Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2020-05-18 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Packet
May 18, 2020 4:53 PM City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page1 MAYOR Roland Velasco COUNCIL MEMBERS Marie Blankley Dion Bracco Peter Leroe-Muñoz Carol Marques Fred Tovar Cat Tucker CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF GILROY CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL 7351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020 REGULAR MEETING 6:00 P.M. MONDAY, MAY 18, 2020 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE ON THE CITY WEBSITE www.cityofgilroy.org VIEW THE MEETING LIVE ON THE CITY WEBSITE www.cityofgilroy.org. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THIS MEETING WILL BE LIMITED. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE BY EMAILING ALL PUBLIC COMMENTS TO THE CITY CLERK shawna.freels@cityofgilroy.org OR BY LEAVING A VOICE MESSAGE COMMENT BY CALLING (408) 846-0204, PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. MAY 18, 2020. THE MAY 18, 2020 MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE GOVERNOR’S EXECUTIVE ORDER N-29-20 In order to minimize the spread of the COVID 19 virus, the City will be offering telephone and email options for public comments at this meeting. The public is encouraged to participate in this meeting by telephone or email as follows: You are strongly encouraged to watch the City Council meeting live on the City of Gilroy’s website at www.cityofgilroy.org or on Cable Channel 17. To view from the website, select the Council Agendas and Videos button from the home page. PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN ON AGENDA ITEMS BEFORE ACTION IS TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL.COMMENTS MAY BE EMAILED TO THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO OR DURING THE MEETING AT shawna.freels@cityofgilroy.org AND MUST BE RECEIVED BEFORE THE MAYOR OPENS PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE ITEM. ADDITIONALLY, COMMENTS MAY BE MADE BY LEAVING A VOICE MESSAGE AT (408) 846-0204, PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. MAY 18, 2020. IMPORTANT: identify the Agenda Item Number or PUBLIC COMMENT in the subject line of your email. The City Clerk will read the first three minutes of each email into the public record. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Governors Order N-29-20, the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk a minimum of 2 hours prior to the meeting at (408) 846-0204. City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page2 If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City. Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available with the agenda packet on the City website at www.cityofgilroy.org subject to Staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting. The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Monday of each month, at 6:00 p.m. If a holiday, the meeting will be rescheduled to the following Monday, with the exception of the single meeting in July which lands on the first day of the month not a holiday, Friday, Saturday or Sunday. KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE GILROY OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, task forces, councils and other agencies of the City exist to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's review. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE, TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY OF THE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION STAFF AT (408) 846-0204 or shawna.freels@cityofgilroy.org I. OPENING A. Call to Order 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Invocation 3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda 4. Roll Call B. Orders of the Day C. Employee Introductions II. CEREMONIAL ITEMS A. Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations 1. Proclamation Naming July 27, 2020 Henry Miller Day III. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page3 PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC COMMENTS MAY BE SUBMITTED BY EMAIL TO: shawna.freels@cityofgilroy.org, (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Council on matters not on this agenda. The law does not permit Council action or extended discussion of any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Council action is requested, the Council may place the matter on a future agenda. Written material provided by public members for Council agenda item “public comment by Members of the Public on items not on the agenda” will be limited to 10 pages in hard copy. An unlimited amount of material may be provided electronically.) City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page4 IV. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Bracco – Gilroy Downtown Business Association Board (alternate), Gilroy Sister Cities Association (alternate), Santa Clara Co. Library JPA, SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA-Board Water Resources Committee, South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee (alternate), South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, South County Youth Task Force Policy Team (alternate), Street Naming Committee Council Member Tucker –CalTrain Policy Group, Cities Association of Santa Clara Co. Board of Directors, General Plan Advisory Committee, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, Street Naming Committee, Visit Gilroy Board Council Member Blankley - ABAG (alternate), Cities Association of Santa Clara Co. Board of Directors (alternate), Economic Development Corporation Board, Gilroy Sister Cities Association, Gilroy Youth Task Force (alternate), SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA- Board Water Resources Committee, South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, VTA Board of Directors Alternate, VTA Policy Advisory Committee, VTA South County City Group Council Member Marques - Gilroy Downtown Business Association Board, Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board (alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board (alternate), Silico n Valley Clean Energy JPA Board (alternate), URM Task Force Sub-Committee, VTA Committee for Transit Accessibility (alternate) Council Member Tovar –Santa Clara Co. Expressway Plan 2040 Policy Advisory Board, Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission, Santa Clara Co. Library JPA (alternate), SCVWD Water Commission (alternate), Silicon Valley Clean Energy JPA Board, South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, South County United for Health, Street Naming Committee, VTA Committee for Transit Accessibility, VTA Policy Advisory Committee (alternate) Council Member Leroe-Muñoz - ABAG, CalTrain Policy Group (alternate), Gilroy Youth Task Force, Historic Heritage Committee, SCVWD Water Commission, Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority Board, Sou th County Youth Task Force Policy Team, VTA Mobility Partnership Mayor Velasco - Economic Development Corporation Board, General Plan Advisory Committee, Historic Heritage Committee (alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, South County Joint Planning Advisory Committee, South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board (alternate), URM Task Force Sub-Committee, VTA Mobility Partnership, VTA South County City Group (alternate) V. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS VI. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE) All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these item s unless a request is made by a member of the City Council or a member of the public. Any person desiring to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have that item removed from the consent calendar prior to the time the Council votes to app rove. If removed, the item will be discussed in the order in which it appears. City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page5 A. Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting B. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Extending the Existence of a Local Emergency as Issued by the Director of Emergency Services C. Annual Re-Adoption of the City's Investment Policy as Required by Government Code Section 53646(a) D. Claim of Diana Clark (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim) E. Claim of Veronica Henderson (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim F. Claims of Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia Representing Two Claimants Related to the Gilroy Garlic Festival Incident - Lopez (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of each claim) G. Claim of Rosetta Mullens (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim) H. Claims of Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia Representing Four Claimants Related to the Gilroy Garlic Festival Incident - Salazar (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of each claim) I. Second Amendment to Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Management Agreement J. Approval of an Amendment to the Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for the Youth Task Force Extending the Term Two Years and Accepting Additional Funding and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Budget Amendments in Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 in the Gang Prevention and Intervention Fund 227 K. Declaration of Surplus Property and Approval of a Purchase and Indemnification Agreement for the Police Department Canine "Scotty" L. Approval of a Parcel Map and Dedication of Public Service Easement for 5717 Obata Way, Gilroy; APN 841-76-014 VII. BIDS AND PROPOSALS A. Extension of the Memorandum of Understanding With Garlic City BMX for a BMX Pump Track City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page6 1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Authorize the Interim City Administrator to sign an extension of the Memorandum of Understanding with Garlic City BMX for a BMX pump track through May 20, 2021. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - NONE IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Report on General Fund Expenditures, Impacts of COVID-19 to Non- General Fund Revenues and Preliminary Recovery Plan Recommendations 1. Staff Report: Bryce Atkins, Interim Finance Director 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Receive report and provide direction to staff. B. Standing Report on Operational Impacts and Other City Efforts Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic 1. Staff Report: Mark Bisbee, Interim Fire Chief 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Receive report X. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS A. Update on Fire Department Standards of Cover Performance Measures 1. Staff Report: Mark Bisbee, Interim Fire Chief 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Receive report. B. Amendment to the City of Gilroy Position Control List for the Reclassification of the Deputy City Administrator Position to Economic Development Manager 1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Receive report and approve amendments to the position control list contained within the Fiscal Year 20 and Fiscal Year 21 budget. C. Progress Report on the Implementation Action Plan for the Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page7 1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Receive report. XI. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS XII. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS XIII. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNITS Pursuant to GC Section 54957.6 and GCC Section 17A.11 (4); Collective Bargaining Units: Local 2805, IAFF Fire Unit Representing Gilroy Fire Fighters; AFSCME Local 101 Representing Employees Affiliated with AFSCME, Local 101; Gilroy Management Association (GMA); Gilroy Police Officers Association, Inc. Representing Gilroy Police Officers; Unrepresented Confidential Exempt Employees, Unrepresented Confidential Non- Exempt Employees, Non-Exempt Part-Time/Temporary/ Seasonal Employees, Exempt Part-Time/Temporary/Seasonal Employees and Department Head Employees City Negotiators: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator, LeeAnn McPhillips, HR Director; Anticipated Issues(s) Under Negotiation: Wages, Hours, Benefits, Working Conditions; Memorandums of Understanding: City of Gilroy and Gilroy Fire Fighters Local 2805, City of Gilroy and AFSCME Local 101 Representing Employees Affiliated with AFSCME, Local 101; City of Gilroy and the Gilroy Management Association (GMA); City of Gilroy and Gilroy Police Officers Association, Inc. 1. Public Comment on Closed Session Items 2. Adjourn to Closed Session ADJOURN TO OPEN SESSION Report of any action taken in Closed Session and vote or abstention of each Councilmember if required by Government Code Section 54957.1 and Gilroy Code Section 17A.13 (a); Public Report of the vote to continue in closed session if required under Gilroy Code Section 17A.11 (5) ADJOURNMENT MEETING DATES MAY, 2020 18* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers JUNE, 2020 1* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers 15* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers 29 Special Joint Meeting with Santa Clara Valley Water District - 6:00 p.m. JULY, 2020 1* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers City Council Regular Meeting Agenda 05/18/2020 Page8 * meeting is webstreamed and televised 2.A.1 Packet Pg. 9 Communication: Proclamation Naming July 27, 2020 Henry Miller Day (Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations) 1 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 City of Gilroy City Council Meeting Minutes May 4, 2020 I. OPENING Mayor Velasco announced that the meeting was being adjourned in memory of Al Howard, and he then detailed Mr. Howard's life. A. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:05 PM by Mayor Roland Velasco 1. Pledge of Allegiance The pledge of allegiance was led by Council Member Tucker. 2. Invocation The invocation was provided by Pastor Malcolm MacPhail of New Hope Community Church. 3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda City Clerk Shawna Freels announced that the agenda had been posted on April 21, 2020 at 5:45 p.m. Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Roland Velasco Mayor Remote 6:00 PM Marie Blankley Council Member Remote 6:00 PM Dion Bracco Council Member Remote 6:00 PM Peter Leroe-Muñoz Council Member Remote 6:25 PM Carol Marques Council Member Remote 6:00 PM Fred Tovar Council Member Remote 6:00 PM Cat Tucker Council Member Remote 6:00 PM B. Orders of the Day Mayor Velasco announced that Item 8A the CARES Act Funding Public Hearing, and Item 10A the Economic Climate and Revenue Projections item, were both being moved up the agenda to be heard following Future Council Initiated Agenda Items. The Council agreed to the agenda change. C. Employee Introductions There were none. II. CEREMONIAL ITEMS A. Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations 1. Proclamation Naming May 3 Through May 9, 2020 Professional Municipal Clerk Week 6.A Packet Pg. 10 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 2 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Mayor Velasco read the proclamation and highlighted the service of the City Clerk and Deputy City Clerk. III. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL Patricia Bentson sent in a comment suggesting that the decaying Garlic Festival shooting memorials outside of Christmas Hill Park be removed. A comment was submitted by Zachary Hilton highlighting the Bike Match G ilroy program, and bicycling and trail use best practices being made available for the public. Public comment was then closed. IV. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Bracco announced that the Santa Clara County Library Joint Powers Authority Board had met, and he detailed the online reading and e -book programs through the Gilroy library. He then gave his condolences to the Howard family. Council Member Leroe-Munoz joined the meeting at 6:25 p.m. Council Member Blankley gave condolences to the Ho ward family and then spoke on the requirement to wear facial masks when traveling on VTA public transportation. Council Member Marques gave condolences to the Howard family, asked that the community support small businesses and purchase gift cards through the Downtown Business Association. Council Member Tovar shared his condolences to the Howard family and to all other community members who had passed away during the pandemic, and commented on the removal of the memorial at Christmas Hill Park. Council Member Leroe-Muñoz gave condolences to the Howard family and other members of the community who had passed away during the pandemic, and then announced on the Valley Water rate public hearing May 28, 2020. Mayor Velasco announced a potential coronavirus test site at Christopher High School and spoke on the Mayor's letter that he had signed requesting additional testing in the County and detailed the program within Santa Clara County. He then shared the work he had been conducting with the Chamber of Co mmerce to address the impacts of the shelter in place order on business. V. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS Council Member Tucker asked to agendize an item on the options the City of Gilroy had with regards to opening up the City after June 1, 2020. The Council agreed to include a routine agenda item on COVID 19 Council Member Marques asked if a future item on assistance for the homeless would be coming before Council in May. 6.A Packet Pg. 11 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 3 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Council Member Tovar asked for a status report on local businesses. Council Member Leroe-Muñoz asked to include any legal requirements of anything the City was advising the community on with regards to the COVID 19 pandemic. VIII. PUBLIC HEARING A. Consideration of Amendments to the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan and Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual Action Plan to Reallocate up to $344,229 of Existing Program Funding and $275,486 of Funding Received Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic, and Approval of a Budget Amendment in Fiscal Year 2019 -2020 in the Amount of $619,715 The staff report was introduced by Community Development Director Garner and further presented by Deputy Community Development Director O'Strander. The public hearing was opened Jorge Mendoza submitted a comment asking the Council to consider providing $250,000 in additional rental assistance for facilitation through St. Joseph's Family Center, and described the need for more staff at the Center. Dolores Perez provided a comment asking the Council to provide rental assistance as landlords didn't care if a renter lost their income due to the Shelter in Place Order. The public hearing was then closed. Possible Action: a) Approve an amendment to the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan to modify the Citizen Participation Plan to accommodate a reduced public comment period and allowance for virtual meetings as allowed by the Federal government due to the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker x 6.A Packet Pg. 12 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 4 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Possible Action: b) Approve amendment No. 2 to the Fiscal Year 2019-2020 CDBG Annual Action Plan to reallocate up to $344,229 of current program funds from projects and activities that did not expend the funds, and adding $275,486 of supplemental funding established by the CARES Act to provide rental assistance, and to provide support to small business affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. $469.715 small business assistance, and $150,00 rental assistance. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member SECONDER: Cat Tucker, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker x Possible Action: c) Adopt a Resolution 2020-21 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy increasing the budget for Fiscal Year 2019-2020 by $619,715 in the Community Development Block Grant Fund. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Carol Marques, Council Member SECONDER: Cat Tucker, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker Possible Action: d) Provide direction to staff regarding a proposed local restaurant gift card purchase and distribution program to replace a previously approved General Fund funded Chamber Business Assistance Program. RESULT: DENY [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Marie Blankley, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker X. NEW BUSINESS A. Current Economic Climate and Revenue Projection Updates Due to the COVID 19 Shelter-in-Place Order The staff report was presented by Interim City Administrator Forbis and Interim Finance Director Atkins. There were no public comments. 6.A Packet Pg. 13 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 5 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Possible Action: Receive report. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker VI. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE) There were no public comments. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Marie Blankley, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker A. Minutes of the April 20, 2020 Regular Meeting B. Opening of a Recruitment Period for Six Seats on the Youth Commission With Terms Ending September 30, 2022 C. Approval of a Notice of Acceptance of Completion and Reduction of the Faithful Performance and Payment Security Bonds for Property Improvement Agreements No. 2017-02 and No. 2017-03, Cambridge Place – Tract 10369 VII. BIDS AND PROPOSALS A. Approval of a Program Supplement Agreement for the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program Project No. 18-PW-246, Amendment to the Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Budget in the Amount of $200,000, and Award of a Contract to American Civil Constructors West Coast LLC in the Amount of $180,620 with a Contingency of $18,062 for the Construction of the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program Project No. 18-PW-246 The staff report was presented by Public Works Director Awoke. There were no public comments. Possible Action: a) Adopt a Resolution 2020-22 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy authorizing the Director of Public Works to execute a program supplement agreement for the bridge preventative maintenance program, project No. 18-PW-246. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Carol Marques, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker x 6.A Packet Pg. 14 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 6 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Possible Action: b) Adopt a resolution 2020-23 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy amending the budget in Fiscal Year 2019-2020 and appropriating $200,000 from the Transportation Grants Fund, Fund 224 to the bridge preventative maintenance program project. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member SECONDER: Cat Tucker, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker Possible Action: c) Award a contract to American Civil Constructors West Coast, LLC in the amount of $180,620 with a project contingency of $18,062 (10%) for the construction of the bridge preventative maintenance program project No. 18-PW-246, and authorize the Interim City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Carol Marques, Council Member SECONDER: Cat Tucker, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Consideration of Amendments to the 2015-2020 Consolidated Plan and Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual Action Plan to Reallocate up to $344,229 of Existing Program Funding and $275,486 of Funding Received Under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic, and Approval of a Budget Amendment in Fiscal Year 2019 -2020 in the Amount of $619,715 The item was moved following V. Future Council Initiated Agenda Items. B. Public Hearing to Establish a List of Properties Subject to the Weed Abatement Program and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Fire Chief to Abate the Nuisance Arising Out of Weeds Growing and Refuse Accumulating Upon Property in the City of Gilroy Pursuant to Section 12.51 of the Gilroy Code The staff report was presented by Interim Fire Chief Bisbee and further presented by County Weed Abatement Manager Kumre. The public hearing was opened; there being none, it was then closed. 6.A Packet Pg. 15 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 7 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Possible Action: Adopt a Resolution 2020-24 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy authorizing the Fire Chief to abate the nuisance arising out of weeds growing and refuse accumulating upon property in the City of Gilroy, pursuant to Section 12.51 of the Gilroy City Code. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker C. Approval of the Issuance of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds by the California Public Finance Authority for a Housing Project Located at 1st Street and Kern Avenue (APN 790-21-041) and Authorization to Enter into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Related to the California Public Finance Authority The staff report was introduced by Community Development Director Garner and further presented by Senior Planner Tambornini. The public hearing was opened. Zachary Hilton submitted a comment suggesting that the project include bike parking and fewer car parking spaces. The public hearing was then closed. Possible Action: a) Adopt a Resolution 2020-25 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving the issuance by the California Public Finance Authority of multifamily housing revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $40,000,000 for the purpose of financing or refinancing the acquisition and construction of 1st and Kern Apartments and certain other matters relating thereto. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker x Possible Action: 6.A Packet Pg. 16 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 8 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 b) Adopt a Resolution 2020-26 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving, authorizing and directing execution of a joint exercise of powers agreement relating to the California Public Finance Authority. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member SECONDER: Marie Blankley, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Implementation of a Small Unmanned Aerial System Program in Public Safety The staff report was presented by Police Captain Espinosa. There were no public comments. Possible Action: Authorize staff to proceed with the implementation of a small unmanned aerial system program in public safety. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member SECONDER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker X. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS A. Current Economic Climate and Revenue Projection Updates Due to the COVID 19 Shelter-in-Place Order The item was moved following V. Future Council Initiated Agenda Items. B. Consideration of a Third Time Extension Request for a Tentative Map and Architectural and Site Review Permit for a Development of 202 Townhouse Units at the Southeast Corner of Santa Teresa Boulevard and First Street, APN's 808-01-21, 808-01-22 and 808-01-23; filed by Eagle Garden, LLC (TM 13-11 & AS 18-20) The item was presented by Planning Manager Wyrick. Public comment was opened A comment was submitted by APC International Inc. Eagle Garden LLC which detailed time intensive CalTrans and PG&E coordination and the need for the additional time to complete required permit processes. Comment was sent by Christ Vanni in support of the time extension and coordination of the adjacent Patio project. A comment was provided by Jim Houge of Granite Construction detailing the First Street paving work his company was coordinating with APC for the Eagle Garden project. 6.A Packet Pg. 17 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 9 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Public comment was then closed. Possible Action: Adoption of Resolution 2020-27 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving a third time extension for Tentative Map TM 13-11 and Architecture and Site Review AS 18-20 creating a 202-unit condominium townhouse development on a property located at the southeast corner of Santa Teresa Boulevard and First Street, APN's 808-01-21, 808-01-22 and 808-01-23; filed by Eagle Garden, LLC. RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member SECONDER: Marie Blankley, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker C. Approval of Updated Temporary Memorandums of Agreement with AFSCME Local 101, Gilroy Management Association, and the Gilroy Police Officers Association, and Temporary Policy Memorandums with Unrepresented Employees in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Shelter in Place Orders The item was presented by Human Resources Director McPhillips. There were no public comments. a) conditions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and shelter in place orders. b) An updated temporary memorandum of agreement with the Gilroy Management Association regarding wages, hours and work ing conditions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and shelter in place orders.. c) An updated temporary memorandum of agreement with the Gilroy Police Officers Association regarding wages, hours and working conditions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. d) An updated temporary policy memorandum with unrepresented employees in each of the following groups in response to the COVID- 19 pandemic and shelter in place orders: 1. Full-time Unrepresented Confidential Non-Exempt & Exempt Employees 2. Full-time Unrepresented Council-Appointed Employees 3. Part-Time/Temporary/Seasonal Unrepresented Hourly & Exempt Employees RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Cat Tucker, Council Member SECONDER: Marie Blankley, Council Member AYES: Velasco, Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar, Tucker XI. