Work and Schedule | September 27, 2024
SELECTED SERVICES BY PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION
Residential
Nexus Study
Residential
Feasibility /
Inclusionary
Study
Residential In-
Lieu Fee Study
Commercial
Nexus Study
Commercial
Feasibility
Study
Gilroy X X
Los Altos Hills X X X
Los Gatos X X
Mountain View X X
Santa Clara (city) X X X X X
Sunnyvale X X
Total Jurisdictions 2 3 3 4 4
TASK 1: PROJECT INITIATION AND GROUP KICK-OFF MEETING
1.1: REVIEW OF BACKGROUND MATERIALS
Strategic Economics will review background information provided by Community Planning
Collaborative (CPC) on the demographics and housing conditions in Santa Clara County, as well as any
recently completed nexus studies and financial feasibility studies.
1.2: DATA REQUESTS
Strategic Economics will submit data requests for the project to CPC, including descriptions of recent
development activity, local active residential developers, current affordable housing policy information
in the participating cities, etc.
1.3: COLLECTION OF EXISTING POLICIES AND FEES
Strategic Economics will research and summarize information on residential affordable housing
impact fees, commercial linkage fees, inclusionary requirements, and in-lieu fees for the participating
cities and other comparable communities in the Bay Area. This information provides context for current
policies in the participating cities and for the relative policies and fee levels enacted by communities
competing for development activity and affordable housing production.
1.2: GROUP KICK-OFF MEETING
The purpose of this meeting is to finalize the scope of work and schedule, review the proposed
methodologies, and obtain any additional background materials or key information. An agenda will be
provided in advance of the meeting. It is assumed that CPC staff would convene the meeting and only
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 2
one meeting would be held. At the kick-off meeting, the Strategic Economics team will discuss the
types of deliverables that will be completed. The meeting will also be used to establish protocols for
communication, project management, and timely review of deliverables, given the complexity of this
multi-jurisdictional project. This meeting is envisioned to be conducted in-person but can also be held
virtually if preferred by participants.
TASK 2: CITY-SPECIFIC KICK-OFF MEETINGS
Strategic Economics will conduct a virtual kick-off meeting with each participating jurisdiction—
scheduled by CPC—to inquire about specific goals, needs, and context. The meeting will also be used
to clarify data and document requests.
TASK 3: STAKEHOLDER AND WORK-IN-PROGRESS MEETINGS DURING RESEARCH AND DATA
GATHERING PHASE (TASKS 4 THROUGH 6)
3.1: TWO DEVELOPER STAKEHOLDER GROUP VIRTUAL MEETINGS
Strategic Economics will conduct two virtual convenings of developers of rental and housing products
in Santa Clara County, with participants identified based on input from participating cities and review
of development activity. These convenings will be used to share information about the project, collect
information about current development conditions by product type, and to vet relevant assumptions
applied in the analyses.
3.2: HOUSING ADVOCATES VIRTUAL MEETING
During a virtual meeting with local housing advocates, Strategic Economics will provide information
about the goals and purpose of the study and solicit feedback about how inclusionary policies and
affordable housing mitigation fees can help meet the housing affordability challenges in Santa Clara
County. Strategic Economics will work with the participating cities to identify housing advocacy
organizations and active citizens, and will then send invitations, organize, plan, and facilitate the
meeting.
3.3: PUBLIC VIRTUAL MEETING
Strategic Economics will provide information about the goals and purpose of the study and solicit
feedback about how inclusionary policies and affordable housing mitigation fees can help meet the
housing affordability challenges in Santa Clara County during a virtual meeting with the public.
Strategic Economics will organize and facilitate the meeting, but CPC and individual cities will be
responsible for publicizing and promoting the meeting. The virtual meeting is envisioned to consist of
a presentation about the project, a question-and-answer period, and a follow-up survey that invites
participants to provide information about their priorities and feedback on the project.
3.4: TWO WORK-IN-PROGRESS PRESENTATIONS FOR ALL PARTICIPATING CITIES
Strategic Economics will facilitate up to two total virtual meetings, including all participating cities, to
share interim information about project status and interim findings. CPC will organize the meeting
dates/times.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 3
TASK 4: RESIDENTIAL NEXUS ANALYSIS
TASK 4.1: SHARED BASE RESIDENTIAL NEXUS MODEL
In this sub-task, Strategic Economics will prepare the residential nexus study components that are
broadly applicable to all cities requesting this analysis. Optional Task C specifies additional scope
and budget to further customize the nexus model affordability gaps for cities requesting this service.
The purpose of the residential nexus model is to estimate the increase in demand for affordable
housing associated with growth in new residential development for “missing middle” housing
developments with fewer than ten housing units. The primary driver for this increase in demand for
affordable housing is the growth in expenditures for goods and services attributable to buyers and
renters of new market rate housing units in Santa Clara County cities.
The residential nexus analysis assumes that an increase in household expenditures associated with
new housing units results in employment growth. Some of these new employees can afford market
rate housing (based on household income), and some will earn incomes below the level needed to
afford market rate housing. It is this second group of employee-households that will face financial
challenges, if they want to work and live in the same city.
The list below provides a summary of the analytic steps involved. This analysis answers the question,
“What is the maximum impact fee that can be charged?” This analysis does not address “At what level
should the housing impact fee be set?” This second question is addressed in sub-task 4.2 for each
relevant city.
• Step 1. Define the residential prototypes that represent new market rate housing development
with fewer than ten housing units in the applicable communities (or, if too few example projects
are being built, the prototype can be based on generic examples of these products).
• Step 2. Estimate household incomes of buyers and renters of new market rate units.
• Step 3. Estimate economic impacts of new buyers and renters using a regional input/output
model.
• Step 4. Estimate the number of new worker households and annual household incomes.
• Step 5. Estimate the demand for affordable housing from new worker households.
• Step 6. Estimate the aggregate affordability gap of new households requiring affordable
housing.
• Step 7. Estimate the maximum nexus-based fee per unit and per square foot for the prototype.
The methodology routinely used for the Step 6 affordability gap calculation is as follows:
Step 1: Calculate affordable rents and sales prices for income groups to be served under proposed
programs for participating cities. The team will confirm the target income groups with each city and
establish four standardized income groups for purposes of all analyses. Most commonly, renter
housing affordability gaps are calculated for very low, low, and moderate-income households. In
most Bay Area cities, the housing affordability gap for ownership housing is calculated for
moderate-income households (and possibly for low-income households as well). Affordable rents
and sales prices will be calculated using standard methods used by state or local programs.
Step 2: Calculate housing affordability gap for ownership housing, based on the difference
between the cost of developing a new modest, residential unit (of the appropriate size for the
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 4
household) and the amount a household can afford to pay at various income levels and household
sizes.
Step 3: Calculate the housing affordability gap for rental housing based on the difference between
the annual capitalized value of the net affordable rent and the construction cost of the new rental
unit. Again, separate calculations are made for each income group and household size included in
the gap analysis.
TASK 4.2: CITY-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND AB 602 ANALYSIS
Strategic Economics will recommend a potential range of impact fees for each city based on the
results of the financial feasibility analysis in Task 5, and review of the fees charged in similar or
competing jurisdictions.
The fee calculated under Task 4.1 or Optional Task C represents the maximum fee that can be levied
on new residential units. Selecting the actual fee requires sensitivity to local conditions. Strategic
Economics will review and consider the factors described below:
Fees charged in neighboring jurisdictions. It is standard practice to consider the fee levels and
requirements of neighboring and other peer jurisdictions. This analysis would compare
recommended fees in Santa Clara County with those charged in other similar Bay Area jurisdictions
(to be identified in conjunction with city staff).
Financial Feasibility of Potential Fee Levels. The final recommendations for fees ideally are set so
that they do not deter future development; the supportable fees determination will be informed by
the financial feasibility analysis completed in Task 5. There are several ways to assess financial
feasibility of potential fee levels:
• Assess how much the imposition of a fee will add to current fees on new residential
developments.