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS 6.A Packet Pg. 18 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) 10 City Council Meeting Minutes 05/4/2020 Interim City Administrator Forbis announced the Straight Talk with community members on Wednesday, and explained that weed abatement at several city properties had taken place the prior week.. XII. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS There was no report provided. XIII. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNITS Pursuant to GC Section 54957.6 and GCC Section 17A.11 (4); Collective Bargaining Units: Local 2805, IAFF Fire Unit Representing Gilroy Fire Fighters; AFSCME Local 101 Representing Employees Affiliated with AFSCME, Local 101; Gilroy Management Association (GMA); Gilroy Police Officers Association, Inc. Representing Gilroy Police Officers; Unrepresented Confidential Exempt Employees, Unrepresented Confidential Non-Exempt Employees, Non-Exempt Part-Time/Temporary/ Seasonal Employees, Exempt Part- Time/Temporary/Seasonal Employees and Department Head Employees ; City Negotiators: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator, LeeAnn McPhillips, HR Director; Anticipated Issues(s) Under Negotiation: Wages, Hours, Benefits, Working Conditions; Memorandums of Understanding: City of Gilroy and Gilroy Fire Fighters Local 2805, City of Gilroy and AFSCME Local 101 Representing Employees Affiliated with AFSCME, Local 101; City of Gilroy and the Gilroy Management Association (GMA); City of Gilroy and Gilroy Police Officers Association, Inc. There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT The Council adjourned to closed session at 9:46 p.m. /s/ Shawna Freels, MMC City Clerk 6.A Packet Pg. 19 Communication: Minutes of the May 4, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Extending the Existence of a Local Emergency as Issued by the Director of Emergency Services Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis Shawna Freels Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy extending the existence of a local emergency as issued by the Director of Emergency Services BACKGROUND Given the significant emergency facing the community, a local emergency was proclaimed on March 13, 2020 by the Director of Emergency Services in response to the spread of the COVID-19 virus. The City of Gilroy had taken numerous measures to combat the spread of the virus and to mitigate risk to the community and to City staff. 6.B Packet Pg. 20 California Government Code Section 8630 and Chapter 9 of the Gilroy City Code (Emergency Organization and Functions) allows the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City is affected, or likely to be affected, by a local emergency and the City Council is not in session. A copy of the Director of Emergency Services’ proclamation is included. However, within seven (7) days of the Director of Emergency Services’ proclamation, the Gilroy City Council must adopt a resolution ratifying the proclamation of a local emergency in order to continue the local emergency for a period sixty (60) days or until the incident has ended. The City Council adopted this resolution on March 16, 2020 The COVID 19 emergency has continued beyond the period of sixty days and California Government Code Section 8630 requires the Council to review and authorize the continuance of the emergency. Staff is recommending that the local emergency be further extended by adopting a resolution continuing the local emergency an additional 60 days, or until the incident has ended. FISCAL IMPACT Given the personnel and logistical resources needed to continue t his effort the proclamation and resolutions are important to ensure available state and federal reimbursements can be made. Without the proclamation and resolutions these reimbursement, funding, and loan options are not available. Attachments: 1. Resolution Extending Local Emergency 2. Proclamation of Local Emergency 6.B Packet Pg. 21 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-17 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY CONTINUING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY AS ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES WHEREAS, the Emergency Services Act, Government Code Section 8630, and Chapter 9 of the Gilroy City Code, Emergency Organization and Functions, empower the Director of Emergency Services (City Administrator) to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency if the Council of the City of Gilroy (“City”) is not in session, and require that the City Council take action to ratify the proclamation within seven (7) days thereafter, or the proclamation shall have no further force or effect; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Sections 8680.9 and 8558(c), a local emergency is a condition of extreme peril to persons or property proclaimed as such by the governing body of the local agency affected by a natural or manmade disaster; and WHEREAS, the purpose of a local emergency proclamation is to provide extraordinary police powers, immunity for emergency actions, authorize issuance of orders and regulations, and activate pre-established emergency provisions; and WHEREAS, a local emergency proclamation is a prerequisite for requesting state or federal assistance; and WHEREAS, conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City, based on the following: 1. A novel coronavirus (Named COVID-19) was first detected in December 2019. 2. On January 30, 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID- 19 outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. On January 31, 2020 the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services declared a Public Health Emergency. 3. On February 10, 2020, the County of Santa Clara declared a local health emergency and proclaimed a local emergency. 4. On March 9, 2020 the County of Santa Clara Public Health Department took steps to protect the health of the community by issuing an order cancelling all mass gatherings of over 1,000 people and additional recommendations to slow the spread of the virus, reduce the number of people infected, and, especially, to protect those who are most vulnerable to severe illness. 5. On March 11, 2020 the WHO made the assessment that COVID-19 can be characterized as a pandemic. 6.B.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Resolution Extending Local Emergency (2820 : Resolution Extending Local Emergency) RESOLUTION NO. 2020-17 6. On March 13, 2020 the Santa Clara County Office of Education announced that all public schools will close for three weeks; and 7. On March 13, 2020 the County of Santa Clara took additional steps to protect the health of the community by issuing additional orders limiting gatherings to 100 people and further banning gatherings of 35 to 100 people unless certain conditions are met to reduce the likelihood of transmission at those events. 8. The City of Gilroy has been responsive and proactive. The City has cancelled programs for senior citizens, postponed agenda items and meetings that are not time- sensitive, cancelled all non-essential travel by City staff and all City-sponsored events likely to result in a possible mass gathering while this crisis continues; and WHEREAS, California Government Code, Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7.5 - California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) allows that with the Proclamation of a Local Emergency the City may seek financial assistance and may request rei mbursement of the significant expenses incurred during response, if approved by the Director of the California Office of Emergency Services or Concurrence or Governor’s Proclamation; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a proclamation declaring the existence of a local emergency within the City; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020 the City Council found that the above described conditions of extreme peril did warrant and necessitate the proclamation of the existence of a local emergency in the City; and WHEREAS, the associated emergency conditions continue to be on-going and the emergency should not be terminated at this time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Gilroy that: 1. The City Council has received the report of the Director of Emergency Services as required by California Government Code Section 8630 (c) and reviewed the need for continuing the declaration of local emergency and finds based on substantial evidence that the public interest and necessity require the continuance of the proclamation of local emergency related to COVID-19. 2. Said local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist until terminated by the City Council of the City of Gilroy. 3. The Director of Emergency Services is hereby directed to report to the City Council within an additional sixty (60) days on the need for further continuing the local emergency. 6.B.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Resolution Extending Local Emergency (2820 : Resolution Extending Local Emergency) RESOLUTION NO. 2020-17 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Gilroy at a regular meeting duly held on the 18th day of May, 2020, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: APPROVED: ________________________ Roland Velasco, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Shawna Freels, City Clerk 6.B.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Resolution Extending Local Emergency (2820 : Resolution Extending Local Emergency) PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY BY THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES WHEREAS, Government Code section 8630 and Gilroy City Code section 9.6(a) authorize the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim a local emergency when the City of Gilroy ("City") is threatened by conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City caused by epidemic, which conditions are or are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City, and the City Council is not in session, WHEREAS, the Director of Emergency Services does hereby find: Conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within the City due to the following: 1. A novel coronavirus {Named COVID-19) was first detected in December 2019; and 2. On January 30, 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. On January 31, 2020 the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services declared a Public Health Emergency; and 3. On February l 0, 2020 the County of Santa Clara declared a local health emergency and proclaimed a local emeegency; and 4. On March 9, 2020 the County of Santa Clara Public Health Department took steps to protect the health of the community by issuing an order cancelling all .mass gatherings of over 1,000 people and additional recommendations to slow the spread of the virus, reduce the number of people infected, and, especially, to protect those who are most vulnerable to severe illness; and, 5. On March 11, 2020 the WHO made the assessment that COVID-19 can be characterized as a pandemic; and 6. On March 13, 2020 the Santa Clara County Office of Education announced that all public schools will close for three weeks; and 7. On March 13, 2020 the County of Santa Clara took additional steps to protect the health of the community by issuing additional orders limiting gatherings to 100 people and further banning gatherings of 35 to l00 people unless certain conditions are met to reduce the likelihood of transmission at those events. 6.B.b Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Proclamation of Local Emergency (2820 : Resolution Extending Local Emergency) WHEREAS, The City of Gilroy been responsive and proactive. The City has cancelled recreation programs, postponed boards and commission meetings that are not time-sensitive, cancelled all non-essential travel by City staff and all City-sponsored events/programs likely to result in a possible mass gathering while this crisis continues; and WHEREAS, the City Council is not in session, and cannot immediate]y be called into session; and WHEREAS, during a local emergency, the Director of Emergency Services is authorized by Gilroy City Code section 9.6(g)(I) to issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency; provided, however, that such rules and regulations must be confirmed at the earliest practical time by the City Council; NOW, THEREFORE, the Director of Emergency Services hereby proclaims that a local emergency, as defined in Government Code Section 8558 and Gilroy City Code section 9.2, now exists within the City; and requests such assistance as may be necessary from the County of Santa Clara, neighboring jurisdictions, the State of California, and the federal govermnent. The local emergency shall not remain in effect for a period in excess of seven (7) days unless it has been ratified by the City Council. !~ Date: m~►rc,l~ (3 ~ as o By; Time: y ' ~'~ ~ ►'n tm orbis m City Administrator/Director of Emergency Services ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney --- 6.B.b Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Proclamation of Local Emergency (2820 : Resolution Extending Local Emergency) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Annual Re-Adoption of the City's Investment Policy as Required by Government Code Section 53646(a) Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Finance Department Submitted By: Bryce Atkins Prepared By: Shawna Freels Strategic Plan Goals Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Re-adopt the City's investment policy affirming it is consistent with the City's investment goals of safety, liquidity, and yield. BACKGROUND Per California Code Section 53646(a), the City Administrator shall annually render to the City Council a statement of investment policy (attached), which shall be considered by the Council at a public meeting to ensure its consistency with respect to the overall objectives of safety, liquidity, and yield. Council last reviewed the policy in Ma y 2019. Per the City’s Investment Policy, temporarily idle or surplus funds of the City shall be invested in accordance with principles of sound treasury management. The three basic objectives of Gilroy's Investment Program are, in order of priority, (1) s afety of invested funds, (2) maintenance of sufficient liquidity to meet cash flow needs of the City; and (3) 6.C Packet Pg. 27 attainment of the maximum yield possible consistent with the first two objectives. At this time, staff recommends no changes to the current investment policy. The City's investment portfolio is structured to provide that sufficient funds from investments are available every month to meet the City's anticipated cash needs. Subject to the safety provisions outlined above, the choice in investment ins truments and maturities is based upon an analysis of anticipated cash needs, existing and anticipated revenues, interest rate trends, and specific market opportunities. The maximum maturity for investment instruments is five years from the date of purchase . The City’s current investment strategy is conservative and passive as the City Treasurer (Finance Director) primarily invests the City’s idle cash in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) which is a program offered to local agencies to participate in a major portfolio managed by the California State Controller with total assets of $30.3 billion (as of April 2020). All securities purchased by the pool are in compliance with Government Code Section 16430 and 14680.4. ANALYSIS On March 31, 2020, the City’s portfolio market value was $128,731,510.12 of which the total amount was held in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). The most recent investment report is attached. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE There is no fiscal impact associated with annually re-adopting the City’s Investment Policy. Attachments: 1. Investment Policy May 2020 2. City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 6.C Packet Pg. 28 - 1 - INVESTMENT POLICY fOr CITY Of GILrOY Revised: May 201920 I. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES Temporarily idle or surplus funds of the City of Gilroy shall be invested in accordance with principles of sound treasury management and in accordance with the provisions of California Government Code Sections 53600, et seq., the Municipal Code, guidelines established by the California Municipal Treasurer's Association and the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers, and this Investment Policy ("Policy"). A. Overall Risk Profile The three basic objectives of Gilroy's Investment Program are, in order of priority: 1. Safety of invested funds; 2. Maintenance of sufficient liquidity to meet cash flow needs of the City; and 3. Attainment of the maximum yield possible consistent with the first two objectives. The achievement of these objectives shall be accomplished in the manner described below: 1. Safety of Invested Funds The City shall ensure the safety of its invested idle funds by limiting credit and interest rate risks. Credit risk is the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer. Interest rate risk is the risk that the market value portfolio securities will fall due to an increase in general interest rates. a. Credit risk will be mitigated by: i. Limiting investments to the safest types of securities as outlined in this policy; ii. By prequalifying the financial institutions with which it will do business; and iii. By diversifying the investment portfolio so that the failure of any one issuer or backer will not place an undue financial burden on the City. b. Interest rate risk will be mitigated by: i. Maintaining adequate sums in 30 day or less funds. ii. Structuring the City's portfolio so that securities mature to meet the City's cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to their maturation to meet those specific needs; and 6.C.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 2 - iii. Investing primarily in shorter term securities (five years or less). c. The physical security or safekeeping of the City's investments is also an important element of safety. Detailed safekeeping requirements are defined in Section III of this Policy. 2. Liquidity The City’s investment portfolio shall be structured in a manner which strives to achieve that securities mature at the same time as cash is needed to meet anticipated demands (static liquidity). Additionally, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio should consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets (dynamic liquidity). Funds equal to 20% of the total annual expenditure budget less any capital expenditures for which bond proceeds are available, less internal service fund charges and less Trust and Agency fund expenditures, as first adopted for each fiscal year, shall be invested in the California State LAIF or other 30 day or less securities for call requirements. However, this provision shall not require the sale of any investment due solely to the adoption of a new budget, or amendment to a budget, which would have the effect of increasing the dollar amount needed to maintain this 20% requirement in 30 day or less funds. At such time that the 30 day or less funds falls below 20% of the annual expenditure budget, the City Treasurer, within 30 days, will notify the Investment Committee with a proposed action plan. The City Council will be subsequently notified of the action taken. The specific percentage mix of different investment instruments and maturities is described in Section II of this Policy. 3. Yield Yield on the City's investment portfolio is of secondary importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. Investments are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. While it may occasionally be necessary or strategically prudent of the City to sell a security prior to maturity to either meet unanticipated cash needs or to restructure the portfolio, this Policy specifically prohibits trading securities for the sole purpose of speculating on the future direction of interest rates. B. Time Frame for Investment Decisions The City's investment portfolio shall be structured to provide that sufficient funds from investments are available every month to meet the City's anticipated cash needs. Subject to the safety provisions outlined above, the choice in investment instruments and maturities shall be based upon an analysis of anticipated cash needs, existing and anticipated revenues, interest rate trends, and specific market opportunities. No investment should have a maturity of more than five (5) years from its date of purchase without receiving City Council approval within the prior 90 days. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 3 - C. Definition of Idle or Surplus Funds Idle or surplus funds for the purpose of this Policy are all City funds which are available for investment at any one time, including the estimated checking account float, excepting those minimum balances required by the City's banks to compensate them for the cost of banking services. This Policy also applies to the idle or surplus funds included in the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, capital projects funds, enterprise funds, internal service funds, trust/agency funds and of other entities for which the City of Gilroy personnel provide financial management services. D. Applicability of Policy This policy does not apply to: 1. The City's Deferred Compensation Plan, the investments in which are directed by the participating employees through a Deferred Compensation Committee; and 2. Monies held by a trustee or fiscal agent and pledged to the payment or security of bonds or other indebtedness, or obligations under agreements, of a local agency, or certificates of participation in such bonds, indebtedness or agreements, the investment of which may be in accordance with the statutory provisions governing the issuance of those bonds, indebtedness or agreements, or to the extent not inconsistent therewith, or if there are no specific statutory provisions, in accordance with the ordinance, resolution, indenture or agreement of the local agency providing for the issuance. E. Benchmark and Performance Standards 1. The City's investment strategy is passive. Given this strategy, the portfolio is expected to meet or exceed the six (6) month treasury bill. 2. The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a rate of return commensurate with risk constraints and cash flow needs. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 4 - II. INVESTMENTS This section of the Investment Policy identifies policies, types of investments, and related matters pertaining to instruments in which the City will invest its idle funds. A. Investment Standards The City of Gilroy operates its temporary pooled idle cash investments under the Prudent Man Rule, California Probate Code Section 16040(b) 1, the Prudent Investor Standard, California Government Code, Section 53600.3 2, and with additional guidance from the provisions of the Uniform Prudent Investor Act, California Probate Code Section 16045, et seq 3. This affords the City a broad spectrum of investment opportunities as long as the investment is deemed prudent and is allowable under current legislation of the State of California (Government Code Section 53600, et seq). B. Eligible Securities Subject to the Prudent Man Rule, the Prudent Investor Standard and other applicable laws and regulations, this policy permits investment in the following: • Insured Certificates of Deposit (CD's) of California banks and/or savings and loan associations, and/or savings with a Superior or Excellent ranking of 165 or more as provided by IDC Financial Publishing Inc. or similar rating publication) which mature in five (5) years or less, provided that the City's investments shall not exceed Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00) per institution. If the investment exceeds the insured $250,000.00, the funds are to be collateralized at 110% of the deposit in government securities or 150% in mortgages. (limited to 15% of the portfolio) 1The Prudent Man Rule states, in essence, that "in investing . . . property for the benefit of another, a trustee shall exercise the judgment and care, under the circumstances then prevailing, which men of prudence, discretion, and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs . . ." 2Governing bodies of local agencies (e.g., a City Council) or persons authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of those local agencies investing public funds pursuant to this chapter are trustees and therefore fiduciaries subject to the prudent investor standard. When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, and managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency. Within the limitations of this section and considering individual investments as part to an overall strategy, a trustee is authorized to acquire investments as authorized by law. 3The standard of care for trustees investing and managing trust assets is the Prudent Investor Standard and takes into consideration the purposes, terms, distribution requirements and other circumstances of the trust, and in satisfying this standard, the trustee is required to exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution in light of the facts and circumstances existing at the time of a trustee's decision or action. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 5 - Local Agency Investment Fund (State Pool) Demand Deposits Securities of the U.S. Government, or its agencies Negotiable Certificates of Deposit placed with federal and state savings and loan associations and federal and state chartered banks with an office in the State of California. (limited to 15% of the portfolio) Bankers Acceptances (limited to 15% of the portfolio) Commercial paper (limited to 10% of the portfolio) Passbook Savings or Money Market Demand Deposits Securities or bonds purchased under a prior investment policy, which may or may not meet the standards of this policy. (Such securities or bonds may be held or sold under this Policy but additional purchases shall not be made.) Money Market Mutual Fund (with $1.00 net asset value and which invests only in instruments allowed under Government Code Section 53600, et seq.) - (limited to 5% of the portfolio) C. Investments Deemed Not Appropriate at this Time The City of Gilroy Investment Policy does not permit investment in the following instruments or securities: Corporate bonds or stocks Repurchase agreements or reverse repurchase agreements Interest only or principal only strips Certificates of Deposit issued by institutions not operating within California Inverse floaters and range notes Financial futures or financial option contracts Securities lending or leveraging any portion of the portfolio D. Collateralization Requirements Uninsured Time Deposits with banks and savings and loans shall be collateralized in the manner prescribed by law for depositories accepting municipal investment funds. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 6 - E. Preformatted Wire Transfers Wherever possible, the City will use preformatted wire transfers to restrict the transfer of funds to preauthorized accounts only. When transferring funds to an account not previously approved, the bank is required to call back a second employee for confirmation that the transfer is authorized. F. Qualification of Brokers, Dealers and Financial Institutions The City Treasurer shall investigate brokers and dealers who wish to do business with the City to determine if they are adequately capitalized, have any pending legal actions against the firm or the individual broker, and that they market securities appropriate to the City's needs. The City shall annually send a copy of the current edition of the Policy to all institutions and broker/dealers which are approved to handle City of Gilroy investments. Receipt of the Policy, including confirmation that it has been received by persons handling the City's accounts, shall be acknowledged in writing within thirty (30) days. G. Diversification The portfolio should consist of a prudent mix of various types of securities, issues and maturities. H. Confirmation Receipts for confirmation of purchase or sale of authorized securities should be received by the City Treasurer within five (5) days and include the following information: trade date, par value, rate, price, yield, settlement date, description of securities purchased, agency's name, net amount due, third party custodial information. These are minimum information requirements. I. Internal Controls Investment duties shall be separated by having at least three persons perform the following functions for any particular investment: the recordation of investments and disbursements, confirmation receipts, the preparation of Treasurer's reports, wire transfers, bank reconciliations and treasury reconciliations. An independent analysis by the external auditor shall be conducted annually to screen internal control, account activity, including verification of all securities, and compliance with policies and procedures. J. Interest Earnings All interest earned on investments authorized by this Policy shall be allocated quarterly to all City funds based on the positive cash balances in each fund as a percentage of the 6.C.a Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 7 - entire pooled portfolio. The interest allocated to those funds not legally required to have interest allocated shall be transferred to Fund 400, Capital Projects Fund. III. SAFEKEEPING OF SECURITIES A. Safekeeping Agreement The City shall contract with a bank or banks with federally insured deposits for the safekeeping services through a third party custodial agreement, (California Government Code Section 53601)4 which includes delivery versus payment provisions, for securities which are owned by the City as part of its investment portfolio. B. Handling of City-Owned Securities and Time Deposit Collateral All securities owned by the City shall be held by the City or by its third party custodian, except the collateral for time deposits in banks, savings banks, and savings and loan associations. The collateral for time deposits in banks and savings and loans shall be held in a trust account in the City of Gilroy's name. Dealers or brokers shall not hold any securities for the City. A broker is not an approved depository under California Government Code Section 53630 5 and Section 53608 6 C. Security Transfers The authorization to release City's securities will be telephoned to the appropriate depository or custodian by a Finance Department member other than the person who initiated the transaction. A written confirmation outlining the details for the transaction and confirming the telephone instructions will be sent to the bank within five (5) working days. A confirming notice documenting the transaction will be sent by the bank to the City within five (5) working days of the transaction. 4Section 53601. Authorized Investments, circumstances. A local agency purchasing or obtaining any security . . . shall require delivery of the securities to the local agency . . . by book entry, physical delivery or by third party custodial agreement. 5Section 53630(c) allows state or national banks, state or federal savings banks or savings and loan associations, state or federal credit unions and federally insured industrial loan companies as approved depositories. 6Section 53608. Deposit of securities; delegation of authority. The legislative body of a local agency may deposit for safekeeping with a federal or state association, a trust company or a state or national bank located within this state or with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco or any branch thereof within this state, or with any Federal Reserve Bank or with any state or national bank located in any city designated as a reserve city by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the bonds, notes, bills, debentures, obligations, certificates or indebtedness, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness in which the money of the local agency is invested pursuant to this article or pursuant to other legislative authority. The local agency shall take from such financial institution a receipt for securities so deposited. The authority of the legislative body to deposit for safekeeping may be delegated by the legislative body to the treasurer of the local agency; the treasurer shall not be responsible for securities delivered to and receipted for by a financial institution until they are withdrawn from the financial institution by the treasurer. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 8 - D. Verification of Security Securities held by an agent of depository as collateral securing time deposits will be verified in writing during the year by the City's independent auditors as part of the City's annual independent audit. The City's independent auditors confirm the collateral directly with the bank holding that collateral. Those securities held by that depository or custodian as collateral are subject to audit by the bank's auditors. IV. STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITY This section of the Policy defines the overall structure of the investment management program. A. Responsibilities of the Finance Department The Finance Department, through its officers and representatives, charged with responsibility for maintaining custody of all public funds and securities belonging to or under the control of the City and for the deposit and investment of those funds in accordance with principles of sound treasury management and in accordance with applicable laws and ordinances. B. Responsibilities and Ethics of the City Treasurer 1. Delegation of Authority The authority of the City Council to invest or to reinvest funds, or to sell or exchange securities so purchased, may be delegated for a one-year period to the City Treasurer, who shall thereafter assume full responsibility for those transactions until the delegation is revoked or expires and shall make quarterly reports of those transactions to the City Council. (California Government Code Section 53607). Subject to review, the City Council may renew the delegation of authority each year. 2. Responsibilities The City Treasurer is appointed by the City Administrator and is subject to his direction and supervision. The City Treasurer is charged with the responsibility for the purchase, sale, custody and investment of City funds, and the development of procedures to implement this Investment Policy. In fulfilling his responsibilities, the City Treasurer is subject to the Prudent Investor Standard and shall render reports regarding compliance with the Investment Policy. The City Treasurer is further responsible for the duties and subject to the powers imposed by and applicable to City Treasurers under the general laws of the State of California. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 9 - 3. Ethical Conduct The City Treasurer will demonstrate integrity in all public and personal relationships, protect the public trust, and seek no favor or accept any personal gain which would influence or appear to influence the conduct of the office of Treasurer. C. Responsibilities of the City Administrator The City Administrator is responsible for directing and supervising the City Treasurer. He is responsible further to keep the City Council fully advised as to the financial condition of the City and its compliance with this Policy. D. Responsibilities of the City Council The City Council shall consider and annually adopt a written investment policy. As provided in that policy, the Council shall receive and review quarterly investment reports and may annually delegate investment authority to the City Treasurer pursuant to California Government Code Section 53607. E. Responsibilities of the Investment Committee There shall be an Investment Committee consisting of the City Administrator, City Treasurer/Finance Director, and Assistant Finance Director. The committee shall meet quarterly to discuss cash flow requirements, monthly and quarterly investment reports, investment strategy, investment and banking procedures, significant investment related work projects being undertaken in each department which will affect the cash flow management of the City Treasurer and to review compliance with the investment policies adopted by the City Council. This will require timely reports from the department heads to the City Treasurer concerning significant future cash flow requirements. V. REPORTING The City Treasurer shall prepare a quarterly investment report, including a succinct management summary that provides a clear picture of the status of the current investment portfolio and transactions made over the past quarter by month. This management summary will be prepared in a manner which will allow the City Administrator and City Council to ascertain whether investment activities during the reporting period are in conformance with the City's Investment Policy. The quarterly investment report will include the following: A. A listing of individual securities held at the end of the reporting quarter showing the: 1. type of investment 2. institution 3. date of maturity 6.C.a Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) - 10 - 4. amount of deposit or cost of the security 5. rate of return B. Unrealized gain or loss resulting from appreciation or depreciation by listing the cost and market value of securities over one year in duration. C. Average yield of return on the City's investments. D. Maturity aging for the investments. E. Compliance of the investment portfolio with the Investment Policy. F. A statement denoting the ability of the City to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months. VI. REVIEW OF INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT A. Statement of Policy As set forth in California Code Section 53646(a), the City Administrator shall annually render to the City Council a statement of investment policy, which shall be considered by the Council at a public meeting. B. Policy Review This Investment Policy shall be reviewed annually by the City Council at a public meeting in accordance with state law to ensure its consistency with respect to the overall objectives of safety, liquidity, and yield. Proposed amendments to the Policy shall be prepared by the City Treasurer and after review by the Investment Committee shall be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at a public meeting. VII. AUTHORITY This Policy was duly adopted by authority of the City Council of the City of Gilroy on the 1st day of July, 2015 and was most recently re-adopted on May 2118, 201920. 6.C.a Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Investment Policy May 2020 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.b Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.b Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 41Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 42Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 43Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 44Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 45Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 46Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 47Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 48Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 49Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) 6.C.bPacket Pg. 50Attachment: City of Gilroy Investment Report 3-31-20 (2819 : Investment Policy Update 2020) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Claim of Diana Clark (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim) Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Human Resources Department Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, this claim is recommended for rejection. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claim is submitted to the City Council for rejection at the May 18, 2020 meeting: Claim of Diana Clark Attachments: 6.D Packet Pg. 51 1. Claim of Diana Clark 6.D Packet Pg. 52 6.D.a Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Claim of Diana Clark (2818 : Claim of Diana Clark (Attorney Donald Stricklin)) 6.D.a Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Claim of Diana Clark (2818 : Claim of Diana Clark (Attorney Donald Stricklin)) 6.D.a Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Claim of Diana Clark (2818 : Claim of Diana Clark (Attorney Donald Stricklin)) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Claim of Veronica Henderson (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Human Resources Department Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, this claim is recommended for rejection. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claim is submitted to the City Council for rejection at the May 18, 2020 meeting: Claim of Veronica Henderson Attachments: 6.E Packet Pg. 56 1. Claim of Veronica Henderson 6.E Packet Pg. 57 6.E.aPacket Pg. 58Attachment: Claim of Veronica Henderson (2817 : Claim of Veronica Henderson (Ribera Law Firm)) 6.E.aPacket Pg. 59Attachment: Claim of Veronica Henderson (2817 : Claim of Veronica Henderson (Ribera Law Firm)) 6.E.aPacket Pg. 60Attachment: Claim of Veronica Henderson (2817 : Claim of Veronica Henderson (Ribera Law Firm)) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Claims of Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia Representing Two Claimants Related to the Gilroy Garlic Festival Incident - Lopez (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of each claim) Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Human Resources Department Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (M PA) and/or legal counsel, these claims are recommended for rejection. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claims are submitted to the City Council for rejection at the M ay 18, 2020 meeting: Claims submitted by the Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia: Claim of Eduardo Lopez Ponce 6.F Packet Pg. 61 Claim of Dasha Lopez Pimental Attachments: 1. Claim of Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental (Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia) 6.F Packet Pg. 62 Richard J. Plezia Board Certified: rick@rplezialaw.com Personal Injury Trial Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization Member: American Board of Trial Advocates Also Licensed: Georgia and Mississippi December 11, 2019 2909 Hillcroft • Suite 575 • Houston, Texas 77057 P: 713.800.1151 • F: 281.602.7735 • www.RickPlezia.com Via Certified mail: Andy Faber City Attorney City of Gilroy 10 Almaden Blvd, 11th Floor San Jose, CA 95113 Re: Claimants: Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental Address: 1607 McGinness Avenue San Jose, California 95127 Date of Loss: July 28, 2019 Dear Andy Faber: Please allow this letter to serve as formal notice that my clients have retained our firm to represent them regarding the above-referenced personal injury incident. You are hereby on notice of this claim for the personal injuries, lost wages, medical treatment, and costs incurred, as a result of this tragic incident. This claim arose on July 28, 2019, at the Gilroy Garlic Festival in Gilroy, California, and in the following manner: Dasha Lopez Ponce was at the Gilroy Garlic Festival with her Father Eduardo Lopez Ponce, when the gunman, Santino Legan, started shooting at the people. Eduardo Ponce Lopez was shot in the arm trying to shield his Daughter Dasha Lopez Ponce. As a result of the events described above, the claimants were taken to a hospital by ambulance in order to receive emergency medical care. Based on the facts above of the individuals, we are providing this notice of a potential claim for the personal injuries of Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental. Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental seeks an award of damages reasonably calculated to compensate the harms they have suffered in connection with the events that led to the personal injury of Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental. The claims below are asserted under California law. 6.F.a Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Claim of Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental (Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia) (2815 : Claims of Law Offices of 2909 Hillcroft • Suite 575 • Houston, Texas 77057 P: 713.800.1151 • F: 281.602.7735 • www.RickPlezia.com The Lopez family was an invitee at the time of the injury. The County of Santa Clara and The City of Gilroy therefore owed the Lopez family the duty to inspect the premises and maintain those premises in a reasonably safe manner. The County of Santa Clara and The City of Gilroy had a duty to provide adequate security but failed to do so. The Security company that was hired failed to account threats posed to large events and provided inadequate and outdated security policies. The condition of the premises posed an unreasonable risk of harm to the Lopez family. The County of Santa Clara and The City of Gilroy failed to properly inspect the venue where the festival took place. They failed to inspect the fence that allowed the shooter to breach the festival. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Yours Very Truly, Richard J. Plezia RJP/kgg Enclosures 6.F.a Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Claim of Eduardo Lopez Ponce and Dasha Lopez Pimental (Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia) (2815 : Claims of Law Offices of City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Claim of Rosetta Mullens (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim) Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Human Resources Department Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, this claim is recommended for rejection. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claim is submitted to the City Council for rejection at the May 18, 2020 meeting: Claim of Rosetta Mullens Attachments: 6.G Packet Pg. 65 1. Claim of Rosetta Mullens 6.G Packet Pg. 66 6.G.a Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Claim of Rosetta Mullens (2814 : Claim of Rosetta Mullens (Infinity Law Group)) 6.G.a Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Claim of Rosetta Mullens (2814 : Claim of Rosetta Mullens (Infinity Law Group)) 6.G.a Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Claim of Rosetta Mullens (2814 : Claim of Rosetta Mullens (Infinity Law Group)) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Claims of Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia Representing Four Claimants Related to the Gilroy Garlic Festival Incident - Salazar (The Interim City Administrator recommends a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of each claim) Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Human Resources Department Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, these claims are recommended for rejection. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claims are submitted to the City Council for rejection at th e May 18, 2020 meeting: Claims submitted by the Law Offices of Richard J. Plezia: Claim of Lorena Salazar 6.H Packet Pg. 70 Claim of Keyla Salazar Claim of Lyann Salazar Claim of Juan Salazar Attachments: 1. Claims of Lorena Salazar, Keyla Salazar, Lyann Salazar, and Juan Salazar (The Law Offices of Richard Plezia) 6.H Packet Pg. 71 Richard J. Plezia Board Certified: rick@rplezialaw.com Personal Injury Trial Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization Member: American Board of Trial Advocates Also Licensed: Georgia and Mississippi January 15, 2020 2909 Hillcroft • Suite 575 • Houston, Texas 77057 P: 713.800.1151 • F: 281.602.7735 • www.RickPlezia.com Via FedEx 2-day E-mail: andy.faber@berliner.com Andy Faber City Attorney City of Gilroy 10 Almaden Blvd, 11th Floor San Jose, CA 95113 Ph: 408-286-5800 Re: Claimants: Lorena Salazar, Keyla Salazar, Lyann Salazar, and Juan Salazar Address: 1607 McGinness Avenue San Jose, California 95127 Date of Loss: July 28, 2019 Dear Andy Faber: Please allow this letter to serve as formal notice that my clients have retained our firm to represent them regarding the above-referenced personal injury incident that resulted in the wrongful death of Ms. Keyla Salazar. You are hereby on notice of this claim for the wrongful death, personal injuries, lost wages, medical treatment, and costs incurred, as a result of this tragic incident. This claim arose on July 28, 2019, at the Gilroy Garlic Festival in Gilroy, California, and in the following manner: Keyla Salazar was at the Gilroy Garlic Festival with her mother, Lorena Salazar, and her father, Juan Salazar, when the gunman, Santino Legan, started shooting at the people. Keyla Salazar was shot while she was running to try to escape and died. Based on the facts above of the individuals, we are providing this notice of a potential claim for the wrongful death of Ms. Salazar and the personal injuries of Ms. Lorena Salazar and Mr. Juan Salazar. 6.H.a Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Claims of Lorena Salazar, Keyla Salazar, Lyann Salazar, and Juan Salazar (The Law Offices of Richard Plezia) (2813 : Claims of 2909 Hillcroft • Suite 575 • Houston, Texas 77057 P: 713.800.1151 • F: 281.602.7735 • www.RickPlezia.com Ms. Lorena Salazar and Mr. Juan Salazar seeks an award of damages reasonably calculated to compensate the harms they have suffered in connection with the events that led to Keyla Salazar’s wrongful death and personal injury of Ms. Lorena Salazar and Mr. Juan Salazar. The claims below are asserted under California law. As a representative of the Estate of Keyla Salazar, Ms. Lorena Salazar is the proper party to bring this action for the physical pain and mental anguish which Keyla Salazar suffered at the time of her death, as well as the reasonable and necessary medical expenses, funeral expenses and any other remedies. The Salazar family was an invitee at the time of the injury. The County of Santa Clara and The City of Gilroy therefore owed the Salazar family the duty to inspect the premises and maintain those premises in a reasonably safe manner. The County of Santa Clara and The City of Gilroy had a duty to provide adequate security but failed to do so. The Security company that was hired failed to account threats posed to large events and provided inadequate and outdated security policies. The condition of the premises posed an unreasonable risk of harm to the Salazar family. The County of Santa Clara and The City of Gilroy failed to properly inspect the venue where the festival took place. They failed to inspect the fence that allowed the shooter to breach the festival. Each of these claims are expected to exceed $3,000,000.00 in damages. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Yours Very Truly, Richard J. Plezia RJP/mn Enclosures 6.H.a Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Claims of Lorena Salazar, Keyla Salazar, Lyann Salazar, and Juan Salazar (The Law Offices of Richard Plezia) (2813 : Claims of City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Second Amendment to Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Management Agreement Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Community Development Department Submitted By: Karen Garner Prepared By: Karen Garner Sue O'Strander Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Approve a second amendment to Countywide household hazardous waste management agreement, and authorize the Interim City Administrator to execute the agreement and related documents. BACKGROUND For decades, the City has met its obligation to provide for household hazardous waste (HHW ) management by participating in the Countywide Collection Program. This popular program provides City residents with the opportunity to participate in several collection events each month. The permanent collection center in San Martin has improved the convenience associated with these services. Santa Clara County, as administrators of the program, estimates that nearly 900 Gilroy households will 6.I Packet Pg. 74 participate in a collection event in the coming fiscal year based on the usage of the system in prior years. ANALYSIS Funding for HHW management comes from fees authorized by Assembly Bill (AB) 939 that the County imposes on waste haulers on the City’s behalf. This fee, which is the subject of a separate countywide agreement, is imposed on every ton of waste disposed. Per the countywide system, the HHW Agreement includes a base assumption that 4% of each jurisdiction’s households will participate in the program annually. Since the estimated participation rate of nearly 900 households is over the 4% base assumption, an augmentation amount must be specified annually in Section 17 of the Agreement. Based on the anticipated participation by City residents and the County’s estimated per - car cost for each user, the County recommends an augmentation of $15,294. As discussed below in the fiscal impact section, revenues collected by the Countywide AB 939 Fee should completely offset the augmentation amount. Approval of the recommended amendment is supported, as it provides Gilroy residents with a convenient and cost-effective location to dispose of HHW locally, in San Martin. Please note that only attachment C-2 has been included with the agreement as other referenced attachments (C & C-1) were specific to the original and prior amendment. ALTERNATIVES The City Council can decide not to approve the Amendment to the HHW Collection Agreement and direct staff to continue evaluating the provision of these services. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND THIS ALTERNATIVE, as it would be impossible to provide equally convenient services to residents without paying significantly higher costs. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE The County estimates that providing HHW collection services to Gilroy residents participating in the County program will cost approximately $85,000 in Fiscal Year 2020- 21 (FY21). This includes the 4% base fee, the augmentation of $15,294, and some fixed costs and mandatory charges. AB 939 Fee revenues credited to Gilroy for HHW Management purpose are estimated to total ap proximately $142,000 based on the anticipated volumes of disposed waste. Since the $142,000 in revenue is more than the $85,000 in cost, fee revenues cover the cost of City residents’ participation, and the County will rebate any excess fee revenues to the City at the end of the fiscal year for the City to use in promoting the program. PUBLIC OUTREACH Since the recommended action is an extension of a long-standing program with no changes proposed, public outreach activities were not conducted. If the City Council approves the amendment, staff will continue to inform the public about the availability of 6.I Packet Pg. 75 the County program. Attachments: 1. Second Amendment to HHW Agreement, Gilroy FY 2021 6.I Packet Pg. 76 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR COUNTYWIDE HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE COLLECTION PROGRAM The Agreement for Countywide Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program (AGREEMENT) by and between the City of Gilroy (CITY) and the County of Santa Clara (COUNTY) previously entered into on June 19, 2018, is hereby amended as set forth below. The COUNTY and the CITY agree that: 1. Section 16. ADDITIONAL SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT is amended in full to read: 16. ADDITIONAL SERVICES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT CITY may elect to augment funding provided for in this Agreement with CITY funds. Additional services shall be made available upon written agreement between the CITY's authorized representative and the County Executive, or designee. Additional services may include, but are not limited to, additional appointments (charged at the Variable Cost Per Car rate), door-to-door HHW collection, used oil filter collection, universal waste collection, electronic waste collection, and abandoned waste collection. CITY agrees to augment up to an additional $15,294 to the Countywide HHW Program during Fiscal Year 2018-2019 for the purpose of attaining or increasing resident participation above the 4% service level at the scheduled collection dates listed in Attachment C, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Augmentation will be calculated at the Variable Cost Per Car rate. Other services will be charged based on a cost recovery basis. CITY authorizes COUNTY to use CITY’s Available Discretionary Funding portion of the AB939 HHW Fee, if available, to pay for the above agreed additional augmentation amount. CITY agrees to augment up to an additional $15,294 to the Countywide HHW Program during Fiscal Year 2019-2020 for the purpose of attaining or increasing resident participation above the 4% service level at the scheduled collection dates listed in Attachment C-1, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Augmentation will be calculated at the Variable Cost Per Car rate. Other services will be charged based on a cost recovery basis. CITY authorizes the COUNTY to use CITY’S Available Discretionary Funding portion of the AB939 HHW Fee, if available, to pay for the above agreed additional augmentation amount. CITY agrees to augment up to an additional $15,294 to the Countywide HHW Program during Fiscal Year 2020-2021 for the purpose of attaining or increasing resident participation above the 4% service level at the scheduled collection dates listed in Attachment C-2, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Augmentation will be calculated at the Variable Cost Per Car rate. Other services will be charged based on a cost recovery basis. CITY authorizes the COUNTY to use CITY’S Available Discretionary Funding 6.I.a Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Second Amendment to HHW Agreement, Gilroy FY 2021 (2778 : Second Amendment to Countywide Household Hazardous Waste portion of the AB939 HHW Fee, if available, to pay for the above agreed additional augmentation amount. At the end of each fiscal year, a final annual cost statement shall be prepared by COUNTY and issued to CITY by November 30th. The annual cost statement will take into consideration costs incurred on behalf of CITY for additional services and all payments made by CITY to COUNTY. If any balance is owed to COUNTY, it will be due within 30 days following receipt of the annual cost statement. If any credit is owed to CITY, COUNTY will refund that amount to CITY within 30 days following delivery of the annual cost statement. / / 2.Attachment C-2 “HHW Schedule For Collection Events for Fiscal Year 2020/2021” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference is hereby added to the AGREEMENT. Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, COUNTY and CITY, through their duly authorized representatives, have entered into this Second Amendment to the AGREEMENT effective as of the last date shown below: COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CITY OF GILROY Signature: Signature: Jeffrey V. Smith Name: _____________________ County Executive Title: Date: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY Stephanie Safdi Deputy County Counsel Date: 6.I.a Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Second Amendment to HHW Agreement, Gilroy FY 2021 (2778 : Second Amendment to Countywide Household Hazardous Waste ATTACHMENT C ‐ 2 HHW SCHEDULE FOR COLLECTION EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021 HHW SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021 2020/Month Day Date Location Type of Event County Holidays/ Notes July Wed,Thurs 1,2 San Martin Permanent Wed,Thurs 1,2 San Jose Permanent Fri,Sat 3,4 No Event No Event 4th OF JULY WEEK Thurs,Fri,Sat 9,10,11 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 16,17,18 San Jose Permanent Saturday 18 Sunnyvale Temporary Thurs,Fri,Sat 23,24,25 San Jose Permanent August Fri, Sat 31,1 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 30,31,1 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 6,7,8 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 13,14,15 San Jose Permanent Saturday 15 Mountain View Temporary Thurs,Fri,Sat 20,21,22 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 27, 28,29 San Jose Permanent September Thurs, Fri 3,4 San Martin Permanent Thurs, Fri 3,4 San Jose Permanent Saturday 5 No Event No Event LABOR DAY WEEKEND Thurs, Fri 10,11,12 San Jose Permanent Saturday 12 Santa Clara Temporary Thurs,Fri,Sat 17,18,19 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 24,25,26 San Jose Permanent October Fri, Sat 2,3 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 1,2,3 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 8,9,10 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 15,16,17 San Jose Permanent Saturday 17 Sunnyvale Temporary Thurs,Fri,Sat 22,23,24 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 29,30,31 San Jose Permanent November Fri, Sat 6,7 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 5,6,7 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 12,13,14 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 19,20,21 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 26,27,28 No Event No Event THANKSGIVING December Fri, Sat 4,5 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 3,4,5 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 10,11,12 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 17,18,19 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 24,25,26 No Event No Event CHRISTMAS Thursday 31 San Jose Permanent 6.I.a Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Second Amendment to HHW Agreement, Gilroy FY 2021 (2778 : Second Amendment to Countywide Household Hazardous Waste HHW SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021-continued 2021/Month Day Date Location Type of Event County Holidays/ Notes January Fri, Sat 1,2 No Event No Event NEW YEAR's DAY Fri, Sat 8,9 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 7,8,9 San Jose San Jose Thurs,Fri,Sat 14,15,16 San Jose San Jose Saturday 16 Sunnyvale Temporary Thurs,Fri,Sat 21,22,23 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 28,29,30 San Jose Permanent Saturday 30 Santa Clara Temporary February Fri, Sat 5,6 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 4,5,6 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 11,12,13 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 18,19,20 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 25,26,27 San Jose Permanent March Fri, Sat 5,6 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 4,5,6 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 11,12,13 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 18,19,20 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 25,26,27 San Jose Permanent April Fri, Sat 2,3 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 1,2,3 San Jose Permanent Thurs, Fri,Sat 8,9,10 San Jose Permanent Saturday 10 Los Altos Temporary TBD Thurs,Fri,Sat 15,16,17 San Jose Permanent Saturday 17 Sunnyvale Temporary Thurs,Fri,Sat 22,23,24 San Jose Permanent Saturday 24 Santa Clara Temporary May Fri, Sat 30,1 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 29,30,1 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 6,7,8 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 13,14,15 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 20,21,22 San Jose Permanent Thurs, Fri 27,28 San Jose Permanent Saturday 29 No Event No Event MEMORIAL DAY WEEKEND June Fri, Sat 4,5 San Martin Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 3,4,5 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 10,11,12 San Jose Permanent Thurs,Fri,Sat 17,18,19 San Jose Permanent Saturday 19 Milpitas Temporary TBD Thurs,Fri,Sat 24,25,26 San Jose Permanent *SUBJECT TO CHANGE 4/6/2020 6.I.a Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Second Amendment to HHW Agreement, Gilroy FY 2021 (2778 : Second Amendment to Countywide Household Hazardous Waste City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Approval of an Amendment to the Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for the Youth Task Force Extending the Term Two Years and Accepting Additional Funding and Adoption of a Resolution Approving Budget Amendments in Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 in the Gang Prevention and Intervention Fund 227 Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Police Department Submitted By: Scot Smithee Prepared By: Scot Smithee Patricia Vigil Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION a) Approve an amendment to the agreement with the County of Santa Clara for the South County Youth Task Force extending the term two additional years ending June 30, 2022, and authorize the Interim City Administrator to execute the amended agreement and related documents. b) Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving a budget amendment in Fiscal Year 2019-20 to reduce funding in Fund 227 by $4,933 and a budget amendment in Fiscal Year 2020-21 increasing the budget in Fund 227 by $157,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6.J Packet Pg. 81 The City of Gilroy (City) currently receives funding from the County of Santa Clara (County) formalized through a service agreement between the City and County for the South County Youth Task Force (SCYTF) violence prevention programs which support services in East Gilroy. The agreement provides funding to support specified Santa Clara County Probation Department Neighborhood Safety Unit violence -prevention programs. This includes strategies and community pro-social services to East Gilroy at San Ysidro Park and Cesar Chavez Gym. The agreement is administered by the Santa Clara County Probation Department Neighborhood Safety Unit and managed by the Gilroy Police Department. It is the County’s desire to continue the partnership with the City of Gilroy and build on City and SCYTF community engagement with the residents of East Gilroy. In addition, because of the unexpected impacts of the Gilroy Garlic Festival tragedy and the current Covid-19 pandemic, the County has negotiated an amendment to the existing agreement to adjust FY 2019-20 funding to align with spending projections for the remainder of the year. The agreement also provides an extension to provide the City of Gilroy with NSU funding for FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22. In order to execute the new amended agreement with the County of Santa Clara, City Council approval is required to authorize the City Administrator to execute an agreement between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Gilroy. City Council action is also required to adopt a resolution to amend the FY 2019-20 and FY 2020-21 City Operating Budgets for Fund 227. The final year of funding for this amended agreement will be incorporated into the Police Department budget recommendations during the FY 2021-22 budget process. BACKGROUND Since Fiscal Year 2017, the County of Santa Clara Probation Department has provided funding to the City of Gilroy to support youth and families who reside in East Gilroy. County funding is formalized through a service agreement between the County and City for the South County Youth Task Force. This agreement is administered by the Probation Department‘s Neighborhood Safety Unit (NSU) and is managed by the Gilroy Police Department. The primary goal of the NSU and its program strategy is to target specific neighborhoods and deliver specific services to increase community safety, build community capacity and leadership, prevent violence and foster a sense of community cohesion by providing social opportunities. Services are currently staffed and delivered through the Gilroy Police and Recreation Departments, and administered by resident volunteer leaders, all based out of San Ysidro Park and the Cesar Chavez Gym. This program has been the impetus behind significant gains in East Gilroy residents’ community involvement, new and thriving relations with the Gilroy Police and Recreation Departments and the emergence of positive community activism through the 6.J Packet Pg. 82 San Ysidro Nueva Vida community group. This group also serves as a resident advisory group of the South County Youth Task Force. Additionally, funds from this Santa Clara County agreement serves as a 1:1 ratio dollar match to the current California Violence Intervention and Prevention Program grant (CalVIP) from the Board of State and Community Corrections, administered by the City of Gilroy on behalf of the SCYTF. The term of the CalVIP Grant ends August 31, 2020. The current agreement began in FY 2017-18 to provide funding through FY 2019-20. Per the existing agreement, funding is scheduled to terminate June 30, 2020. This new agreement will extend funding to June 30, 2022. ANALYSIS It is the County of Santa Clara Probation Department Neighborhood Safety Unit’s desire to continue the partnership with the City of Gilroy building on the work and community engagement already with the residents of East Gilroy. Over the course of this past fiscal year Santa Clara County officials have worked with Police Department staff to discuss funding options for the remainder of FY 2019-20 and the opportunity for continuation of funding into FY 2020-21 and FY 2021-22. Due to staffing changes and delays in hiring supporting positions, the current fiscal year program budget is underspent in salaries. Additionally, this year bought some unforeseen challenges that interrupted service delivery, e.g. the tragic events at the Gilroy Garlic Festival and the current Covid-19 pandemic. As a result, the County has negotiated an amendment to the existing agreement to adjust FY2019-20 funding to align with spending projections for the remainder of the year. This reduction will not negatively affect the programs in the City, and will provide an extension of the current agreement for continued NSU funding in FY 2020 -21 and FY 2021-22. The proposed amendment will result in the following actions: 1. Reduce the existing FY 2019-20 funding by $4,933 from $119,650 to $114,717, to align with projected expenditures and; 2. Extend the term of the agreement by two additional years for FY 2020 -21 and FY 2021-22. Funding for the two additional years will be $157,000 per year for a total of $314,000. Budget Amendment Resolution Recommendations: FY 2019-20 Amended Operating Budget: Neighborhood Safety Unit (NSU) Service Agreement – Santa Clara County 6.J Packet Pg. 83 Fund-227 Department-1400 Fund-0000 Account Budget Amount Title 4120 $ 18,138* Wages/Part Time 4206 $ 33,250 Support Services 4215 $ 7,116 Contractual Services 4221 $ 5,000 Office/Computer Supplies 4265 $ 48,453 Program Expenses 4320 $ 2,760 Equipment/Furniture $114,717 Total *FY 2019-20 Operating Budget reduction of $4,933 in Wages/Part Time from $23,071 to $18,138. FY 2020-21 Amended Operating Budget: Neighborhood Safety Unit (NSU) Service Agreement – Santa Clara County Fund-227 Department-1400 Fund-0000 Account Budget Amount Title 4110 $ 65,000 Salaries 4120 $ 5,000 Wages Part Time 4206 $ 12,000 Support Services 4215 $ 40,000 Contractual Services 4221 $ 2,500 Office/Computer Supplies 4265 $ 30,000 Program Expenses 4320 $ 2,500 Equipment/Furniture $157,000 Total ALTERNATIVES Council may reject the extension of the County agreement through June 30, 2022 and not approve the budget amendments for FY 2019 -2020 and FY 2020-2021. If not approved the $4,933 previously allocated to the City will not be expended and will be returned to the County. The City will not receive additional funding over the next two fiscal years of $314,000. Staff Does Not Recommend this option. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE If adopted, the FY 2019-20 Operating Budget, Fund 227, would be reduced by $4,933, and the FY 2020-21 Operating Budget, Fund 227, would be increased by $157,000. Attachments: 6.J Packet Pg. 84 1. Resolution SCYTF Budget Amendment 6.J Packet Pg. 85 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-XX RESOLUTION NO. 2020-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF GILROY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019-2020 AND FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 IN THE GANG PREVENTION/INTERVENTION FUND AND APPROPRIATING PROPOSED EXPENDITURE AMENDMENTS WHEREAS, the City Administrator prepared and submitted to the City Council a budget for the City of Gilroy for Fiscal Years 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, and the City Council carefully examined, considered and adopted the same on June 3, 2019; and WHEREAS, City Staff has prepared and submitted to the City Council a proposed amendment to said budget for Fiscal Year 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 for the City of Gilroy in the staff report dated May 18, 2020 for the Gang Prevention/Intervention Fund; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and considered the same and is satisfied with said budget amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT appropriations in the Gang Prevention/Intervention Fund, Fund 227, is hereby decreased by $4,933 for Fiscal Year 2019- 2020 and increased by $157,000 for Fiscal Year 2020-2021. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of May 2020 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: APPROVED: ___________________________ ATTEST: Roland Velasco, Mayor _________________________ Shawna Freels, City Clerk 6.J.a Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Resolution SCYTF Budget Amendment (2821 : SCYTF Amended Agreement) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Declaration of Surplus Property and Approval of a Purchase and Indemnification Agreement for the Police Department Canine "Scotty" Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis Trevin Barber Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Declare the canine known as “Scotty” as surplus property to be sold to his handler, and authorize the Police Chief to enter into a purchase and indemnification agreement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY One of the Gilroy Police Department Canine Officers has left our employment as of May 7, 2020. His Canine partner was paid for by the Gilroy Police Foundation and ownership of the canine was transferred to the City of Gilroy. The Canine Handler would like to keep his Canine and an agreement has been reached between the Canine Officer, the Chief of Police and the Gilroy Police Foundation to 6.K Packet Pg. 87 accept $2,000 from the handler as a prorated amount to cover the projected remaining value of the canine. The City Attorney drafted a purchase and indemnification agreement that grants temporary possession of the canine to the handler pending City Council approval of the agreement. BACKGROUND Gilroy City Code on Surplus Property The City of Gilroy has routinely used auction as a fast and convenient means of disposing surplus property. The Council-adopted City of Gilroy Purchasing Policy states: “8.8 Surplus Property Disposal All city equipment, supplies, and vehicles (“personal property” or “property”) will eventually reach the end of their useful life and must be disposed of, and to the best extent possible, generate revenue through sale or traded-in when new equipment is purchased. The following procedures apply to the disposal of surplus property: Surplus Disposal. It is the responsibility of department heads to determine when an item is obsolete or excess surplus property. After such determination is made, the surplus property may be transferred to another department or used as a trade-in for new equipment. Surplused items may be donated, sold through a competitive sealed bid process, or sold at public auction to another governmental or non-profit entity. For final disposal, City Council shall approve of items to be surplused.” Surplused items may be donated, sold through a competitive sealed bid process, or sold at public auction to another government agency or to a non -profit organization. In order of precedence, an opportunity for surplused items may be offered at no cost to: 1) Gilroy Unified School District, 2) The City of Gilroy’s Youth Center, and 3) Gilroy Chamber of Commerce. Surplused items unlikely to generate significant revenue and that are not acquired by other City departments may be donated to other public agencies, to Gilroy’s sister city of Teca ta, Mexico or to non-profit organizations. Any donation of surplus City property to a non -profit organization shall be approved by the City Council upon a finding that (a) such non -profit is qualified under Section 501(c)(3) if the Internal Revenue Code and (b) the donation will benefit the City and its constituents. Gilroy Police Department K9 Unit 6.K Packet Pg. 88 Police canine teams are assigned to the patrol division and work a beat assignment. The canine teams differ from the ordinary patrol officer because they have the additional responsibility of responding to all in progress violent crimes, crimes involving weapons and fleeing fugitives regardless of the beat the crime is occurring in. Canine teams will search buildings, open areas and vehicles where a violent offender or armed suspect may be hiding or lying in wait. Canine teams can use scent detection to identify evidence related to a crime, can track fleeing fugitives, locate hidden suspects and apprehend actively resisting offenders. Canine teams are also trained to deploy with the SWAT team and work alongside SWAT team members on dangerous and complex of missions. Police canines spend the first 12 and 15 months of their life with a breeder to learn basic obedience. Once the adolescent canine gains maturity, the canine advances to a highly trained police canine trainer who will put the canine through a very specific selection process to make sure the canine has the proper temperament, mental capacity and sociability to conduct police work. The Police Department selects potential canine officer candidates through an interview process that consists of a writing assignment, oral interview, review of performance evaluations and supervisory recommendations. Once the officer is selected, the officer works with a police canine trainer to find a canine that matches the officer’s personality. The compatibility between the officer and canine partner is crucial to the team’s longevity and overall success. This team will spend almost every hour of every day together for the remainder of the dog’s life. Once a canine pair has been made they attend a basic patrol canine school where the team learns to work together in patrol functions. Patrol functions consist of advanced obedience and agility, detection, hard (urban) and soft (rural) surface tracking, evidence searches, open area and building searches. This part of the training process is approximately 4 weeks. Upon completion of training and certification the handler/canine team is assigned to a patrol team. After working their shift the canine goes home with the officer. Police canines form deep bonds with their handler and the handler’s immediate family (spouse, children, and other family pets). Police canines have a working life of anywhere from 3 -8 years. The working life of the canine is broad because it is based on the overall physical health of the canine. Two major factors that impact the overall physical health of the dog include their size and the enforcement activity they engage in. A larger dog will have a shorter working life than a smaller dog; and a dog that has more deployments in the field will have a shorter working life than a dog with fewer deployments. 6.K Packet Pg. 89 This particular canine was the first canine paid for in full by the Gilroy Police Foundation. The Foundation also purchased a bullet resistant vest for the canine. Since the Gilroy Police Foundation will likely be requested to assist with the purchase of a replacement canine in the future, the Chief approached the Foundation about the propriety of allowing the handler to keep his canine. Through these discussions an expected working life expectancy was agreed upon and the value remaining from the purchase price was calculated. The Foundation requested a return of the bullet resistant vest for use with another canine and agreed on $2,000 as a reasonable reimbursement to off -set the purchase of a new canine in the future. DISCUSSION The Police Department Dog known as “Scotty” has formed a measurabl e bond with his handler Bobby Zuniga. Given Mr. Zuniga is no longer an employee for the City of Gilroy, a resolution regarding the disposition of Scotty needs to be reached. Scotty is a large canine that has had a very active law enforcement career. These two factors would indicate a strong potential that the service life of the canine would be of shorter longevity. The Department could attempt to identify another Canine handler, team up Scotty with that new handler and send them back to the police canine schools. The time needed to accomplish this would be several months on a best case scenario and would cost several thousand dollars in training expenses alone. There is also a potential the bond between Scotty and a new handler would not develop to a degree necessary for deployment as an active canine team. When considering the potential working life left in Scotty the effort and expense does not justify this course of action. A new handler would simply not get enough longevity with the dog to make this arrangement viable. Staff has determined the canine should not be sold in the same manner as other surplus property, given the obvious bond between Scotty and Mr. Zuniga. Staff recommends the Police Department Dog known as Scotty be declared as surplus property and sold to Mr. Zuniga so the dog may live a full life with his human partner. Given the speed of Mr. Zuniga’s departure, the extraordinary considerations created by the Shelter in Place Order, and other complexities described in this report, Staff resolved a verbal agreement with Mr. Zuniga, the Police Foundation and the Chief of Police. Working with the City Attorney’s Office an agreement was drafted between Mr. Zuniga and the City absolving the City of any liability related to the canine after May 7,, 2020. Mr. Zuniga was allowed to keep possession of the canine pending Council action. With Council approval the contract will be fully executed and Mr. Zuniga will pay $2,000 to the City in exchange for his canine partner Scotty. These funds will be revolved to the 6.K Packet Pg. 90 purchase of the next police canine. Mr. Zuniga has already returned the bullet resistant vest as requested by the Gilroy Police Foundation. ALTERNATIVES 1. Council can choose not to approve the surplus of the canine Scotty and revoke the purchase and indemnification agreement. The canine would be returned to the Department and a kennel service would be sought to care for the dog pending a process to assign and train a new handler if possible. Staff does not recommend. FISCAL IMPACT $2,000. The proceeds will be revolved to the acquisition of a new police canine in the future, offsetting some of the cost associated with the future acquisition of another canine. Attachments: 1. Canine Scotty Agreement for Sale and Indemnification 6.K Packet Pg. 91 6.K.a Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Canine Scotty Agreement for Sale and Indemnification (2816 : Surplus of Police Dog) 6.K.a Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Canine Scotty Agreement for Sale and Indemnification (2816 : Surplus of Police Dog) 6.K.a Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Canine Scotty Agreement for Sale and Indemnification (2816 : Surplus of Police Dog) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Approval of a Parcel Map and Dedication of Public Service Easement for 5717 Obata Way, Gilroy; APN 841-76-014 Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Public Works Department Submitted By: Girum Awoke Prepared By: Girum Awoke Jorge Duran Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Approve parcel map and acceptance of the dedication of a public service easement for 5717 Obata Way, Gilroy; APN 841-76-014. BACKGROUND The City has received a request to approve the subdivision of a parce l located at 5717 Obata Way, in the southeast part of the City, for the purpose of providing two lots, an ingress/egress access as well as a Public Service Easement (PSE). The existing parcel is approximately 3.42 acres and shown in the County Assessor Map as APN 841-76- 014. The site is also located in an area zoned as Industrial. DISCUSSION 6.L Packet Pg. 95 The property located at 5717 Obata Way is currently used as a construction material processing and staging site for Noah concrete. According to the Santa Clara County Assessor’s office records, the property is owned by the Donato and Xochitl Alvarez Revocable Living Trust and Gerald T. Movrich (Owners). The Owners of the property are requesting approval of a Parcel Map for the proposed 2- lot subdivision, dedication of a proposed Public Service Easement (PSE), and creation of a Private Ingress/Egress Easement. Per the State of California Subdivision Map Act (which regulates and controls design and improvement of subdivisions with proper consideration for their relation to adjoining areas, requires owners/subdividers to install streets and other improvements, and ensures the protection of both the public and purchasers of subdivided lands), a Parcel Map is required to be submitted to the local jurisdiction for the division of land into four or fewer parcels. The purpose of a subdivision could be for the sale, lease, or financing of a property in the immediate or in the future, with certain exceptions. The existing parcel is Parcel 1, as shown on that certain Parcel Map file d in the office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, in Book 543 of Parcel Maps, at page 39. This parcel will be subdivided into Parcel A and B. Access to the newly subdivided Parcel B will be provided through Parcel A, which will require an Ingress/Egress easement for the benefit of Parcel B. A minimum 40’ access is required for Parcel B. In addition, the recording of a PSE over any road access is required to meet City standards. Staff has reviewed the Parcel Map and determined that the Map is ready for recording with Santa Clara County, once approved by City Council. ALTERNATIVES Council could deny the request to approve the Parcel Map. However, the current use of the property (and the request to subdivide the property) is consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning and land use designations for the area. Staff has not found any legal reason that would warrant denying approval of this Parcel Map. Therefore staff DOES NOT RECOMMEND THIS OPTON. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE There are no financial impacts with this Council action. Attachments: 1. 