• Determine the percentage of total development costs represented by fees. Strategic
Economics will determine the financial feasibility of various fee options (including the
maximum nexus justified fee resulting from this analysis and lower fee scenarios) by
estimating the increase in total development costs resulting from the fees.
• Conduct financial feasibility sensitivity analyses (as part of Task 5) to determine how
changing rents/prices, required return, and construction costs would interact with the
ability to support different fee levels.
Based on efforts above, information on recommended fee levels for all cities included in the study will
be provided. Then, during any public process described in the optional task section below, these fees
will be presented to public officials to elicit feedback.
An AB 602 analysis will be completed for each participating city after that city selects a desired
residential impact fee level. AB 602 requires the nexus study for a new fee to “identify the existing
level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an
explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.” (Government Code § 66016.5). Strategic
Economics will provide sufficient analysis and findings to meet the AB 602 requirements by first
identifying the existing ratio of deed-restricted, “family” affordable units in each city to the number of
housing units in the city. Then Strategic Economics will calculate the level of service associated with
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 5
the proposed residential impact fee, or the number of family affordable units that could be funded per
household created by new development. Finally, Strategic Economics will prepare findings justifying
the need for additional affordable housing funding.
TASK 5: RESIDENTIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY AND INCLUSIONARY ANALYSIS
TASK 5.1: SHARED BASE RESIDENTIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY
In coordination with CPC and the participating cities, Strategic Economics will develop up to five
development project prototypes, ensuring that they represent the ownership and rental residential
development types being built in the cities. The prototypes will vary based on assumptions regarding
building type, density, unit size, ground-floor retail area, parking ratios, etc. The prototypes will be
shared with CPC and the cities for comment before arriving at a final set of assumptions for the pro
forma feasibility analysis.
Upon establishing the prototypes, Strategic Economics will research inputs and assumptions for the
financial feasibility analysis. The key inputs into the pro forma model are the revenues (rents/sales
prices), development costs, and land costs. Strategic Economics will collect and summarize data on
construction costs in the county, using a combination of real estate industry publications, online
information, and interviews with local developers and brokers. At this stage of the analysis, Strategic
Economics will also research and apply generic rents/prices and land values, which will then be
customized for the participating cities in sub-task 5.2.
Strategic Economics will develop a pro forma model to test the financial feasibility of the prototypes.
The analysis will first examine the feasibility of each prototype without any affordable housing
requirements. The financial feasibility analysis of projects will be measured using a static pro forma
model that will solve for the project’s rate of return and residual land value. The results will create a
baseline understanding of prototype-specific project feasibility and ability to support on-site affordable
housing requirements.
TASK 5.2: CITY-SPECIFIC RESIDENTIAL FEASIBILITY STUDIES AND INCLUSIONARY ANALYSES
Strategic Economics will then customize the pro forma analysis and test inclusionary requirements for
each participating city. We will research and generate customized assumptions for land values and
achievable rents and sales prices. We will also request that the cities provide applicable impact fees
and permit fees for each prototype.
Strategic Economics will work closely with City and CPC staff to create and test up to four scenarios of
affordable housing requirements for each city. These policy alternatives will be informed by factors
including the baseline feasibility results, findings from the analysis of nearby communities’ policies
and performance, implications of AB 1505 requirements (including its guidance on affordability levels),
and guidance from City staff.
Strategic Economics will then adapt the development prototypes pro forma model to test the financial
feasibility of varying the inclusionary housing requirements according to the policy alternatives. The
pro forma analysis will be structured to understand what changes could be made to inclusionary
requirements to support the continuing feasibility of projects while also incorporating affordable units.
As part of this analysis, Strategic Economics will conduct sensitivity analyses based on potential
changes in market rents and sales prices, variations in construction costs, variations in required
return, or comparison of residual land value results against the range of actual land values.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 6
Based on the findings of these analyses, Strategic Economics will generate findings and
recommendations regarding supportable inclusionary requirements both today and in the future, along
with policy suggestions for balancing the requirements with any feasibility constraints.