5717 Obata Way - Signed Map 6.L Packet Pg. 96 6.L.a Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: 5717 Obata Way - Signed Map (2826 : Parcel Map, 5717 Obata Way) 6.L.a Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: 5717 Obata Way - Signed Map (2826 : Parcel Map, 5717 Obata Way) 6.L.a Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: 5717 Obata Way - Signed Map (2826 : Parcel Map, 5717 Obata Way) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Extension of the Memorandum of Understanding With Garlic City BMX for a BMX Pump Track Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Interim City Administrator to sign an extension of the Memorandum of Understanding with Garlic City BMX for a BMX pump track through May 20, 2021. BACKGROUND On May 20, 2019 the City and Garlic City BMX (GCBMX), executed a 12 -month memorandum of understanding (MOU) that would allow both parties to explore the possibility of the development of a BMX styles skills park at Christmas Hill Park. ANALYSIS Staff recommends an extension of the MOU to May 20, 2021 to allow both parties to continue their due diligence in determining the viability of a BMX facility. This is the only recommended adjustment to the MOU. 7.A Packet Pg. 100 Should the development of the BMX park come to fruition, staff will return to the City Council with recommended terms and conditions for the operation of the BMX park. ALTERNATIVES Council could reject the recommended action. This is not recommended as the extension of the MOU only permits the City and GCBMX to continue to explore potential projects. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE There is no fiscal impact associated with this extension. Attachments: 1. Garlic City BMX - MOU for Potential BMX Park (2019) 7.A Packet Pg. 101 This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") entered into as of this ;04, day of tw, , 2019, is intended to set forth certain understandings, undertakings, and agreen0ats by and between the Garlic City BMX, a California non-profit corporation GCBMX") and the City of Gilroy, California, a body corporate and politic, ("City") concerning the development of a BMX style skills park ("BMX Park") located on property at Christmas Hill Park in Gilroy. RECITALS WIREERENS, the City promotes and provides safe and comprehensive community facilities, programs, and services to enrich the quality of life for all residents and visitors; WHEREAS, GCBMX is a non-profit organization dedicated to improving bike skills in the City of Gilroy and is committed to: (i) advocacy for all bike riders, (ii) building and maintaining bike skills parks, (iii) teaching proper park use, and (iv) working with governmental entities to create programs at bike skills parks for the community, and WHEREAS, the City and GCBMX wish to enter into this MOU to establish a framework of cooperation upon which mutually beneficial programs, work projects, and bicycling facilities may be planned by the City and GCBMX at Christmas Hill Park with such mrograms, projects and facilities complementing the missions of the City and GCBMX, and are done in the best interests of the public. NOW THEREFORE, the City and GCBMX have determined to undertake this MOU setting out certain elements of their intended cooperation with respect to a BMX Park. AGREEMENT 1) The City and GCBMX are contemplating the possibility of building and operating a BMX Park at Christmas Hill Park, and that the division of responsibilities between them could be similar to that outlined herein. a) If a BMX Park is built, then the general responsibilities of GCB are contemplated to be: i) Provide as -needed maintenance, no less than one-time per month, using its own tools. 11) Keep a documented site -maintenance log. iii) Provide and empty trash receptacle(s). iv) Provide and manage a port -a -potty, as needed. QW-6516-16141 ALRO470M 7.A.a Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Garlic City BMX - MOU for Potential BMX Park (2019) (2769 : Garlic City BMX Pump Track MOU Extension) v) rrovide and maintain adequate signage to be mutually agreed upon by CITY and GCBMX. vi) Provide general maintenance and upkeep at, and near to, the BMX Park. b) If the BMX Park is built, then the general responsibilities of City are contemplated to be: i) Provide access to GCBMX for construction, ongoing maintenance, and emergency response. ii) Work with GCBMX to coordinate an emergency response plan for the BMX Park. iii) Permit GCBMX to hold minor special events open to the public at the BMX Park, at no cost to GCBMX, so long as these events do not require additional city resources above and beyond typical demand at Christmas Hill Park. Larger special events that require, for example, additional police, maintenance crews, and/or administrative staff would be authorized by normal City procedures allowing for cost recovery by City via the typical special event permit process. iv) Allow GCBMX to keep a locked tool cache on -site at the Park. 2) This MOU is neither a fiscal nor funds obligation document. Any endeavor involving reimbursement or contribution of funds between the parties shall be handled in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and procedures. If agreed upon, such endeavors would be the subject of separate agreements to be entered into by the City and GCBMX. 3) City shall have sole approval rights and authority over all development of the BMX Park and organized activities GCBMX may undertake at the Park. 4) Nothing in this MOU shall restrict or prohibit either parry from participating in similar activities or arrangements with other public or private agencies, organizations, or individuals. 5) The terms of this MOU are non -binding. Nothing herein shall obligate either the City or GCBMX to expend or allocate appropriations or to enter into any contract or other obligations. The entering into this MOU is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 6) Both parties shall comply with all local, state, and federal laws, including but not limited to, executive orders, regulations, and policies relating to non-discrimination. 7) The initial term of this MOU shall be one year from the date first above written. This MOU may be extended, modified or amended upon the written consent of both 4810-6516-16140 ALRO4706083 7.A.a Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Garlic City BMX - MOU for Potential BMX Park (2019) (2769 : Garlic City BMX Pump Track MOU Extension) parties or may be terminated with 30-day written notice by either party. Notices shall be given as follow: a) To the City: Attn: City Administrator City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna St. Gilroy, CA 95020 b) To GCBMX Attn: Mary Garcia, President Garlic City BMX 803 Lawrence Dr. Gilroy, CA 95020 In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this MOU below: Garlic Citv BMX City of Giillroov y. m/ TTNae. an-y Garcia Na tip. Gab -el A. vl L ;vim Title: President Dag/` Approved as to Form: Gilroy City Attor ffice By f Ci Attorney Title: City Administrator Date:A-2!z7 Z©Z 9 ATTEST: 4810-6518-1614A ALF\04706083 7.A.a Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Garlic City BMX - MOU for Potential BMX Park (2019) (2769 : Garlic City BMX Pump Track MOU Extension) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Report on General Fund Expenditures, Impacts of COVID-19 to Non-General Fund Revenues and Preliminary Recovery Plan Recommendations Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Finance Department Submitted By: Bryce Atkins Prepared By: Bryce Atkins Strategic Plan Goals Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ W orkforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Receive report and provide direction to staff. BACKGROUND At the May 4, 2020 regular City Council meeting, staff presented projected revenue shortfalls due to the COVID-19 shelter-in-place order(s). Although the projections are preliminary due to the lag between economic activity and the tax revenues, the most likely impact scenario, based on currently available information, is a reduction in revenues by $7.0 million and $4.3 million for FY20 and FY21 respectively. This is a total reduction from budgeted numbers across both fiscal years by $11.3 million. As part of the report, staff discussed with Council a process involving several Council meetings to prepare a recovery plan to address two issues invo lving the City’s finances: 9.A Packet Pg. 105 1) The immediate concern regarding the rapid decrease in revenues associated with the COVID-19 shelter-in-place order, with the fiscal impacts described above; and, 2) The City’s pre-existing structural deficit. The deficit was already included in the adopted budget for FY20 and FY21, with several fiscal years into the future before the City’s established reserves begin to be used. However, with the impacts of COVID-19, the reserves are threatened beginning this fiscal year, so instead of planning over several years, the recovery plan will need to address the structural deficit as well. At the May 4th, 2020 City Council meeting, staff committed to bringing back to Council a discussion of General Fund expenditures, a review of the revenue impacts to the City’s non-general funds and their expenditures, discussions regarding the one-time savings to address FY20 revenue shortfalls, and several potential options for the recovery plan to address the remaining COVID-19 caused shortfall as well as addressing the ongoing structural deficit. GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES At the May 4, 2020 City Council meeting, staff presented projected revenue shortfalls due to the COVID-19 shelter-in-place order(s). The next step includes evaluating FY20 General Fund expenditures, reviewing the adopted budget for FY21, and the implications to the City’s financial position resulting from the gap between revenue and expenditure projections. Below is Figure 1, a table showing the currently budgeted and projected expenditu res for FY20: Figure 1: FY20 General Fund Expenditure Projections Expenditure Category FY20 Amended Budget FY20 Projected Actual FY20 Savings/ (Deficit) Personnel $40,651,227 $41,977,967 $(1,326,740) Materials and Services $7,537,531 $6,241,220 $1,296,311 Capital Outlay $150,000 $0 $150,000 Transfers $4,747,850 $4,684,747 $63,103 Internal Service Charges $5,539,384 $5,539,384 $0 Other Charges $467,648 $644,193 $(176,545) Total $59,093,640 $59,087,511 $6,129 9.A Packet Pg. 106 The City’s FY20 projected budget numbers are in alignment with the adopted budget. As with most years, fluctuations between expenditure categories create overages and savings, however the City is expected to be within $6,000 of the adopted budget amount. The City’s personnel expenses for FY20 are projected to be over the projected levels by $1.3 million. Of this amount, $0.8 million is in overtime, which has seen a level of use greater than what was included in the adopted budget. The overtime overages include significant amount in the month of August for Police Patrol ($0.2 million) and Fire Operations throughout the fiscal year ($0.6 million) to address significant vacancies within the Department, as well as some staff on injury leave . The remaining $0.5 million was a reduction in projected salary savings of the General Fund. The other increased expenses is in category of Other Charges, which is $0.2 million above budgeted levels, tied to costs associated with the Gilroy Garlic Incident in August of 2019. This amount of higher than budgeted costs is offset with projected actuals being lower than budgeted levels in the categories of Materials and Services($1.3 million in savings), Capital Outlay ($0.15 million), and Transfers (<$0.1 million), namely a min or reduction in the Recreation Department transfer based on the year-end projections based on current information. Overall, the City’s General Fund expenditures for FY20 is projected to end with a total of $59.1 million. Based on this amount, combined with the projected actual revenue totals, below are projections for the net surplus/ (deficit) for the General Fund for FY20 and FY21, assuming no other actions are taken to address the gap: Figure 2: General Fund Projection Summary for FY20 and FY21 FY20 FY21 Beginning Unassigned Fund Balance $21,258,8701 $10,829,504 Current Projected Revenue2 $48,658,145 $52,666,803 Projected Expenditures3 $(59,087,511) $(57,711,594) Projected Ending Fund Balance $10,829,504 $5,784,713 1 This figure is taken from the FY19 CAFR, and then reduced by the $1.8 million IRS Sectio n 115 Trust investment, and the $4.6 million transfer for one-time projects from the previously unassigned fund balance. 2 These amounts are drawn from the budgeted revenues, adjusted by the lost revenue projections from the current COVID-19 shelter-in-place economic impacts as reported on May 4, 2020. 3 FY 20 amount includes the budgeted $2 million in use of fund balance at initial adoption and $1.2 million in carryover appropriations and budget amendments. 9.A Packet Pg. 107 Projected Annual Surplus/(Deficit) $(10,429,366) $(5,044,791) Deduct budgeted (planned) use of fund balance and carryover encumbrance appropriations from deficit result (included in Expenditures above) $3,442,068 $712,634 COVID-19 Lost Revenue Related Deficit Amount $(6,987,298) $(4,332,157) Overall, without adjustment, the City is projected to spend $10.4 million and $5 million more than is earned in FY20 and FY21, respectively, for a combined total of $15.4 million. Of this amount, $3.4 million and $0.7 million in FY20 and FY21 were planned in the budget and as a result of encumbrance appropriation carryovers. The remaining portion is the amount due to the COVID-19 revenue shortfall is $7.0 and $4.3 million respectively, for a combined total of $11.3 million. NON-GENERAL FUNDS The City has nearly 100 separate, non-general funds. Instead of presenting on each and every fund separately, the information presented below is grouped by fund type, and presented in aggregate format. Gas Taxes The City’s Gas Tax revenues are received from other agencies as pass-through payments. Many of them have formulas and waterfall provisions which make projecting revenues from these sources challenging. The City’s gas taxes come mainly from an excise tax on fuel purchased. It is based on a fee assessed to a gallon of fuel, and not a percentage of the cost spent on the fuel, which would be akin to a sales tax. This includes the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) and Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA). HUTA is entirely driven by excise taxes, while RMRA is a combination of excise taxes and vehicle registration taxes. The City also receives revenues from the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) that are tied to registration fees, called the Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) Fund, and the VTA also passes through the Measure B Local Streets and Roads funds, which is sales tax based. Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) The City’s budgeted projections for HUTA revenue have nearly been reached for FY20. Budgeted at a combined total of $1.2 million acros s the 5 HUTA funds, $1.1 million has already been received. Projections for FY20 place the funds at $1.3 million in revenue at year-end, approximately $0.1 million in revenue above 9.A Packet Pg. 108 projections even with a 30% reduction in revenues over two months. The revenue typically lags by two months as well. Staff is recommending to keep the FY21 projected revenues the same as the budget at $1.2 million. Overall, no revenue shortfall is projected at this time compared to the adopted budget. The impacts would essentially be less surplus than what we may have experienced without the COVID-19 emergency. This may change as more information becomes available, and may change within the individual funds within the HUTA gas tax group. Additionally, the City received reimbursements of approximately $0.7 million from previous grant fund projects that were paid out of several HUTA funds. This amount was deducted from the projected totals above, for the purposes of monitoring new revenue, and not reimbursements of previously earned revenues in prior years. Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) RMRA is based on a mix of excise tax and vehicle registration funds. FY20’s budgeted revenues in this fund total $0.9 million. To date, the fund has received $0.8 million, not including a reimbursement of $0.2 million from prior year expenditures, with a two month lag. Similarly to the HUTA projections, even with 30% reduction, this fund is anticipated to take in more than budget projections for revenue, to the projected amount of $1.0 million, an increase of $0.1 million. As before, staff is recommending to keep FY21’s projections at the adopted budget level. Measure B Measure B, unlike the other gas tax revenues discussed, is actually a sales tax in Santa Clara County. However, like the other funds, how it is distributed is based on fixed amount waterfall provisions and proportionate share based on population of the cities in the county and the County’s road and expressway lane mileage. To make it more complex, after an initial distribution, which the City has previously received, the remaining funds are reimbursement based. As such, the amount budgeted is the full allocation assuming there are sufficient projects to receive the reimbursements. At this time, the City has only received $0.2 million of the budgeted $1.0 million in revenue. However, this is due to the fact that no expenditures have been encumbered or spent against this fund, and not the result of COVID -19 related impacts. When projects are approved to use the funds, then the funding may be drawn down as a reimbursement. The delay in projects is attributable to the litigation over the measure that was resolved earlier this fiscal year. Now that the matter has been resolved, the City is free to pursue use of this funding source for local street and road maintenance. 9.A Packet Pg. 109 Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) The City’s VRF fund has already received the amount budgeted for the fiscal year. The amount was received in November, 2019. As such, no COVID-19 related revenue shortfall from budgeted levels will be experienced in FY20. This is due to the funding source being derived from a fee added to vehicle registrations in the County. This makes the VRF Fund the least volatile transportation revenue in economic downturns. Because of this stability, and that the full appropriation was received this fiscal year, staff is recommending to keep the revenue projections for FY21 at the budgeted level. Grant Funds Staff is not projecting any losses in revenues for grants at this time. Grant funding typically comes with grant agreements which identify the funding awarded. Additionally, federal awards, which form the larger part of the City’s grant awards, are allocated specifically to the awardee, and is at a low risk for involuntary reallocation. No l ost revenue is currently projected for FY20 or FY21. This includes Community Development Block Grants, which actually saw increased allocations as part of the federal CARES Act. Future years may have less likelihood of grant awards, however the City does not budget for potential grants but only those that are actually awarded to the City, and therefore no budget shortfalls are present. Development Impact Fees Staff is taking a very conservative approach to the projection of Development Impact Fees. While building-related user fees tend to follow the market, it includes improvements to existing, developed property, development impact fees are based on new or expanded demands on City services as a result of new growth, which do not generate revenue at the same pace of recovery that building user fees can. Staff is projecting no additional revenue this fiscal year beyond what has already been received. Additionally, based on the performance of the impact fee funds, it has a similar level of revenue decline as seen in the user fees, approximately only 40% of the revenue that was projected in the adopted budget. As with the user fees, this is not really an impact of COVID-19, but is a financial condition that must be addressed. In addition to slow activity in the development market, these funds are also challenged with the deferment of impact fee payments from the pulling of the permits until occupancy later in the project development. Below is Figure 3, a table showing the projected revenue shortfall compared to budget projections for FY20, as well as the expenditures and net position change. Figure 3: Development Impact Fee Funds FY20 9.A Packet Pg. 110 Development Impact Fee Funds FY20 Budget Projected Surplus/ (Shortfall)%Budgeted Projected Savings/ (Deficit) Net Position Change 420 - STORM DRAIN DEVELOPMENT 167,732$ 25,861$ (141,871)$ -85%197,522$ 83,477$ 114,045$ (57,616)$ 432 - STREET TREE DEVELOPMENT 8,316$ 2,579$ (5,737)$ -69%5,000$ -$ 5,000$ 2,579$ 433 - TRAFFIC IMPACT 5,481,184$ 2,413,122$ (3,068,062)$ -56%7,447,455$ 2,846,210$ 4,601,245$ (433,089)$ 435 - SEWER DEVELOPMENT 4,207,690$ 1,709,938$ (2,497,752)$ -59%3,990,541$ 1,278,130$ 2,712,411$ 431,808$ 436 - WATER DEVELOPMENT 979,452$ 512,322$ (467,130)$ -48%676,229$ 1,120,907$ (444,678)$ (608,584)$ 440 - PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT 9,187,494$ 3,472,991$ (5,714,503)$ -62%8,835,215$ 6,867,524$ 1,967,691$ (3,394,533)$ Totals 20,031,868$ 8,136,813$ (11,895,055)$ -59%21,151,962$ 12,196,248$ 8,955,714$ (4,059,435)$ Revenues Expenditures These shortfall funds will be received sometime in the future, it is just not known for certain which fiscal year it might be received. This type of delay in revenues is not unusual, as it has happens from time to time. Development projects that were planned to be constructed may be delayed, which delays the receipt of impact fees. In many instances, the expenditures utilize fund balance – that is, funds that were accumulated in previous years and held until project funding was adequate. For the recovery factor, staff is recommending to use the average annual growth over the past 10 years, or as many years as the impact fee has been in existence. After the prior recessions, recovery rates have varied widely, increasing sometimes as high as 168% which was an increase a few years after the 2001 recession. Staff feels that a high bounce back rate is too optimistic, especially given that the decline was not COVID-19 recession related, but had started before the shelter-in-place began. Below is Figure 4, which shows the projected, first recovery year revenues and projected shortfall compared the adopted budget Figure 4: Development Impact Fee Funds FY21 Expenditures Development Impact Fee Funds FY21 FY20 Projected Average Annual Growth Rate FY21 Projected FY21 Adopted Budget Surplus/ (Shortfall)Budgeted Net Position Change 420 - STORM DRAIN DEVELOPMENT 25,861$ 26.1%32,602$ 148,996$ (116,393)$ 155,155$ (122,553)$ 432 - STREET TREE DEVELOPMENT 2,579$ 21.3%3,128$ 5,659$ (2,531)$ 5,000$ (1,872)$ 433 - TRAFFIC IMPACT 2,413,122$ 29.0%3,111,990$ 4,128,437$ (1,016,447)$ 604,296$ 2,507,694$ 435 - SEWER DEVELOPMENT 1,709,938$ 23.0%2,102,397$ 3,050,319$ (947,922)$ 1,202,224$ 900,173$ 436 - WATER DEVELOPMENT 512,322$ 36.1%697,069$ 716,904$ (19,835)$ 2,902,219$ (2,205,150)$ 440 - PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT 3,472,991$ 13.3%3,935,529$ 6,389,295$ (2,453,765)$ 5,682,310$ (1,746,781)$ Totals 8,136,813$ 9,882,716$ 14,439,610$ (4,556,893)$ 10,551,204$ (668,488)$ Revenues Based on the projections, the shortfall for all impact fee funds is projected at $16.5 million over the two fiscal years. It is the highest shortfall, even more than the General Fund. However, most if not all of the shortfall is associated with development progressing slowly throughout the year, and not just COVID-19 impacts. This is not an unusual happening in most cases. When revenues received for the impact fees are this dramatically lower than projected, projects will be delayed until sufficient revenues are received to develop the project. 9.A Packet Pg. 111 The primary fund within the development impact fee funds that has the largest shortfall is the Public Facilities Impact Fee Fund, Fund 440. Two revenue bonds’ debt service payments, the Gilroy Gardens inter-fund loan and the Development Services Center/One-Stop Shop project are appropriated within this fund. Staff will be recommending to review the projects associated with this fund and to adjust or postpone them to adapt to the lower amount of reven ue. Recreation Roughly 30% ($1.1 million) of the Recreation Fund is supported by user fees and other special revenue, while the other 70% ($2.7 million) is funded by a transfer from the City’s General Fund in FY20 and FY21. Currently, the Recreation Fund has received $0.7 million in revenue from sources other than the City’s General Fund. The FY20 budgeted revenue, excluding the transfer from the General Fund, is $1.2 million. The assumptions used in these projections assume that the shelter-in-place will continue through June. As such, the $0.7 million represents all that the Recreation Fund is projected to receive in FY20, as under the assumption no programming will continue except for limited programs for vulnerable populations, which typically have minim al to no cost recovery. In fact, in April and the beginning of May, reimbursements for user fees paid for intended programs and those in the near future are being reimbursed, resulting in negative net revenue, which is accounted for in the projected revenu e total. Original budgeted expenditures were $3.8 million in FY20. The current projected year - end total of Recreation expenditures is $3.4 million. This amount is subject to change if services are restored, in whole or in part for the late spring or summer seasons. Should programming resume before July, the additional costs, only being partially recovered from user fees, would increase the need for the transfer -in from the General Fund. This would decrease the anticipated $63,103 in projected savings as identified in the below table Figure 5: Recreation Fund FY20 Recreation Fund FY20 Budget Projected Surplus/ (Shortfall)%Budgeted Projected Savings/ (Deficit) Net Position Change 290 - RECREATION 3,835,082$ 3,419,905$ (415,177)$ -11%3,835,082$ 3,356,803$ 478,280$ 63,103$ Revenues Expenditures For FY21, staff is projecting that the shelter-in-place order lifts July 1, and staff return to work. However, the programming for the summer season will likely not commence right away. In the 2009 recession, Recreation revenue increased minimally for the first year, 1.28%. Staff is projecting for FY21 that the full budgeted transfer from the General Fund will take place, and that other revenue will increase by 1.28% for the year. If Recreation were to use all appropriations for FY21, there would be an additional need for $457,000 from the City’s General Fund above the budgeted amount. 