TASK 5.3: CITY-SPECIFIC IN-LIEU FEE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Strategic Economics will calculate potential in-lieu fee levels corresponding to the applicable
communities’ selected inclusionary requirements. Strategic Economics will identify the maximum in-
lieu affordable housing fees that could reasonably be charged on market-rate developments by
calculating the housing affordability gap. Unlike the affordability gap calculated for the impact fees,
this gap will examine the difference between market rate rents/sales prices and affordable rents/sales
prices. This approach reflects the equivalent cost for providing an on-site inclusionary unit and
equivalent benefit to a lower-income household. Strategic Economics will also determine the
community’s typical cost to subsidize a unit of affordable housing by reviewing the community’s
average local contribution toward recently built or proposed affordable housing development projects.
The affordability gap and local contribution respectively represent the maximum reasonable in-lieu fee
(directly equivalent to the inclusionary requirement) and the actual typical City cost to leverage outside
funds to produce a unit of affordable housing. After delivery of the administrative draft report, Strategic
Economics will participate in a phone call with City staff to walk through the results and explain how
to evaluate them for the purpose of establishing an in-lieu fee.
TASK 6: COMMERCIAL NEXUS STUDY AND FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
TASK 6.1: SHARED BASE COMMERCIAL NEXUS MODEL AND FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Strategic Economics will complete an initial shared commercial nexus model and financial feasibility
analysis. Optional Task D specifies additional scope and budget to further customize the nexus model
for cities requesting this service.
Strategic Economics will analyze information about recent and pipeline nonresidential development
projects in the participating cities to establish five prototypes including office, industrial, life
science/R&D, retail, and hotel uses. The prototypes will be shared and discussed with CPC and city
staff to arrive at a final set of assumptions for the nexus and feasibility analyses.
The nexus analysis and subsequent affordability gap calculation will together allow Strategic
Economics to identify the maximum possible commercial linkage fee that could be charged to net new
nonresidential development. The nexus analysis will demonstrate the impact of new commercial
development on affordable housing needs. The nexus analysis is completed with the following steps:
1) Calculate the number of employees that will work in the space associated with the
development prototypes.
2) Calculate the number of new households associated with this employment growth.
3) Estimate the incomes of the new employee-households.
4) Identify the number of associated moderate-, low-, very low-income households, all of
which would reflect additional need for affordable housing.
The affordability gap calculation described in sub-task 4.1 (and potential local adjustments in Optional
Task D) will generate a maximum fee that can be levied on new nonresidential developments.
Selecting the actual fee requires sensitivity to local market conditions. A base financial feasibility
analysis will be prepared to examine development feasibility and assess the sensitivity of the feasibility
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 7
model to changes in development costs, revenues, and required return. Strategic Economics will
conduct a financial feasibility analysis for the nonresidential prototypes by employing a similar
methodology as in sub-tasks 5.1 and 5.2
TASK 6.2: CITY-SPECIFIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSES AND AB 602 JUSTIFICATION ANALYSIS
Strategic Economics will recommend a potential range of impact fees for each city based on the
results of the financial feasibility analysis in sub-task 6.1, any local adjustments to the nexus
analysis in Optional Task D, and review of the fees charged in similar or competing cities. The
affordability gap calculation, feasibility analysis, and process for establishing recommended impact
fees for each prototype and community will be completed using a similar approach and methodology
as that described for the residential impact in sub-task 4.2.
An AB 602 analysis will be completed for each participating city after that city selects a desired
commercial linkage fee level. AB 602 requires the nexus study for a new fee to “identify the existing
level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an
explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.” (Government Code § 66016.5). Strategic
Economics will provide sufficient analysis and findings to meet the AB 602 requirements by first
identifying the existing ratio of deed-restricted, “family” affordable units in each city to the number of
worker households associated with employment in the city. Then Strategic Economics will calculate
the level of service associated with the proposed commercial linkage fees, or the number of family
affordable units that could be funded per worker household created by new development. Finally,
Strategic Economics will prepare findings justifying the need for additional affordable housing funding.