9.A Packet Pg. 112 Figure 6: Recreation Fund FY21 Expenditures Recreation Fund FY21 FY21 Projected FY21 Adopted Budget Surplus/ (Shortfall)Budgeted Net Position Change 290 - RECREATION 3,488,660$ 3,945,375$ (456,715)$ 3,945,375$ (456,715)$ Revenues Enterprise Funds The City’s two enterprise funds, the Sewer and Water Funds, a re unique from the other non-general funds described in this staff report. There is no specific loss of revenues overall. While utility billing was closed during the initial shelter-in-place orders, customers continued to use water, and staff even received requests to start water service. The obligation to pay for the water service remains for the COVID-19 shelter-in- place period(s). Instead, the impact from COVID-19 is deferred revenue and cash flow considerations, as opposed to lost revenue. The enterprise funds have not received revenue for April and May, due to the lack of billing. Utility billing staff have returned to the office on partial days as of Monday, May 11th. The staff are working on issuing catch-up billing. At this time, staff will be issuing utility bills in June. Based on the delay between bills being issued and when payments are typically received, we are projecting payments being made in late June and July. Additionally, customers will be able to request payment plans for those bills du ring the COVID-19 period, so depending upon how many customers determine to request payment plans, a large portion of the revenues for FY20 will be collected in FY21. Below is Figure 7, which shows the revenue and expenditure analysis for the enterprise funds for FY20, assuming that the three months of revenue at the end of FY20 will all be collected over the span of FY21. Figure 8, which shows the collection of the revenue in FY21 which will offset the negative position change. Figure 7: Enterprise Funds FY20 Enterprise Funds FY20 Budget Projected Surplus/ (Shortfall)%Budgeted Projected Savings/ (Deficit) Net Position Change 700 - SEWER ENTERPRISE 14,214,658$ 9,656,532$ (4,558,126)$ -32%16,331,139$ 11,926,704$ 4,404,435$ (2,270,171)$ 720 - WATER ENTERPRISE 13,840,949$ 10,131,562$ (3,709,387)$ -27%12,792,567$ 13,485,385$ (692,818)$ (3,353,823)$ Totals 28,055,607$ 19,788,094$ (8,267,513)$ -29%29,123,706$ 25,412,089$ 3,711,617$ (5,623,995)$ Revenues Expenditures Figure 8: Enterprise Funds FY21 Expenditures Enterprise Funds FY21 FY21 Projected FY21 Adopted Budget Surplus/ (Shortfall)Budgeted Net Position Change 700 - SEWER ENTERPRISE 17,879,177$ 14,280,547$ 3,598,629$ 15,843,016$ 2,036,161$ 720 - WATER ENTERPRISE 17,700,942$ 13,906,302$ 3,794,641$ 13,759,111$ 3,941,831$ Totals 35,580,119$ 28,186,849$ 7,393,270$ 29,602,127$ 5,977,992$ Revenues Internal Service Funds 9.A Packet Pg. 113 Internal Service Funds receive their revenues from other City departments for the services they perform, usually on formulas driven by either a pro -rata share of costs incurred serving each department, or based on a relative ratio across the departments on a particular basis of the functional service of the fund. Based on the manner of the fund, there is currently no loss of revenue for the internal service funds. Only reductions in service to the other departments would cause a loss of revenue for the internal service fund(s). At this time, there are no projections of revenue loss for FY20 or FY21. Debt Service Funds Similarly, the City’s Debt Service Funds operate off of the debt schedules that are determined with the indenture agreements for the debt. The Debt Service funds have scheduled revenues and expenditures. Agency Trust Funds By their nature, the City does not budget revenue for Agency Trust Funds with limited exceptions. These exceptions include the South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA) and the Highway 152 Refinancing Bond debt service. SCRWA’s funding comes from operating cost allocations to the cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. The Highway 152 Agency bonds are associated with assessments against the properties within the district, and based on the assessment structure of the district does not vary based on the property value, so no COVID-19 impacts are projected for these two funds. The rest receive revenue associated with interest, where applicable. Donations or one-time revenue is not budgeted, as such income is typically not known during the budget process. However, the expenditures in those agency funds are tied only to the value of the funds held, and there are no obligations against the City’s other funds to address expenditures or debts in the Agency Trust funds. Community Facilities Districts The City has two Community Facilities Districts (CFD), the Deer Park and the Citywide CFD. The CFDs are assessed against properties within the district, on a separate assessment calculation with growth limiters in the calculation of assessments. These assessments will grow, but do not decrease with economic conditions as it relates to revenue. As such, there are no projected revenue shortfalls with the City’s two CFDs. 5-YEAR GENERAL FUND FORECAST MODEL Below is a forecast model for the next 5 years, showing numerically both the impacts of COVID-19 on the City’s finances, but also the ongoing structural deficit that the City is incurring. This assumes no actions are taken to address the financial condition. Figure 9: 5-Year Forecast Model – No COVID-19 Impact Mitigation (in millions) 9.A Packet Pg. 114 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beginning Fund Balance 21.3$ 10.8$ 5.8$ (2.2)$ (10.4)$ (18.0)$ Add: Revenues 48.7$ 52.7$ 52.0$ 53.9$ 56.7$ 58.2$ Less: Expenditures (59.1)$ (57.7)$ (59.9)$ (62.1)$ (64.3)$ (66.4)$ Budget Solutions -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance 10.8$ 5.8$ (2.2)$ (10.4)$ (18.0)$ (26.2)$ Operating Margin (10.4)$ (5.0)$ (7.9)$ (8.3)$ (7.6)$ (8.2)$ CITY’S GENERAL FUND RESERVES The general fund reserve, or fund balance of the general fund, is a measure of the financial resources available. It is like the savings account for the general fund. It has been built up over the years as a result of revenues exceeding expenditures, primarily due to one-time savings. The reserve helps the City mitigate risks and provide a back- up for revenue shortfalls. The City Council in prior years has adopted a policy to help manage the reserve, including two dedicated reserve categories, the Economic Stability Reserve (ESR) and the Unrestricted Minimum Reserve (UMR). Each of these have conditions that must be met to be used, per the policy. The general fund reserve is intended to help the City when revenues temporarily fall short of expenditures. This can be in response to the challenges of a changing economic environment, or during cyclical deficits when annual expenditures temporarily exceed revenues. The general fund reserve is maintained to cover unanticipated costs or fund one –time unbudgeted necessary costs (such as equipment/fleet failures or uninsured losses). In more extreme cases, the General Fund is established as a safety net in the event of a disaster requiring immediate response from the City. A major earthquake, flood or terrorist attack could require cash to be on-hand to immediately respond prior to the receipt of state or federal assistance. A catastrophic event could quickly exhaust the reserve and require a service level reduction (i.e. less money for parks, streets, recreation, etc.) Use of Reserves As identified above and in the adopted reserve policy, the intent of reserves are to provide temporary resources for one-time expenditures. While they can cover the shortfall of revenues due to a temporary incident (natural disaster, economic recession), it cannot sustain ongoing or long-term expenditures. Use of reserves depletes the reserve balance, but simultaneously it means that there is not revenue coming in to replenish it at the same time. It is a limited resource as it is generated from one-time savings, and not from a dedicated revenue source. Additionally, the adopted policy requires that the two reserves must be replenished, especially the ESR which has a specific timeframe, by policy, in which the ESR level must be fully replenished (discussed below). 9.A Packet Pg. 115 Economic Stability Reserve The Economic Stability Reserve is to be used only in extraordinary circumstances, upon satisfaction of one of the following “economic triggers” and with the majority vote of the City Council: State take-away of significant revenue Large drop in property taxes Major business closures (sales tax and/or utility users’ tax impact) Dramatic drop in development from projections Large unexpected drop in sales taxes or other primary revenues due to severe recession The economic triggers cause the General Fund reserve to fall below a predetermined percentage of expenditures (e.g. 20%) Should Council determine and vote to use the economic stability reserve, then the funding may be used to offset the losses and fund services that are still to be provided during the period of economic instability, and facilitate the City operating with the approach to make a soft landing, as discussed in the previous staff report regarding this matter. In the event the Economic Stability Reserve is used, the City is obligated by the policy to replenish the reserve by the end of the next biennial budget to 10% of the general fund expenditures for the given year. Given that we are in the mid-cycle period, if used the ESR is to be fully replenished by the end of Fiscal Year 2023. If the full am ount is used, then the fiscal recovery policy must not only balance all expenditures in a year to its revenue, but must have revenues exceed expenditures by an annual average between FY21 and FY23 of $1.9 million, assuming all $5.7 are used between FY20 an d FY21. One-Time Use The funds in the general fund reserve have a one -time use. This means than any use would reduce the reserve and funding would have to be rebuilt over time. No dedicated source of income exists to re-fund the reserve. Rebuilding the reserve could mean service reductions to “make ends meet” because replenishing the reserve means diversion of annual operating monies to the general fund reserve instead of funding services, projects or programs. This results in a very limited use of the reserves, remaining to cover one-time costs, and not to pay ongoing costs over one or more years. COVID-19 and the City’s reserves 9.A Packet Pg. 116 In determining the use of the City’s reserves, there are a few considerations that staff would like to raise. The ESR is intended to address short term economic impacts, and not intended to be used to address mid-term or long-term ongoing shortfalls from spending more funds than revenues can be expected to cover It is not advisable to spend all of the ESR at the outset of the event. Currently, it is unknown if a resurgence of the coronavirus will occur, and if there will be a second or more shelter-in-place orders issues. It is advisable to retain a minority portion of the ESR to handle any additional. As such, the proposed cost recovery plan as presented below is only calling for a portion of the ESR to be used initially. We are not planning to dip into the UMR portion of the City’s reserves at this time. Although an option if the fiscal impacts drag out or recur in the future, i t is not currently planned to be used in response to this current COVID-19 emergency incident. If this changes, staff will engage with the City Council to discuss its potential use. As discussed in the section above regarding the requirement to replenish the ESR to its 10% of expenditures amount, the City would have two years to bring the fund back up to policy levels of funding. Assuming the amount would be $5.7 million, and assuming the full use of the ESR over the span of both years, in addition to the o perating costs bring reduced below revenues, they would have to be reduced below that level by $2.85 million per year to stay consistent with the current version of the reserve policy. This is another reason why ongoing costs are not suited to be addressed with reserves. PROPOSED BUDGET FIXES/STRUCTURE OF DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN Staff is currently compiling proposed budget fixes and means to address the funding gap for a draft recovery plan to present to the City Council. Below are a listing of some of the proposed methods to address the fiscal challenges the City is in currently. Staff is seeking Council direction to know if the proposed fixes are in keeping with Council’s desire regarding how to address the financial challenge, or if there is other direction t hat Council wishes to provide staff. The savings are broken out into one-time and ongoing savings. For those where a dollar figure has been calculated, the amount is provided in the narrative, as well as on the 5-year forecast model presented below. One-time o One-time Project Savings ($6.3 million General Fund, $1.1 million Public Facilities Impact Fee Fund) $2.0 million – transfer from the Capital Outlay Fund, Fund 605 $0.6 million – postpone the Sports Park expansion 9.A Packet Pg. 117 $1.5 million – postpone the Downtown Parking Lot $1.7 million – postpone the Glen Loma Fire Station $0.5 million – savings in the General Fund for the Enterprise Resource Planning and Land Management System software $1.1 million – postpone the Development Services Center to help reduce the use of fund balance in the Public Facilities Impact Fee Fund. This helps preserve fund balance to pay against the debt service in the fund. Should fund balance be depleted, the debt may require the General Fund to issue payment, further depleting the General Fund o Department Operational Reductions Staff has begun the process of identifying savings in line items to identify opportunities for savings in the adopted budgets. o Labor Savings Negotiated offerings Staff has evaluated the financial impacts from Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs). The City expects that July 1, 2020 negotiated COLAs will cost the City approximately $1.0 million in the General Fund. o Use of Economic Stability Reserve Should Council approve the list of one-time project savings, the total amount would prevent the City from having to use the ESR in FY20. This allows it to cover costs in FY21 until the fiscal adjustments are established and implemented. Ongoing o Department Operational Reductions City departments, in addition to the one-time savings this or next fiscal year, are also looking into ways to address costs in the long-term by looking at their ongoing expenses. These typically come in the form of contractual services, program costs, or other ongoing commitments to see if there is a more cost efficient way to deliver the services that each department provides our residents. o Citywide Reorganization Staff is looking into options to gain efficiencies with reorganization of departments. For example, staff is reviewing the City’s department 9.A Packet Pg. 118 structure to reduce executive compensation and further identify administrative savings. o Reduction in Workforce Although a reduction in the City’s workforce is a difficult and challenging decision, the long-term financial sustainability of the City’s operation may require such reductions as it is an effective tool to adjust ongoing costs to be more in alignment with the City’s revenues. o Reductions in Employee Costs As employee compensation absorbs approximately 70% of the City’s General Fund, any financial recovery plan must explore the potential of reduced compensation expenditures which could include furloughs, pay cuts, or increased financial contributions from employees. REVISED GENERAL FUND 5-YEAR MODEL WITH OPTIONS Below is a revised version of the five-year General Fund model including the options listed above. In employing the options listed above including the labor cost reduction, the City may avoid using any of the ESR in FY20, assuming projections hold true to actuals. This allows the ESR to be used in F21, granting time to finalize the recovery plan to address the annual $8 million deficit. It also allows the City to be prepared for the “second wave” of the pandemic that could impact the City later this year. FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beginning Fund Balance 21,258,870$ 18,129,504$ 13,084,713$ 5,143,697$ (3,125,222)$ (10,686,698)$ Add: Revenues 48,658,145$ 52,666,803$ 51,956,202$ 53,870,605$ 56,696,956$ 58,236,185$ Less: Expenditures (59,087,511)$ (57,711,594)$ (59,897,218)$ (62,139,524)$ (64,258,432)$ (66,431,992)$ Budget Solutions 7,300,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Ending Fund Balance 18,129,504$ 13,084,713$ 5,143,697$ (3,125,222)$ (10,686,698)$ (18,882,505)$ Operating Margin (3,129,366)$ (5,044,791)$ (7,941,016)$ (8,268,920)$ (7,561,476)$ (8,195,807)$ The $7.3 million budget solutions include the following proposed options: Solution Amount (in millions) Transfer from the Capital Outlay Fund, Fund 605 $2.0 Postpone the Sports Park expansion $0.6 Postpone the Downtown Parking Lot $1.5 9.A Packet Pg. 119 Postpone the Glen Loma Fire Station $1.7 Savings in the General Fund for the Enterprise Resource Planning and Land Management System software $0.5 Elimination of July 1, 2020 Employee COLAs $1.0 Total $7.3 Again, it is worth noting that the solutions provided above are to address the pressing need for the COVID-19 revenue loss, and not the projected ongoing $8 million annual deficit. Should these solutions not come to fruition, alternative cost cutting options will be explored and recommended to Council. ALTERNATIVES Council may determine alternatives or additional strategies to address the revenue shortfalls and the ongoing structural deficit. No specific alternatives are identified, as this is an agenda item to seek direction on the development of the draft budget plan. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE Varies. There are many different combinations of strategies that Council may direct staff to employ to address the short-term impacts of COVID-19 and the long-term structural deficit currently projected continuing into the future. Staff will have a model of the next five fiscal years for use in projecting options that Council would like to consider for addressing these fiscal challenges. CONCLUSION The City’s fiscal challenges are significant, totaling $15.4 million over two years, and approximately $8 million annually into the future. While originally planning address the City’s financial future over the next few years, COVID-19 has forced the adjustments and decisions to be made within the next few months. Staff is still conducting a thorough review of its operations in order to prepare the Recovery Plan to Council. However, there is a need from staff for some more immediate direction to be provided by Council regarding the options to repurpose assigned funding to other projects to bolster the General Fund balance to incur the financial losses from COVID-19, and provide time for a well-planned approach to recovering from the emergency and addressing the long-term financial shortfall. NEXT STEPS It is staff’s recommendation to address the financial challenges over a series of Council Meeting agenda items. Staff has identified a list of recommended recurring agenda 9.A Packet Pg. 120 items for the duration of the SIP orders and revenue reductions. The first and second meeting topics have been addressed. The third session, adoption of the recovery plan will take place next, either on June 1st or 15th of 2020, or potentially across both meetings. 3. Adoption of the Recovery Plan – June 1st or June 15th, 2020 Staff will provide revised recommendations incorporating Council direction from the May 18th Council meeting. The recommended plan to resolve the $8 million ongoing funding shortfall will consist of, in order: Department Savings + Citywide Reorganizations + Employee Compensation Savings This may include budget amendments to return one-time monies to the general fund and provide final approval of revised service levels. Depending on Council direction, final approval of the Recovery Plan may occur at either June meeting. Council can also delay, amend, or not accept certain recommendations. 4. Implementation of the Fiscal Recovery Plan – July 1, 2020 Staff will implement the adopted Fiscal Recovery Plan. 5. Additional Fiscal Recovery Plan modifications (if necessary) – TBD The Fiscal Recovery Plan is based on a snapshot in time and depending on the duration and impacts of the SIP, may require adjustments. In conjunction with these topics, staff will establish more frequent monitoring and reporting of City revenues, as well as expenditures to show any change in the net financial position of the City. Staff will provide monthly updates to Council that will provide updated information including the effectiveness of the Fiscal Recovery Plan. 9.A Packet Pg. 121 City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Standing Report on Operational Impacts and Other City Efforts Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Fire Department Submitted By: Mark Bisbee Prepared By: Mark Bisbee Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Receive report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The COVID-19 pandemic continues to play a major role in influencing in how local government responds to the current health and fiscal crisis. Having timely and accurate situational awareness is paramount for elected officials to make informed decisions on how best to allocate resources for maximum effectiveness within our community. POLICY DISCUSSION Policy discussions as the result of information contained in this report may include service levels, fiscal decisions and employee relations, among others. BACKGROUND 9.B Packet Pg. 122 Current Situation: These figures represent the most up-to-date data available when this staff report was drafted. In the interests of providing the most current and relevant information, the oral report for this item is likely to have information that is more timely, and may differ from what is covered below. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), as of May 10, 2020, there have been almost 62,000 additional cases of COVID-19 reported globally, bringing global estimates to over 3,900,000 cases and over 274,000 deaths. For the United States, as of May 10, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have confirmed a total of 1,300,696 COVID-19 cases including 78,771 deaths. In California there are 66,680 confirmed cases and 2,745 deaths. Santa Clara County accounts for less than 4% of the cases and approximately 5% of the deaths in California. As of May 10, 2020, at 1700 hours, the total case count for Santa Clara County was 2,341, less than 1% increase since the last report. There are 129 deaths among the cases of COVID-19 in Santa Clara County. As of May 10, 2020, Gilroy has 43 confirmed documented cases of COVID -19. COVID-19 community transmission is widespread throughout Santa Clara County. Limited testing capacity means case counts represent only a small portion of actual cases within each city. COVID-19 Cases Dashboard: The Santa Clara Department of Public Health website data dashboard provides detailed information about cases and deaths from COVID-19 in Santa Clara County and is intended for informational purposes only. New details added in early April include confirmed cases by city of residence and deaths by race/ethnicity. The County does not have complete or accurate racial/ethnic breakdowns of confirmed cases in Santa Clara County, as is true for all counties across California and at the state level. The County will release additional details on confirmed cases as they become 9.B Packet Pg. 123 available. The County of Santa Clara's COVID-19 cases dashboard has been updated with a new methodology for the dates of associated cases. Cases will now be reported by the date of specimen collection. Previously, data on the dashboard reflected new cases by the date that confirmed positive results were reported into the California Reportable Disease Information Exchange (CalREDIE) system. This adjustment provides dates that more closely represent the timing of the spread of the virus in Santa Clara County. The update in methodology today does not change the general progression of our case counts over time, but moves up the dates by a few days to be closer to when individuals may be developing symptoms. The number of new cases from day to day might not always add up to the cumulative total of cases. This is because our quality control measures and those of the California Department of Public Health may determine a need for reclassification of some cases. These small adjustments are due to changes in results from inconclusive or pending, or duplications in results, and are normal occurrences in the day-to-day collection of complicated data. ANALYSIS The data supports the following conclusions: There has been a 30% drop in COVID-like medical patients that the Gilroy Fire Department (GFD) has responded to in the past four weeks. The last confirmed COVID-19 positive patient was transported 26 days ago. 49% of patients were over 60 years old, and a majority were male. 31 of 56 COVID-like patients were tested; 35% tested “positive.” ALTERNATIVES The alternatives to not monitoring changes and updates to COVID-19 are twofold: it would hamper the City’s ability to plan adequately for pandemic and financial recovery, and it may not provide an opportunity to capture and evaluate an uptick in COVID -19 cases that could be a forewarning of resurgence in pandemic conditions. Elected 9.B Packet Pg. 124 officials and civil servants alike should remain informed for operational and policy planning purposes. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE Fiscal impacts are directly tied to, and occur as the result of, pandemic conditions region-wide and within our community. CONCLUSION This standing report is to inform our elected leaders and to keep them updated on changes to COVID-19 conditions within the clinical and operational spheres of our local government. NEXT STEPS This report will continue to be updated at all Council Meetings as long as its needed. PUBLIC OUTREACH Public education and outreach regarding COVID-19 is a regular and ongoing feature of our Community Engagement team. 9.B Packet Pg. 125 City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Update on Fire Department Standards of Cover Performance Measures Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Fire Department Submitted By: Mark Bisbee Prepared By: Mark Bisbee Jennifer Fortino Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability ☐ Downtown Revitalization ☐ Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services Enhanced Public Safety ☐ Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Receive report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2019, the Gilroy Fire Department (GFD) embarked on a Standards of Cover (SOC) process that also included the South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District and the City of Morgan Hill. The report highlighted a n eed to build and staff a fourth fire station in the Glen Loma response district, in addition to eight specific recommendations. Of those, Council directed staff to report back on the three items listed below. POLICY DISCUSSION 10.A Packet Pg. 126 The City adopted the Standards of Cover during the December 2, 2019 meeting. GFD continues to work towards meeting these standards within the confines of existing staffing and budgetary restrictions. BACKGROUND At the December 2, 2019 City Council meeting, direction was given that a study session be held by May 1, 2020 on the following three items: Recommendation #5: The City and the South Santa Clara County Fire District should consider a potential shared service solution in western Gilroy to provide long-term fire services and pre-hospital EMS to serve both jurisdictions. Recommendation #7: The City should aggressively work to improve its fire service call processing/dispatch performance to better align with industry best practice standards. Recommendation #8: The City should eithe r upgrade its current fire records management system (RMS) or replace it as soon as possible as part of an outsourced fire services dispatch contract. In addition, direction was given that a formal letter be sent to CalFire on outsourcing Fire dispatch for improved dispatch service. Council also requested quarterly reports on the Alternative Services Model (ASM) response times. Response times are directly related to where the ASM is physically located and how and when it is staffed. The ASM has been staffed in a small, temporary trailer at Christmas Hill Park with two personnel detailed from 8am to 8pm. This deployment situation was originally designed to only last about six months, until a full - service temporary station could be initiated in the Glen Loma a rea. It has since proved inadequate due to social distancing requirements and sewage sanitary issues. Numerous subsequent delays in the development of the Town Center and affordable housing projects have delayed the Glen Loma site preparation for the large r temporary station. With the emerging economic uncertainty as a result of the COVID -19 shutdown, staff is now working to implement an alternate site for the temporary station that is independent of the Glen Loma Development as soon as possible. In the mea ntime, GFD staff has temporarily moved into the TEEC building at Christmas Hill Park. ANALYSIS Follow-up items from the December 2, 2019 Council meeting: Recommendation #5: The joint meeting was originally scheduled to occur on March 24, 2020 but was subsequently cancelled due to COVID-19. Having a virtual meeting was explored, but it was determined it would be best to wait and schedule it in person. Recommendation #7: Improving fire service call processing and dispatch times. 10.A Packet Pg. 127 It’s important to note that in determining call processing times, the Gilroy Dispatch Center is scrutinized differently than the CalFire Emergency Command Center (ECC). As a Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP), the clock starts when the phone is picked up, and the caller needs to be questioned to determine the nature of the emergency. When CalFire picks up the phone, the caller has already been questioned by the County, before being routed to them. The next step is to “push” the call out, and CalFire has an advantage in already receiving a “sanitized” call within the required timeframe of one minute, thirty seconds (1:30). This results in Gilroy having to complete more tasks than CalFire within the same timeframe, which makes the dispatch delay seem worse than it really is. Despite the time standard discrepancies, the Dispatch Center and the Fire Department created a pilot study to develop a pre -alert procedure that pushes the calls out earlier, allowing for the Fire Department to initiate its response earlier. The pilot study seems to indicate an overall decrease in call processing and dispatch times of 30 -40 seconds in the Chestnut, Las Animas and Sunrise districts. There was a decrease in call processing of 25 seconds in the Santa Teresa district. Further reductions in call processing and dispatch times are anticipated through the upgrading of our antiquated station alert system. This system has been in service since the late 1970’s, and we are working to upgrade it as staffing allows. Recommendation #8: The Fire Department is in the process of upgrading our records management system (RMS). We have experienced some delays due to the COVID-19 shutdown, but if all goes as planned, we anticipate completion of this item by June 30, 2020. A letter was sent to CalFire’s Chief Hess dated April 2, 2020 formally requesting a quote for dispatch services. The attached third quarter ASM report indicates that when a unit is staffed and available in quarters, response times to the Glen Loma district decrease by at least 30%. The difference between day and night response times is 3 minutes 17 seconds (3:17). This underscores the necessity of continuing the ASM model to maintain fire response capabilities and potentially expanding to a 24-hour coverage format until the Glen Loma Fire Station is built and fully staffed. Due to delays in building a fire station in the Glen Loma area, it becomes imperative that the City continue to explore its own deployment methods. This includes consideration of an alternate temporary fire station site until the permanent Glen Loma fire station can be built. ALTERNATIVES It is the top priority of the Fire Department to address the ongoing Standards of Cover in order to address currently identified gaps and shortfalls in emergency response capabilities. The recommendations in this report represent our best options to provide 10.A Packet Pg. 128 the highest level of service possible with existing resources. Staff is willing and able to provide additional models and alternative solutions if the levels of funding and staffing are modified. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE If the ASM model is to be maintained, sufficient FY 20 -21 funds need to be allocated to support the desired level of service, including funds to provide adequate facilities and staffing. CONCLUSION This report has addressed the items of concern expressed by Council during the December 2, 2019 meeting, the 3rd quarter ASM report, fire service industry best practices, and the specific needs for the City and the GFD. NEXT STEPS Several next steps are required to move forward on SOC issues. 1. Rescheduling the joint Gilroy, Morgan Hill and South Santa Clara County meeting to discuss areas of mutual interest; 2. Development of a joint Dispatch-GFD oversight group to continue monitoring call processing times, guidance on upgrading the antiquated Station Alert System, and evaluation of potential dispatch outsourcing options; 3. Completion of the RMS upgrade; 4. Continuation of the ASM model in the Glen Loma area, including implementing a temporary fire station; PUBLIC OUTREACH Once the threat of the pandemic has passed and a temporary fire station is established, a community-centered open house should be considered to celebrate progress towards SOC compliance. Attachments: 1. ASM 3rd Quarter Response updated 5-7-2020 2. Dispatch Pilot Study Report 5-7-2020 10.A Packet Pg. 129 *24 hour response time in the Santa Teresa District Analysis Staff has provided the first and second quarter ASM pilot study reports to the City Council. In those reports, we noted a reduction in response times in the Santa Teresa (STR) district when the ASM is on duty during their 8am-8pm operational period. We additionally saw moderate decreases in response times in the Chestnut, Las Animas and Sunrise districts. The third quarter report also shows the same response time patterns we reported in the first and second quarters. As displayed in the below tables, this pattern suggests that implementation of the ASM pilot study not only reduces response times in the STR district, it also moderately reduces response times in the Chestnut, Las Animas and Sunrise districts. Below are the response times prior to implementing the ASM Pilot Study: Standards of Cover Response Times Pre-ASM Performance Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Response Times 8:56 8:11 8:33 *10:51 Below are the response times for the first, second and third quarters after implementation of the ASM Pilot Study: First Quarter ASM Response Times All Districts Post-ASM Performance First Quarter Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Response Times 8:32 8:07 8:08 *9:18 Second Quarter ASM Response Times All Districts Post-ASM Performance Second Quarter Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Response Times 8:36 8:09 8:22 *9:43 Third Quarter ASM Response Times ASM Response Times All Districts Post-ASM Performance Third Quarter Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Response Times 8:33 7:34 8:28 *9:28 10.A.a Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: ASM 3rd Quarter Response updated 5-7-2020 (2725 : Fire Department Performance Measures Update) *24 hour response time in the Santa Teresa District The third quarter response data demonstrates the Chestnut response district has shown a consistent decrease in response times of at least 20 seconds in the first, second and third quarters. This is directly attributed to the Chestnut station not having to respond into the STR district between 8am-8pm. The Las Animas districts third quarter response time has shown a decrease of over 30 seconds compared to the first and second quarters. This decrease in response time in the third quarter is attributed to the ASM covering the Las Animas district while the Las Animas engine was responding to other calls within its district. The Sunrise districts third quarter response time data was relatively unchanged between the second and third quarters, but still shows a slight decrease in response times when compared to the Pre-ASM pilot study response times. Santa Teresa District Response Times The overall third quarter response time for the STR response district is 9 minutes 28 seconds (9:28). This overall third quarter response time falls in line with the overall response times in the first and second quarters. While the overall response times are higher than the Best Practice goal of 7 minutes 30 seconds (7:30), it should be noted that the overall response times in the first, second and third quarters have decreased by over 1 minute compared to the Pre-ASM response time of 10 minutes 51 seconds (10:51). While the overall response times in the STR district have decreased over the last three quarters, there are actually three response time components to the STR district that require further analysis. The ASM’s overall 24-hour response time in the third quarter is 9:28. This includes the 12 hours the ASM is on duty and the 12 hours the ASM is not on duty. The ASM’s third quarter response time during its operational period of 8am-8pm was 7 minutes 34 seconds (7:34). This is a decrease of over 3 minutes compared to the Pre- ASM response time of 10:51. While slightly higher, the second quarter’s response time was still over 2 minutes less than the Pre-ASM response time. This significant decrease in response times, while the ASM is on duty, highlights how effective the ASM is in reducing response times in the STR district. The STR response times between 8pm-8am, when the ASM is not on duty, is more in line with the Pre-ASM response time of 10:51. As noted in the below tables, the response times when the ASM is not on duty are significantly higher than when the ASM is on duty. This difference in response times between when the ASM is on duty compared to when the ASM is off duty further emphasizes the effect the ASM has on response times in the STR district. 10.A.a Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: ASM 3rd Quarter Response updated 5-7-2020 (2725 : Fire Department Performance Measures Update) *24 hour response time in the Santa Teresa District First Quarter ASM Response Times Santa Teresa District Only Santa Teresa Third Quarter Performance Santa Teresa 24 hours (42 calls) Santa Teresa w/ASM on duty (28 calls) 8am-8pm Santa Teresa w/out ASM on duty (14 calls) 8pm-8am Response Times 9:18 7:32 10:41 Second Quarter ASM Response Times Santa Teresa District Only Santa Teresa Second Quarter Performance Santa Teresa 24 hours (45 calls) Santa Teresa w/ASM on duty (32 calls) 8am-8pm Santa Teresa w/out ASM on duty (13 calls) 8pm-8am Response Times 9:43 8:35 11:37 Third Quarter ASM Response Times Santa Teresa District Only Santa Teresa Third Quarter Performance Santa Teresa 24 hours (42 calls) Santa Teresa w/ASM on duty (28 calls) 8am-8pm Santa Teresa w/out ASM on duty (14 calls) 8pm-8am Response Times 9:28 7:34 10:31 While the ASM has had a significant impact on response times in the STR district, it has also provided added capacity to the other three response districts during the third quarter. The ASM either covered the City, or responded into the other three response districts while those engines were responding to other calls, 63 times in the third quarter. The ASM responded into the Las Animas district 32 times, the Chestnut district 26 times and the Sunrise district 5 times during the third quarter. Below are a few notable responses the ASM assisted with outside of the STR district: February 11, 2020 – Responded into the Las Animas district to assist the Las Animas engine with CPR of a patient. February 17, 2020 – Responded into the Las Animas district to assist the Las Animas engine with CPR of a patient. February 28, 2020 – Responded into Las Animas district to assist the Las Animas engine with a patient who was having a stroke. March 1, 2020 – Responded into the Chestnut district to assist Chestnut with CPR of a patient. March 28, 2020 – Covered the City while the Las Animas and Chestnut engines responded to a patient requiring CPR. 10.A.a Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: ASM 3rd Quarter Response updated 5-7-2020 (2725 : Fire Department Performance Measures Update) *24 hour response time in the Santa Teresa District Current Overtime Costs for the ASM We are 75% through the ASM pilot study and we have spent a total of $394,512 in overtime to staff the ASM 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. Although to date we have spent 96.42% of the overtime allotted for the ASM pilot study, we estimate a reduction in overtime costs will occur in the fourth quarter. All six of our newly recruited firefighter/paramedics have completed their sign-offs and they are now able to fill department positions, which we estimate will reduce the overtime necessary to staff the ASM. 10.A.a Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: ASM 3rd Quarter Response updated 5-7-2020 (2725 : Fire Department Performance Measures Update) The Gilroy Fire and Gilroy Communications Departments initiated a Dispatch Pilot Study that commenced February 1, 2020 and concluded on March 31, 2020. The purpose of the Dispatch Pilot Study was to address the delayed call processing times identified in the Standards of Cover (SOC) report that the Gilroy Fire Department conducted in 2019. In an effort to reduce 911 call processing times, the Communications Department restructured their call processing procedures to reduce the time from when the Communic ations Department receives a 911 call to when they dispatch the Fire Department. The below table shows the call processing/dispatch times that were included in the SOC final report to the City Council on December 2, 2019. The SOC report identified the NFPA Best Practice Goal of 1 minute 30 seconds (1:30) for call processing/dispatch. The SOC report also listed the actual call processing/dispatch times for all four of the Gilroy Fire Departments response districts. Also included in the SOC report was the first-due call-to-arrival response times. This is the time it takes once the Communications Department receives a 911 call for them to dispatch the Fire Department and for the Fire Department to arrive on scene . The NFPA Best Practice goal for first-due call-to-arrival response times is 7 minutes and 30 seconds (7:30). The call processing/dispatch and first-due call-to-arrival response times for all four response districts, presented in the SOC final report, exceeded the NFPA Best Practice goals. Standards of Cover (SOC) Response Time Findings Performance Component Goal 90th Percentile Performance Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Call Processing/Dispatch1 1:30 2:41 2:33 2:20 2:37 First-Due Call-to-Arrival4 7:30 8:56 8:11 8:33 10:51 To determine whether the Dispatch Pilot Study was effective in reducing call processing/dispatch and first-due call-to-arrival response times, we compared the response times from the Pilot Study two-month timeframe against the response times from November 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The below table shows a slight reduction in the Chestnut District call processing/dispatch response times compared to the SOC response findings, but the other three response districts where essentially unchanged. However, the first-due call–to-arrival response times during this two-month time period decreased significantly in the Chestnut and Santa Teresa response districts. The response times for the Las Animas and Sunrise districts showed slight but not significant decreases in response times. 10.A.b Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Dispatch Pilot Study Report 5-7-2020 (2725 : Fire Department Performance Measures Update) November 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 Pre-Dispatch Pilot Study Component Goal 90th Percentile Performance Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Call Processing/Dispatch1 1:30 2:23 2:32 2:25 2:36 First Due Call to Arrival 7:30 8:31 8:09 8:22 9:52 The table below reflects the call processing/dispatch and first-due call-to-arrival dispatch response time results from the Dispatch Pilot Study. The response time results during this time- period reflect at least a 30 second or more reduction in call processing/dispatch for all of the fire response districts except for the Santa Teresa response district. The reduction in this response time is just under 30 seconds. February 1, 2019 to March 31, 2019 Post-Dispatch Pilot Study Component Goal 90th Percentile Performance Chestnut Las Animas Sunrise Santa Teresa Call Processing/Dispatch1 1:30 1:52 1:49 1:46 2:12 First Due Call to Arrival 7:30 8:33 7:36 7:58 8:32 Along with a reduction in call processing/dispatch response times, there was also a reduction in the first-due call-to-processing response times in all fire response districts except for the Chestnut district. This shows that when the Communications department changed their call processing/dispatch procedures, the first-due call-to-arrival response times also decreased. The preliminary results of the Dispatch Pilot study shows a reduction in both the call processing/dispatch and first-due call-to-arrival response times. While the response times have not reached the NFPA Best Practice goals, staff is confident with additional time we can continue to improve our response time processes to allow the Fire and Communications Departments to continue to get closer to the NFPA best practices goals. Another key to the Fire Departments ability to improve its response times is the upgrade of our Records Management System (RMS). Our current RMS system is 8 versions out of date. This prevents us from being able to con duct in-depth response time analysis because we do not have access to the advanced reporting features that have been included in the most recent RMS upgrades. We estimate that the RMS system will be upgraded by the end of June 2020. 10.A.b Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Dispatch Pilot Study Report 5-7-2020 (2725 : Fire Department Performance Measures Update) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Amendment to the City of Gilroy Position Control List for the Reclassification of the Deputy City Administrator Position to Economic Development Manager Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis Trevin Barber Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Fiscal Stability Downtown Revitalization Economic Development ☐ Neighborhood Services ☐ Enhanced Public Safety Workforce Stability ☐ Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Receive report and approve amendments to the position control list contained within the Fiscal Year 20 and Fiscal Year 21 budget. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff is reviewing vacant positions to achieve continuity of service, right-sizing, and budget savings. The following report analyzes the direct fiscal impact of eliminating a Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development and creating an Economic Development Manager. BACKGROUND 10.B Packet Pg. 136 As part of the FY20 Budget, Council approved a position for a Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development. Following the adoption of the budget the City began to prepare for the recruitment. Peckham & McKenney, an executive search firm, was hired to conduct the Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development recruitment.. The recruitment process was conducted, but the top finalist did not accept the position and the City Administrator elected not to pursue other candidates from the pool in favor of conducting a new search. The initial preparation steps for the second recruitment were underway, but were put on hold when the City Administrator announced his resignation. While the City continues to monitor the economy and fiscal conditions, the issue of a vacant economic development position remains. The City is now considering how best to position the organization during the upcoming economic recovery. Given the uncertain economic and fiscal conditions, reducing salary outlays for un-recruited positions has become a necessity. ANALYSIS As the position for Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development remains vacant, it is a candidate for re-assessment. At this time staff has completed an analysis for alternative economic development positions that the City may consider for reducing budgeted expenditures. Two alternative position levels were analyzed along with the recommendation for the Deputy City Administrator position, with reduced costs: (1) Economic Development Director and (2) Economic Development Manager. The analysis considered the proposed positions and used salary information from benchmark comparable cities, as well as Gilroy costs, to calculate total employer cost (salary and benefits). Final salary and job description is subject to change based on Personnel Commission review and approval. The potential salary figures and Gilroy costs for the alternative positions are estimated below. Figure #1: Matrix of Salary and Total Employer Cost (Salary and Benefits) Total Employer Cost Position Title Minimum Maximum Reduce Deputy City Administrator $(246,031) $(315,731) Econ. Dev. Director $210,939 $295,773 Econ. Dev. Director Savings $(35,092) $(19,958) Econ. Dev. Manager $156,040 $208,091 Econ. Dev. Manager Savings $(89,991) $(107,640) 10.B Packet Pg. 137 Using the survey data staff created a draft salary range for a manager level position to compare against the budgeted Deputy City Administrator position. Comparison reveals a potential savings of $89,991 to $107,640 if the City were to move toward the Economic Development Manager position instead of the currently budgeted Deputy City Administrator – Economic Development position. Given the savings, and uncertainty in the budget, reclassifying the Deputy City Administrator position to an Economic Development Manager on the position control list is recommended. Economic Development for a Strong COVID-19 Recovery The COVID-19 Emergency has placed many unknowns around the economy and there is a valid question as to what an econom ic developer would do during a pandemic. Staff recognizes that economic development is a high priority in the City’s Strategic Plan, however the current action items and work plan for economic development may not be fruitful during a pandemic, instead they may need to be temporarily modified to accommodate the COVID-19 Emergency and adjusted to support recovery. As has been stated in previous discussions, economic development is not a switch that gets turned on or off. As part of Gilroy’s economic recovery, even in the most dire financial times, the City should invest in economic development. Attached are the Economic Development Guiding Principles and the draft work plan. ALTERNATIVES Reclassify the Deputy City Administrator position into an Economic Development Director position. Staff does not recommend this option. One important factor for director-level compensation is depth and breadth of staff supervision, which this position would not be performing. Further, the savings would be significantly lower than at a manager level. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE Staff’s recommendation for reclassifying the Deputy City Administrator position to an Economic Development Manager will reduce General Fund expenditures by approximately $90,000 to $108,000 annually. CONCLUSION The reclassification of the vacant position from a Deputy City Administrator to an Economic Development Manager would better meet the needs for a position to focus purely on economic development in the recovery phase of the recession, as wel l as 10.B Packet Pg. 138 future economic growth. Additionally, the reclassification would result in cost savings to the City’s General Fund at a time when maximum savings are needed . NEXT STEPS Should Council approve the change to the budget and Position Control List staff will proceed to finalize the job description and salary range for bargaining unit input and Personnel Commission review. The next step will be consideration of the overall budget and whether or not to proceed forward with filling the vacant position at this time. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. Attachments: 1. Gilroy ED Guiding Principles and Work Plan 10.B Packet Pg. 139 CITY OF GILROY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GUIDING PRINCIPLES 10.B.a Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Gilroy ED Guiding Principles and Work Plan (2766 : Economic Development Manager Position) 10.B.a Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Gilroy ED Guiding Principles and Work Plan (2766 : Economic Development Manager Position) 10.B.a Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Gilroy ED Guiding Principles and Work Plan (2766 : Economic Development Manager Position) 10.B.a Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Gilroy ED Guiding Principles and Work Plan (2766 : Economic Development Manager Position) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Progress Report on the Implementation Action Plan for the Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 Meeting Date: May 18, 2020 From: Jimmy Forbis, Interim City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis Trevin Barber Strategic Plan Goals Fiscal Stability Downtown Revitalization Economic Development Neighborhood Services Enhanced Public Safety Workforce Stability Public Engagement RECOMMENDATION Receive report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The attached document is the current Implementation Action Plan with progress updates on each of the action items. BACKGROUND The Gilroy City Council has maintained the business practice of having a two-year Strategic Plan for the City of Gilroy. A strategic plan better positions the City to prioritize the goals of the Council in a fiscally viable manner, aligning fiscal and human resources to achieve the agency’s short and long-term goals. 10.C Packet Pg. 144 On February 22, 2019, Council held its annual goal-setting workshop with the City’s consultant team from RGS facilitating during a Special Study Session of the City Council. The Study Session, which was open to the public, resulted in the development of a Mission Statement, a Vision Statement, a set of Core Values and seven Goals to guide the City’s future operations: Ensure Financial Stability Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Revitalize Downtown Focus on Revenue Driving Economic Development Retain Stability in City’s Workforce Provide Opportunities for Meaningful Public Engagement Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services The Strategic Plan, which is for FY20 and FY21, is aligned with the biennial Operating Budget cycle. It encompasses the goals, suggested actions, programs, projects, and initiatives suggested by Council and staff over the course of its development. The goals that are included represent the highest priorities for the City Council. The Draft Strategic Plan was presented to the City Council and public during a regularly scheduled meeting on April 1, 2019 and was adopted on June 3, 2019. Staff also brought the Draft IAP for review by the City Council on December 2, 2019 where it was approved, making it the official work plan for staff to pursue attainment of the Strategic Plan goals as determined by Council. ANALYSIS The IAP is organized based on the seven adopted Strategic Plan Goals, and identifies actions within each area that are anticipated to progress the City closer to attaining the respective goal. The current IAP now lists 77 actions, four less than the adopted version. Changes from previous IAP report are as follows: (1) Removed CAFR '19 (2) Removed CAFR '20 (3) Removed Duplicate Downtown Abatement Unreinforced Masonry (4) Removed Duplicate Community Engagement Effort for Police and Fire Revenue Measure / Glen Loma Station. Below is a table that identifies the distribution of actions by department and strategic goal, with annotation for number of concluded projects for that category. Reference List of Strategic Goals: 1. Ensure Financial Stability 2. Enhance Public Safety Capabilities 3. Revitalize Historic Downtown 10.C Packet Pg. 145 4. Focus on Revenue Driven Economic Development 5. Retain Stability in the City’s Workforce 6. Provide Opportunities for Meaningful Public Engagement 7. Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services Figure #1: IAP Distribution of Actions by Goal and Department Strategic Goal Number Department 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Administration and Economic Development 4 0 4 5 3 5 0 21 Community Development 3 1 6 2 0 1 1 14 Finance 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 Fire 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 9 Human Resources 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 Information Technology 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 Police 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 9 Public Works 2 1 1 0 1 0 3 8 Recreation 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 Total 25 15 12 8 9 6 4 77 It is important to note all of these action items are very different in size and scope from each other, no one item is alike. As such, the items have various different statuses and end dates, with some being ongoing. However, in order to make the information easier to read staff has created four different generalized definitions to categorize the status of each project: 1. Complete/Finished 2. In Progress/On Target. 3. Behind/Delayed/Not Started 4. Other/COVID-19 The below chart provides details on the action status of each action by strategic goal. Figure #2: IAP Distribution of Action Status by Goal Strategic Plan Goals Complete/ Finished On Target Behind/ Delayed Other Grand Total 1. Ensure Financial Stability 7 8 1 7 23 2. Enhance Public Safety Capabilities 1 11 1 2 15 3. Revitalize Historic Downtown 2 5 - 5 12 4. Focus on Revenue Driven - 2 1 5 8 10.C Packet Pg. 146 Economic Development 5. Retain Stability in the City’s Workforce 2 4 - 3 9 6. Provide Opportunities for Meaningful Public Engagement 3 2 - 1 6 7. Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services 1 3 - - 4 Grand Total 16 35 3 23 77 Percent of Total 21% 45% 4% 30% 100% To date 16 projects have been finished, 35 are in progress/on target, 18 are delayed due to COVID-19, 5 related to Economic Development and 3 are behind schedule. Many of the “on-target” items are close to completion, given that these are two-year plans it is anticipated that they will conclude by the end of the second fiscal year. The below chart goes into more details on the “Behind, Economic Development, and COVID-19. Figure #3: IAP Distribution of Behind/Delayed and Other Statuses by Goal Strategic Plan Goals Behind Econ Dev COVID-19 Grand Total 1. Ensure Financial Stability 1 - 7 8 2. Enhance Public Safety Capabilities 1 - 2 3 3. Revitalize Historic Downtown - 1 4 5 4. Focus on Revenue Driven Economic Development 1 3 2 6 5. Retain Stability in the City’s Workforce - - 3 3 6. Provide Opportunities for Meaningful Public Engagement - 1 - 1 7. Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services - - - - Grand Total 3 5 18 26 Percent of Total 4% 6% 23% 34% Action items delayed due to COVID-19 are those that would have otherwise been categorized as “In Progress/On Target.” Items that are behind or delayed have various different impediments and it would be best to reference the attached IAP Re port for more details on each scenario. Attachments: 1. Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report 10.C Packet Pg. 147 City of Gilroy Implementation Action Plan (ADOPTED) – Q3 Progress Report FY20 and FY21 1 Strategic Plan Goal Strategies and Objectives Implementation Action Steps Lead Department / Team Timeline / Milestones Value Proposition, Progress, Comments (Council notes, resources needed, other projects this one depends on, etc.) 1. Ensure Financial Stability 1.1 Maintain sound, responsible fiscal policies regulating debt and establishing parameters for reserves. 1.1.a Maintain a minimum of 20% of the General Fund in reserves. 1.1.b Adhere to adopted policies and procedures. 