TASK 7: DRAFT SUITE OF REPORTS
Strategic Economics will prepare four draft “model” reports representing the range of analyses and
policy recommendations completed under tasks four through six. These draft reports will summarize
methodology, findings, and recommendations for one city, along with standardized appendices for use
in all reports. The participating cities would then provide comments on the model reports, and Strategic
Economics would then author draft reports for all participating cities.
TASK 8: GROUP MEETING TO DISCUSS RESULTS
Strategic Economics will conduct a meeting with all participating cities to present the model draft
reports and provide an overview of the recommendations. This meeting can be conducted either in-
person or virtually, with CPC responsible for scheduling the meeting.
TASK 9: ONE-ON-ONE MEETINGS TO PRESENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Strategic Economics will conduct an additional virtual meeting with each city to present city-specific
findings and recommendations, and to receive input and further direction.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 8
TASK 10: FINAL REPORTS
Strategic Economics will revise the draft reports and provide final reports. Revisions will be completed
in response to a single consolidated set of comments and direction provided from the participating
cities on their respective draft reports.
OPTIONAL TASKS
OPTIONAL TASK A: PUBLIC HEARING
As requested by participating cities, Strategic Economics would participate in public hearings with
decision-makers such as city councils, planning commissions, and housing oversight bodies. For each
requested hearing, Strategic Economics will coordinate with City staff, prepare presentations as-
needed, and participate in the hearing. Each public hearing would be approved and billed as a
separate optional task.
OPTIONAL TASK B: ADDITIONAL ONE-ON-ONE VIRTUAL MEETINGS WITH CITIES
As requested by participating cities, Strategic Economics will participate in additional one-on-one
virtual meetings, with each meeting to be approved and billed as a separate optional task.
OPTIONAL TASK C: CUSTOMIZATION OF RESIDENTIAL NEXUS MODEL ASSUMPTIONS
Upon request by a participating city, Strategic Economics will further customize the residential nexus
model to prepare results based on different household income levels and corresponding affordability
gaps. For each applicable city, Strategic Economics will calculate the maximum nexus-based fee per
unit and per square foot for the residential prototype with fewer than ten units.
OPTIONAL TASK D: CUSTOMIZATION OF COMMERCIAL NEXUS MODEL ASSUMPTIONS
Upon requests by a participating city, Strategic Economics will further customize the commercial nexus
model. Potential customization areas include affordability gap calculations based on specific income
levels and local market conditions, and changes to the development prototype assumptions to reflect
different job densities and industry mixes. For each applicable city, Strategic Economics will prepare a
customized calculation of the maximum nexus-based fee per square foot of each development
prototype.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics Scope to Prepare Nexus and Feasibility Studies | September 27, 2024 9
Schedule
The following schedule achieves completion of the project within ten months of full execution of the
services agreement.
Schedule for Cities Association of Santa Clara County Inclusionary and Linkage Fee Study
Task # Task Name
Approximate
Task Start
Approximate
Task Finish
Approximate
Duration
Task 1 Project Initiation and Group Kick-Off Meeting October October .5 month
Task 2 City-Specific Kick-Off Meetings October December 2 months
Task 3 Stakeholder and Work-In-Progress Meetings
3.1 Two Developer Stakeholder Group Virtual Meetings December March 4 months
3.2 Housing Advocates Virtual Meeting December January 1 month
3.3 Public Virtual Meeting January February 1 month
3.3 Two Work-In-Progress Presentations to Cities January May 4 months
Task 4 Residential Nexus Analysis October March 6 months
Task 5 Residential Feasibility Study and Inclusionary Analysis October March 6 months
Task 6 Commercial Nexus Study and Feasibility Analysis October March 6 months
Task 7 Draft Suite of Reports March May 2 months
Task 8 Group Meeting to Discuss Results May May 1 month
Task 9 One-On-One Meetings to Present Recommendations June July 2 months
Task 10 Final Reports July August 2 months
Notes: Schedule assumes a start date in October 2024. All listed calendar months are in 2024 or 2025.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics
Proposed Budget for Cities Association of Santa Clara County Inclusionary and Linkage Fee Study - Updated 9/30/2024 to modify contingency
Staff
Title
Billing Rate
Tasks Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost
Task 1 10 2,350$ 0 -$ 12 2,160$ 14 2,100$ 18 2,070$ 54 $8,680
Task 2 10 2,350$ 0 -$ 13 2,340$ 0 -$ 0 -$ 23 $4,690
Task 3
3.1 5 1,175$ 0 -$ 9 1,620$ 4 600$ 0 -$ 18 $3,395
3.2 6 1,410$ 0 -$ 6 1,080$ 10 1,500$ 2 230$ 24 $4,220
3.3 6 1,410$ 0 -$ 6 1,080$ 10 1,500$ 2 230$ 24 $4,220
3.3 8 1,880$ 0 -$ 10 1,800$ 10 1,500$ 2 230$ 30 $5,410
Task 4 Residential Nexus Analysis
4.1 Shared Base Residential Nexus Model 2 470$ 0 -$ 12 2,160$ 40 6,000$ 8 920$ 62 $9,550
4.2 City-Specific Recommendations, AB 602 Analysis 3 705$ 1 310$ 16 2,880$ 40 6,000$ 23 2,645$ 83 $12,540
Task 5 Residential Feasibility Study and Inclusionary Analysis
5.1 Shared Base Residential Feasibility Study 4 940$ 0 -$ 36 6,480$ 90 13,500$ 20 2,300$ 150 $23,220
5.2 City-Specific Residential Feasibility & Inclusionary Analyses 5 1,175$ 1 310$ 52 9,360$ 68 10,200$ 14 1,610$ 140 $22,655
5.3 City-Specific In-Lieu Fee Analysis and Recommendations 12 2,820$ 0 -$ 15 2,700$ 72 10,800$ 6 690$ 105 $17,010
Task 6 Commercial Nexus Study and Feasibility Analysis
6.1 Shared Base Commercial Nexus Model and Feasibility Analyses 5 1,175$ 0 -$ 32 5,760$ 100 15,000$ 40 4,600$ 177 $26,535
6.2 City-Specific Feasibility and AB 602 Analyses 5 1,175$ 1 310$ 28 5,040$ 60 9,000$ 16 1,840$ 110 $17,365
Task 7 Draft Suite of Reports 7 1,645$ 1 310$ 56 10,080$ 154 23,100$ 23 2,645$ 241 $37,780
Task 8 Group Meeting to Discuss Results 4 940$ 0 -$ 4 720$ 4 600$ 2 230$ 14 $2,490
Task 9 One-On-One Meetings to Present Recommendations 10 2,350$ 0 -$ 16 2,880$ 18 2,700$ 6 690$ 50 $8,620
Task 10 Final Reports 10 2,350$ 1 310$ 19 3,420$ 39 5,850$ 9 1,035$ 78 $12,965
Task Subtotals 112 26,320$ 5 1,550$ 342 61,560$ 733 109,950$ 191 21,965$ 1,383 $221,345
Contingency $27,054
Expenses Expenses (data, travel)$1,600
TOTAL BUDGET $249,999
Derek Braun Dena Belzer Chris Holcomb Madeleine Galvin Gus Stephens
Principal President Associate II Associate R.A.
Subtotal:
Stakeholder and Work-In-Progress Meetings
$235 $310 $180 $150 $115
Project Initiation and Group Kick-Off Meeting
City-Specific Kick-Off Meetings
Two Developer Stakeholder Group Virtual Meetings
Housing Advocates Virtual Meeting
Public Virtual Meeting
Two Work-In-Progress Presentations to Cities
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics
Optional Tasks Budget for Cities Association of Santa Clara County Inclusionary and Linkage Fee Study
Staff
Title
Billing Rate
Tasks Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost Hours Cost
Opt A 11 2,585$ 0 -$ 4 720$ 4 600$ 0 -$ 19 $3,905
Opt B 2 470$ 0 -$ 4 720$ 0 -$ 0 -$ 6 $1,190
Opt C 0 -$ 0 -$ 8 1,440$ 20 3,000$ 0 -$ 28 $4,440
Opt D 1 235$ 0 -$ 4 720$ 20 3,000$ 0 -$ 25 $3,955
Expenses Expenses (data, meetings)$0
Subtotal:
Principal President Associate II Associate R.A.
Derek Braun Dena Belzer Chris Holcomb Arpita Banerjee Gus Stephens
$115
Public Hearing (prep and attendance)
Additional One-On-One Virtual Meetings with Cities
$235 $310
Customization of Residential Nexus Model Assumptions
Customization of Commercial Nexus Model Assumptions
$180 $150
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
Strategic Economics
Cost Breakdown by City - Updated 9/30/2024 to modify contingency
Tasks Task Cost % of Task Amount % of Task Amount % of Task Amount % of Task Amount % of Task Amount % of Task Amount % of Task Amount
Task 1 $8,680 17%$1,447 17%$1,447 17%$1,447 17%$1,447 17%$1,447 0%$0 17%$1,447
Task 2 $4,690 17%$782 17%$782 17%$782 17%$782 17%$782 0%$0 17%$782
Task 3
3.1 $3,395 17%$566 17%$566 17%$566 17%$566 17%$566 0%$0 17%$566
3.2 $4,220 17%$703 17%$703 17%$703 17%$703 17%$703 0%$0 17%$703
3.3 $4,220 17%$703 17%$703 17%$703 17%$703 17%$703 0%$0 17%$703
3.3 $5,410 17%$902 17%$902 17%$902 17%$902 17%$902 0%$0 17%$902
Task 4 Residential Nexus Analysis
4.1 Shared Base Residential Nexus Model $9,550 0%$0 50%$4,775 0%$0 0%$0 50%$4,775 0%$0 0%$0
4.2 City-Specific Residential Nexus, Recommendations, AB 602 $12,540 0%$0 50%$6,270 0%$0 0%$0 50%$6,270 0%$0 0%$0
Task 5 Residential Feasibility Study and Inclusionary Analysis
5.1 Shared Base Residential Feasibility Study $23,220 0%$0 33%$7,740 0%$0 0%$0 33%$7,740 0%$0 33%$7,740
5.2 City-Specific Residential Feasibility & Inclusionary Analyses $22,655 0%$0 33%$7,552 0%$0 0%$0 33%$7,552 0%$0 33%$7,552
5.3 City-Specific In-Lieu Fee Analysis and Recommendations $17,010 0%$0 33%$5,670 0%$0 0%$0 33%$5,670 0%$0 33%$5,670
Task 6 Commercial Nexus Study and Feasibility Analysis
6.1 Shared Base Commercial Nexus Model and Feasibility Analyses $26,535 25%$6,634 0%$0 25%$6,634 25%$6,634 25%$6,634 0%$0 0%$0
6.2 City-Specific Commercial Nexus, Feasibility, AB 602 Analyses $17,365 25%$4,341 0%$0 25%$4,341 25%$4,341 25%$4,341 0%$0 0%$0
Task 7 Draft Suite of Reports $37,780 15%$5,812 15%$5,812 15%$5,812 15%$5,812 31%$11,625 0%$0 8%$2,906
Task 8 Group Meeting to Discuss Results $2,490 17%$415 17%$415 17%$415 17%$415 17%$415 0%$0 17%$415
Task 9 One-On-One Meetings to Present Recommendations $8,620 17%$1,437 17%$1,437 17%$1,437 17%$1,437 17%$1,437 0%$0 17%$1,437
Task 10 Final Reports $12,965 15%$1,995 15%$1,995 15%$1,995 15%$1,995 31%$3,989 0%$0 8%$997
Task Subtotals $221,345 12%$25,736 21%$46,768 12%$25,736 12%$25,736 30%$65,550 0%$0 14%$31,819
Contingency $27,054 12%$3,146 21%$5,716 12%$3,146 12%$3,146 30%$8,012 0%$0 14%$3,889
Expenses Expenses (data, travel)$1,600 $267 $267 $267 $267 $267 $0 $267
TOTAL BUDGET $249,999 $29,148 $52,751 $29,148 $29,148 $73,828 $0 $35,975
Mountain View Santa Clara Saratoga SunnyvaleGilroyLos Altos Hills Los Gatos
Stakeholder and Work-In-Progress Meetings
Project Initiation and Group Kick-Off Meeting
City-Specific Kick-Off Meetings
Two Developer Stakeholder Group Virtual Meetings
Housing Advocates Virtual Meeting
Public Virtual Meeting
Two Work-In-Progress Presentations to Cities
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
EXHIBIT B
PROJECT MANAGEMENT SCOPE
from Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning
Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will provide project management and supplementary
technical assistance to the project. Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning’s scope will be
funded by the Silicon Valley Community Foundation.
Project Management:
Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will convene the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS (the City
of Gilroy, the Town of Los Altos Hills, the Town of Los Gatos, the City of Mountain View, the City of
Santa Clara, the City of Saratoga and the City of Sunnyvale) and serve as a single point of contact for the
technical consultant (CONTRACTOR), with authority to make minor decisions when appropriate.
Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will coordinate logistics, including arranging meetings
and phone calls as needed. Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will also help the
CONTRACTOR with collecting data and information about existing requirements from the participating
and neighboring jurisdictions.
Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will also support the FISCAL AGENT with review of
contracts and assistance with budgeting and invoices. Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning
will review all monthly CONTRACTOR invoices and verify for accuracy prior to sending to the FISCAL
AGENT for payment. Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will track monthly invoices and with
assistance from the FISCAL AGENT provide quarterly accounting of invoices, and charged and remaining
funds for each of the PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS.
Technical Assistance:
Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will provide additional technical assistance to the
project. Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning will review products and help the
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS vet the nexus and feasibility study recommendations. Baird + Driskell +
Abrams Community Planning will summarize decisions/direction for the CONTRACTOR.
Baird + Driskell + Abrams Community Planning may provide additional analysis to help guide
jurisdictions' decision-making in setting their requirements.
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
EXHIBIT C
PROJECT BUDGET and COST ALLOCATION FOR
PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS
For a breakdown of the Strategic Economics Work Program budget by task, see Exhibit A.
TOTAL PROJECT COST
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS $249,999
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL NOT-TO-EXCEED PROJECT COST
$249,999
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
BY JURISDICTION:
PROJECT COST for CITY OF GILROY
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS
CITY OF GILROY Share of Total Contract $25,736
CITY OF GILROY Share of Contingency $3,146
SUBTOTAL $267
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL COST $29,148
PROJECT COST for TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Share of Total Contract $46,768
TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Share of Contingency $5,716
SUBTOTAL $267
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL COST $52,751
PROJECT COST for TOWN OF LOS GATOS
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS
TOWN OF LOS GATOS Share of Total Contract $25,736
TOWN OF LOS GATOS Share of Contingency $3,146
SUBTOTAL $267
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL COST $29,148
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF
PROJECT COST for CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW Share of Total Contract $25,736
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW Share of Contingency $3,146
SUBTOTAL $267
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL COST $29,148
PROJECT COST for CITY OF SANTA CLARA
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS
CITY OF SANTA CLARA Share of Total Contract $65,550
CITY OF SANTA CLARA Share of Contingency $8,012
SUBTOTAL $267
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL COST $73,829
PROJECT COST for CITY OF SUNNYVALE
TECHNICAL CONSULTANT – STRATEGIC ECONOMICS
CITY OF SUNNYVALE Share of Total Contract $31,819
CITY OF SUNNYVALE Share of Contingency $3,889
SUBTOTAL $267
PROJECT MANAGER – BAIRD + DRISKELL + ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING
Silicon Valley Community Foundation is providing funding for BAIRD + DRISKELL
+ ABRAMS COMMUNITY PLANNING’s Scope of Work
$0
TOTAL COST $35,975
Docusign Envelope ID: FFC17223-F25B-45AB-A480-035ACCE20CAF