1.1.c Continue to review and update Master Fee Schedules and Rate Schedules on regular basis to ensure appropriate cost recovery models are in place. Update Fees and Charges Finance Finance Director Finance Manager – Budgeting Consultant Department Liaisons January 2020 Adoption Q3’19: RFP for consultant issued Q3’19: Consultant selected Q4’19: Initial proposal for update Q4’19: Presentation to Council Q3’20: Present to Council Recreation definition of cost recovery Q4’20: Present draft cost recovery resolution for review Q4’20: Present revised cost recovery resolution for Council Approval, to be effective January 1, 2021 Value: Updating the fee schedules ensures that the cost of goods and services provided to the public does not exceed the amount of revenue collected from end -users. It ensures rates align with Council priority and provides visibility for the end-user. Ultimately this supports long-term fiscal stability and resident satisfaction. Progress: During the update process, staff encountered and presented to Council questions regarding fundamental aspects of determining cost recovery. Staff commenced working on these items, and was progressing when the COVID-19 shelter-in-place orders were imposed. This project has been placed on hold due to its non -essential status. As the City begins to reactivate services, this item will resume. The timeline has been updated assuming the resumption of normal services on June 30, 2020. 1.2 Prioritize use of discretionary funds based on the 2020-2021 Strategic Plan Goals. Prioritize Capital Funding Administration City Administrator November 2019 Q3’19: Council Consideration Q4’19: Council Decision Value: The City has undertaken several capital projects intended to provide improved services and better quality of life to residents. Prioritizing the limited funding available ensures resources are directed to the most important projects with greatest the retur n on investment for residents. Progress: Aug 26, 2019, Special Meeting Study Session complete 1.3 Continue to seek local, regional and federal grant opportunities to support City projects, programs and initiatives. Police Grants Police Police Chief 2020 Implementation Q3’20: Justice Assistance Grant Submit application Q4’20: Justice Assistance Grant Council approval Q3’ 2020 CalVIP Q3’ 2020 Bullet Resistant Vest Grant Value: Grants provide new revenues to support staff efforts in maintaining emergency service levels. Progress: FY20 JAG Grant and FY20 Bullet Resistant Vest Grant Application will be submitted in August, 2020. COVID-19 BJA grant application submitted for 43k (April, 2020) Prop 68 Park Grant CANELLED Recreation Recreation Director Recreation Manager Santa Clara County Public Health Dept. Public Works August 2019 Q4’19: Strategy and goal setting meetings Q1’20: Synthesize community input Q1’20: Assist with gathering cost estimates for grant amenities Q1’20: Convene grant committee Q1’20: Provide editorial support for application Q2’20: Grant application submittal Q3’20: Grant was declined Value: Grants provide new revenues to support staff efforts in maintaining service levels. Progress: Gilroy was notified in February, 2020 by the State Department of Parks and Recreation that Gilroy was not selected for funding. Cancelled. State grant administrators have scheduled a Gilroy site visit on November 13, 2019. Planning to resubmit during next grant cycle. SB2 Grant for Permit Streamlining Community Development CD Deputy Director Senior Planner November 2020 Q4’19: Resolution to Council Q4’19: Submission of application Q1’20: award of grant Q2’20: Acceptance and appropriation Value: State funding targeting streamlining affordable housing Progress: The City has submitted an application and awarded a grant. Staff is working with the state Housing and Community Development Department to revise the scope of work. On target. 10.C.a Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 2 Q3’20: Initial work Q4’20: Completion Community Development Block Grant Consolidated Plan Update Community Development CD Director Housing and Community Development Technician November 2020 Q3’19: Confer with countywide consultants Q4’19: Research and public outreach Q1’20: Draft regional and local plans Q2’20: Council considers adoption Q4’20: Completion Value: Will increase speed in which grant funds are drawn-down and deployed to improve quality of life Progress: County Consultant is finalizing the 2020-2025 Consolidated Action plan for public comment. Consideration and adoption of the Consolidated Action is currently scheduled to go to Council in June. On target. 1.4 Explore options to reduce pension liabilities including retiring debt through bond(s) or other financial tools. PERS Rate Stabilization Trust Fund Finance Finance Director Human Resources Director February 2020 Q3’19: Research options for Section 115 Trust Q4’19: Trust fund options presentation to Council Q4’19: Final presentation, Council consider adoption Value: Provides an alternative to CalPERS in which the City will attempt to out-perform their investment rate of return. Provides pension contribution smoothing by sending trust funds to CalPERS to minimize the impact of contribution increases. Becoming more informed on pension costs solutions. Progress: Completed. Council approved the pursuit and initial funding of the IRS Section 115 Pension Trust, completing this objective. Although this objective is completed, work will proceed on the Pension Trust to establish an investment policy. Additionally, the policy directive of Council in approving this financial tool requires discussing investing in this trust each fiscal year at the conclusion of each fiscal year. 1.5 Provide transparency in all activities related to municipal finance and ensure that financial records are accurate, reliable and timely. Your Voice Budget Widget / Clear Gov Administration and Economic Development Communications and Engagement Manager Senior Management Analyst Finance Director Finance Manager – Budgeting September 2020 Q3’19: “The City Budget: Planning for the Future” YourVoice 5-part campaign completed Q1’20: Evaluate options for new web-based tool Q2’20: Testing/needs assessment period Q3’20: Possible implementation with new budget Value: By engaging in increased communication with our community using simplicity of language, authentic intent and inclusive processes, the City aims to increase informed participation in local government in such a way to enhance the City leaders’ capacity to make well-informed budget decisions and to cultivate an increased sense of collaboration, pride, and unified support of a shared vision for Gilroy. Progress: “The City Budget: Planning for the Future” YourVoice 5-part campaign. Evaluated budget websites; not feasible. Complete. 1.6 Explore options for service delivery mechanisms to reduce costs. Closed Circuit TV (CCTV) Mainline Public Works Public Works Director Sewer Inspection Unit July 2020 Q3’19: Adopt updated SSMP document Q4’19: CCTV QA/QC program development Q2’20: Receive Equipment Q3’20: Start implementation Value: A QA/QC program would evaluate our cleaning methods and procedures and would help ensure that our operators are and cleaning pipe using the correct tools and nozzles for maximum efficiency. The general condition of sewer lines could also be rated so that sewer line repair projects could be planned more effectively. Progress: Public Works received the new CCTV inspection equipment on February 11, 2020. Staff was trained to use the camera equipment on February 28, 2020 and the vehicle was placed into service in March 2020. To date it has been used in six sewer line inspections. The SSMP was approved by council in October 2019 and posted on City website; SSMP update is being worked on and will be finalized in Fall 2020; a CCTV QA/QC program work has started but has been suspended due to the non -essential nature of the work. Department Unmanned Aerial System Program Police Police Chief IT Director March 2021 Q3’19: Council approval to implement program Q4’19: Obtain required license from the FAA Q4’19: Purchase UAS vehicle funded by Police Foundation Value: Increases officer safety and acts as force multiplier, increases operational capacity with the ability to quickly deploy Progress: Q2’20: Council approved implementation of program at their May 4, 2020 meeting. Four officers have qualified and obtained their FAA Remote Pilot License Receive donation from Gilroy’s Police Foundation and purchase the UAS 10.C.a Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 3 2020: Pilot Begins 2021: Evaluate, develop a report with findings and recommendations Q2’21: Present report findings and recommendations to City Council Smart Tablet Reporting Technology Deployment Police Police Chief Police Captain Information Technology Director December 2020 Q3’19: Obtain smart tablet’s (50 units) Q4’20: Implement new RMS system Value: Reducing time to complete forms, the paperless report writing and data scanner capabilities use smart phone and tablet, and voice recognition technology in tandem. Progress: 50 Smart Tablets were purchased and are currently being used with stand-a-lone forms software pending implementation of a new Records Management System (Another IAP action item) allowing interoperability. All feedback has been positive being that patrol officers are now able to accomplish many tasks directly from the field. Complete Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) Fire Fire Chief Police Chief Information Technology Director November 2019 Q4’19: Coordinate discussions with Police and Fire Departments as part of dispatch service agreement Value: Improves response time by always sending closest unit Progress: PD and FD vehicles have GPS and Communications is able to see them on their map. However, Communications does not dispatch Police or Fire units based on AVL and they do not have a plan to begin using AVL because it is not compatible with their current CAD system. Over the Air Mapping (Directions) Fire Fire Chief Information Technology Director February 2020 Q1’20: Work with IT to implement project. Train Fire Department staff personnel to become mapping coordinators. Value: Improves response map accuracy Progress: The Fire and IT Departments are currently beta testing this program on Engine 47. The Fire Department has provided feedback to IT regarding changes they would like made to the map view as it appears on the MDT in the engine. Due to the Covid -19 emergency, IT has not had the chance to make the modifications that the Fire Department is requesting. Per IT, this item is on hold until the Shelter In Place restrictions are lifted. We estimate this will be completed by September 30, 2020. Recreation Facility and Program Needs Assessment Recreation Recreation Director YMCA Consultant August 2020 Q2’19: Prepare an RFP Q2’19: Interview top 3 consultants Q2’19: Select project consultant Q2’20: Stakeholder and community input Q3’20:Evaluate Gilroy Recreation Dept. programs and facilities Q3’20: Developed and conduct one of two community surveys Q4’20: Conducted second community survey Q1’21: Analyze community surveys and present findings and recommendations to City Council Value: Obtain customer satisfaction levels through community survey, identify facility and program strengths and opportunities; department’s capacity to meet communit y’s recreational needs and potential partnerships to fill recreation gaps. Progress: Selected Pros Consulting for needs assessment and survey. In December 2019, Consultant developed a project website with #ReCreateGilroy. Consultant conducted a site visit to Gilroy on December 5 and 6, 2019 and facilitated 4 community forums and interviewed community stakeholders, program participants, seniors and city council members, totaling approximately 200 participants. Community Survey is scheduled for Q4’20. . Implement Recommendations from the Community Development Department Review Community Development CD Director CD Deputy Director Planning Manager Management Analyst - (Trainee) March 2020 Q2’17: Report with recommendations received Q3’19: 50% implemented, including 2/3rds of priority 1s and 2s. Q1’20: implement remaining via Land Management System adoption Value: Improve consistency, predictability, a of Planning and Building review of developer proposals. Progress: As of March 31st, 2020, 21 of 49 recommendations are completed. All but 5 have been initiated. 28 out of 30 positions budgeted, 27 filled. Continued implementation on hold due to LMS prioritization. On target. Bloomberg What Works Cities’ Certification Administration Senior Management Analyst Management Analyst Roundtable Ongoing Multi-year program Phase 1 – Data Governance Phase 2 – Performance Analytics Phase 3 – Advanced Analytics Value: Over $100k in free training opportunities for staff to learn about data science and performance based management tools. Progress: Team is working through courses on Data Governance policies. Unable to implement new policies due to SIP and COVID-19. Temporarily postponed. 10.C.a Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 4 Bloomberg Philanthropies John Hopkins University Phase 4 – Results-Driven Contracting Phase 5 – Open Data Enterprise Performance Management Administration Senior Management Analyst Management Analyst Roundtable Information Technology Applications Analyst Department Liaisons Management Partners June 2020 Q1’19: Convene Roundtable Q1’19: Compile Data Inventory Q2’19 Strategic Planning Q2’19: Analyst needs assessment / training Q4’19: Refine Service Index Q1’20: Build performance measures and test data pipelines Q2’20: Draft program plans Q3’20: 1st year pilot Q3’21: Launch Value: Improves communications on successful outcomes, leverages existing data assets to improve operational performance and evidence based decisions making. Complete work plan for performance management. Explore performance based contracting techniques. Promotes cross-training. Progress: Data inventory strategic plan, and analyst training complete. Departments drafting measures. Unable to finalize measures due to SIP and COVID-19. Temporarily postponed. Pilot Outside Business Licensing Processing CANCELLED Finance Finance Director Finance Manager – Budgeting Vendor July 2020 Q3’19: RFP Q1’20: Present options and business case to Council Value: Cost savings to the City. Tech update with customer service improvements. Progress: Cancelled. This item was presented to the City Council. Feedback from the Council included concerns regarding the use of intermediary vendors for this service, and degradation of customer service. At this time, this objective has been cancelled. Should a change of co nditions in the future necessitate consideration, staff will resuscitate this objective and bring it before the City Council. Information Technology Service Management Information Technology Information Technology Director Vendor December 2019 Q4’19: Complete Value: Enhanced work order system for Information technology support. Progress: Complete Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Finance Finance Director Information Technology Director Finance Manager – Budgeting Vendor Q4’19: Contract negotiation Q2’20: Design and build, then validate Q3’20: Finance modules Q4’20: Human Resources modules Q1’21: Utility Billing Value: A large technology upgrade that will free-up staff capacity. Progress: Request for proposal process complete in Q3’19. The ERP project is currently on-track. Work has proceeded with implementation of the Financial module, starting in early April 2020. Current work includes the fundamentals and analysis portions, network connectivity and setup of Tyler Cloud services. This work will continue the rest of Q2’20. Q3’20 will see enhanced design and the development of user testing protocols. Records Management System Fire and Information Technology Fire Chief Information Technology Director Vendor Q3’19: IT work plan Q4’19: Complete needs assessment Q1’20: Staff report to council Q1’20: Meet with CalFire to discuss outsourcing dispatch and RMS Value: Improved data collection and analysis Progress: We have reviewed our needs and determined that we will upgrade our current Enterprise RMS platform to a hosted RMS platform. This will include updating our RMS to the current version. We are currently about 8 versions behind and our RMS vendor will no longer support our current version after this year. We completed a Scope Call on 4/16/2020 with the vendor and our IT department and confirmed that both the vendor and the COG can support the hosted platform. We received an updated quote on 4/16/2020 and confirmed it is within our budget for this program. We are currently working on the contract for the upgrade. The upgrade is delayed due to the Covid-19 emergency. We estimate completion of the project by August 31, 2020. Civic Rec Recreation Recreation Director Recreation Manager Information Technology Director June 2019 Q4’19: Selected project consultant - CivicRec Q1’20: Commenced work and began teleconference meetings Q1’20: Staff inputted all department Value: New, easy to use and less expensive software; increased registration and facility reservation efficiency; improved customer service levels; thorough reporting, automated customer satisfaction survey and a volunteer database Progress: System preparations for launch. New registration software is scheduled to go live in March 2020, in alignment with the Summer Activity Guide. Due to Covid-19, we are delaying the launch of new registration software to January 2021. 10.C.a Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 5 Vendor activities, classes, special events, facilities, registration information in software Q2’20: CivicRec facilitated an in-person hands-on 3 day training in Gilroy with department staff Q3’21: New registration software will go live Customer Relationship Management and Computerized Maintenance Management System 311 Call Center Public Works / Administration Deputy Public Works Director Communications and Community Engagement Manager Information Technology Director Senior Management Analyst Vendor July 2020 Q3’19: Start implementation of CMMS ( Q4’19: Complete installation and launch Cityworks for Streets/Storm operations Q1’20: integration with CRM Q3’20: deploy Cityworks to other functional areas (Fleet, Water, Facilities and parks) Q4’20: Explore opportunities for a 311 system integration Value: Help make city government effective and more responsive to the needs of residents, its business owners, and visitors. Improves citizen satisfaction and communication for City services. Reduces non-emergency call volume in the 911 center. Provide the City Council, Executive Team, and the Analyst Roundtable with detailed performance metrics to use as a management tool to improve service delivery. A Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) and Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) application assists a Public Works agency manage all aspects of its Operations in one, convenient database. All essential data, such as asset conditions, locations and maintenance schedules/history are easily accessible and available; it also enables staff to enter or access information on inspections, preventive maintenance and unexpected or emergency work in real time. In addition, because CMMS can be integrated with GIS and a Customer Relations Management (CRM) application, it is possible to share information or manage work requests both from inside and outside the agency. Progress: Cityworks on-site work order training and database setup has been completed. The on-site testing, administrator training and launching of Cityworks (CMMS) has been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and shelter in place order. This work will commence in phases depending on the availability of Operations staff and the resumption of normal operations. A 311 call center was reviewed as an option and dismissed due to high cost. 2. Enhance Public Safety Capabilities 2.1 Ensure adequate funding for appropriate levels of staffing for law enforcement and fire department personnel. 2.1.a Quantify cost of service for paramedic/emergency medical technician services and explore alternative service delivery methods. 2.1.b Consider long-term funding options to support public safety. Alternative Service Model (ASM) Pilot Study Fire Fire Chief Fire Division Chief Finance Director August 2020 Q4’19: Pilot launched Q3’20: Develop quarterly reports with findings and recommendations and present to City Council Value: Daily added response capacity in the Santa Teresa district Progress: Pilot in First Year FY20 and Evaluate for FY21. Proposal for pilot approved by Council on April 8, 2019 as part of 20/21 budget. -We have completed three quarters of the ASM Pilot Study and have reported the response data to the City Council after each quarter. Due to budget constraints related to the Covid-19 emergency, we have not received direction on whether we will receive funding in FY 20/21 to continue the ASM pilot study, or to adopt the ASM as a permanent part of our staffing model. We estimate we will receive direction from the City Council regarding continuation of the ASM by July 1, 2020. Community Engagement Effort for Police and Fire Revenue Measure / Glen Loma Station Moved to Goal 6.4 to elimnate duplication Administration and Economic Development City Administrator Police Chief Fire Chief Finance Director Senior Management Analyst Consultants July 2019 to November 2020 Q2’19: Community Polling Q3’19: Report to Council Q3’19: Listening and Feedback Sessions Q4’19: Report to Council, direction Value: Expanded outreach to address awareness of police and fire needs to increase citizen engagement Progress: 2nd follow-up community poll finished, provided report to Council. Complete. Glen Loma Fire Station Fire Fire Chief City Administrator Finance Director Q4’19: Present Glen Loma Ranch Fire Station construction update to City Council Q1’20: Site temporary modular fire station on Glen Loma Site Q1’20: Finalize construction documents Value: Provide permanent station for fire services in the Glen Loma Ranch area to reduce response times Progress: The Fire Department is currently in weekly talks with the Glen Loma Developer and City Staff regarding the status of building the permanent Glen Loma Fire Station. Due to the Covid-19 emergency and the financial impact it has had on the City, building the Glen Loma Fire Station is likely on hold. The City is looking for a site in the Santa Teresa 10.C.a Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 6 Q2’20: Release RFP Q3’20: Select contractor and award bid Q4’20: Construction begins Q4’21: Fire station completion District in which to place a modular building that can function as a temporary fire station until the developer can build the permanent fire station. We estimate the City will select an alternate site for the temporary fire station by July 31, 2020. Text 911 Police Police Chief Police Captain IT Director Vendor July 2020 Q3’19: Received integration solution quotes Q4’19: Potential State Funding Award Q4’19: Implement County System Q4’19: Complete Value: Allows reporting to 911 Communication Center via text message. Increase in quality of service. Continuity with County plans. Progress: This project was completed and became operational in September, 2019. 2.2 Support local and regional partnerships for mutual aid. Silicon Valley Regional Communications System SVRIA Fire Fire Chief Fire Division Chief Police Captain 2020 Q4’19: Identify bi-directional amplifier vendor and purchase equipment Q1’20: Install BDA and program all vehicle systems Q1’20: Switch over to the trunked system Value: Ensure Roll-out of SVRCS XSC Radio Communications Countywide upgrade to a 700/800 MHz digital radio system for better communication between all public safety agencies within the County of Santa Clara. Progress: Power hook up was delayed due to PG&E. Redeployments around the State for major fire areas. - Both radio towers in Gilroy have been powered and are operational. Installation of the Bi-directional Amplifier project is complete. All PD radio programming is complete. PD will be switching to the new P25 Digital Radio System (SVRIA) on Thursday, May 7, 2020. The Fire Department’s radios are not programmed for the new P25 digital radio system. County Communications will program the Fire Department’s radios after the Shelter In Place restrictions are lifted. We estimate completion of the programming of the Fire Department radios by September 30, 2020. 2.3 Continue to update emergency operations plan(s) and ensure appropriate staff training and engagement for implementation. Emergency Operations Plan 2019 Fire Fire Chief Fire Division Chief Administration Police Chief Public Works Director Communications and Community Engagement Manager Department Liaisons 2020 Q4’19: Review contracting services Q1’20: Update EOP Q1’20: Start Emergency Operations Plan refresh Q1’20: Discuss coordination and contracting w/city of Morgan Hill for shared EOC manager position Q2’20: Training for EOC staff Q3’20: Exercise Plan Value: Updating the Emergency Operations Plan helps align practices with State and Federal guidelines, increasing opportunities for aide, and reduces risk to life and property. Progress: Received vendor proposal and met with Morgan Hill to discuss cost of sharing proposal. -We met with two vendors to discuss contracting with them to complete the EOP. However, our Administrative Captain/EOC Coordinator has been working on the EOP during this time and may be able to complete it without the need to contract th e service out. Additionally, due to the Covid-19 emergency, we may not have the funds to contract with a third party to complete the EOP. We estimate completion of the EOP by September 30, 2020. 2.4 Support emergency preparedness throughout the community. Wildfire Preparedness Fire Fire Chief Fire Division Chief Communication and Engagement Manager Review CWPP annually Q2: Provide community wildland preparedness presentation Q3: Send out annual wildfire pre- responses info Value: Develop a community engagement plan for residents on wildfire preparation reducing risk to life and property. Progress: We conducted a Wildfire Preparedness community meeting on June 25, 2019. We also created Wildfire Preparedness literature and will post this information on the Fire Departments Facebook page and on the Fire Departments webpage on the City of Gilroy website by May 29, 2020. We will also ask the PIO to post it on the City of Gilroy’s Facebook page by May 29, 2020. PG&E Power Outages Public Works and Fire Fire Chief Fire Division Chief Police Chief Public Works Director Q4’19: Submit Cal OES grant application for emergency supplies and support Q1’20: Public Works to create City infrastructure list and plan Value: Develop a community engagement plan for PG&E’s outages reducing risk to life and property. Progress: All critical City facilities such as the Police Station, fire stations, Annex, Corporation Yard, wells and City hall have back-up generators installed. The generator at City Hall is undersized for normal operation to continue during a power outage. Staff hired 10.C.a Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 7 Communication and Engagement Manager Q2’20: Identify at-risk households a consultant to develop plans for City Hall to share the Police Station’s ample generator. (Note – Plans to hire the consultant for design are on hold based on CIP funding discussions) All generators are checked on a routine basis for fuel and are on a preventative maintenance schedule. 2.5 Maintain safe, well-lit streets, roads, and sidewalks. 2.5.a Provide consistent Code Enforcement monitoring. 2.5.b Proactively address blight within the community. Fireworks Regulations Fire Fire Chief Fire Marshall Q4’19: Council Considers adoption of revised regulations and permitting Q2’20: implementation of new permitting Q3’20: Revised hearing and appeals process for residents Value: Updating regulations to be clearer will aide in enforcement and hearings. Greater enforcement will drive fire hazard prevention. Progress: Adopted revisions. Planning for conducting revised hearings in Q3. Improve Evening and Weekend Coverage (see 3.2) Community Development CD Deputy Director Human Resources Director Q4’19: Re advertise for vacant positions Q1’20: Hire and train new Officers and begin weekend and night coverage Value: Currently, all part-time staff have been furloughed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes a freeze on the hiring of part-time Code-Enforcement officers. Delayed. Progress: Completed a recruitment process and was not able to fill the two vacant PT Code Enforcement Officer positions. Discussed combining the two PT positions to a full-time position – not approved. Currently, evaluating all vacant positions and all part-time (non- grant funded) positions are furloughed. 2.6 Continue to support enhancements for Safe Routes to Schools. OTS Grant Funding Police Police Chief Police Captain September 2020 Value: Accept $96,000 OTS grant funding to support Safe Routes to School, DUI Checkpoints, and Distracted Driving Campaigns Progress: Council approved acceptance of the 2019 grant Q3’19 2020 OTS grant application to be submitted in August, 2020 2.7 Monitor treatment, storage and delivery systems to ensure safe, reliable delivery of water. Replace steel service water lines that contain lead fittings Public Works Water Public Works Director July 2029 Value: there are more than 450 steel service lines that need to be replaced with in the next 10 years in order to comply with a state mandate that requires all steel service lines with potential lead linings completely removed out of the distribution system, starting with a replacement plan that will be submitted before July 2020. PW Water section plans to perform 50 replacements per year. Progress: On target. The PW Water section has so far replaced 74 services and based on current productivity and staffing levels expect 24 replacements per year. In addition, the department is putting together a CIP project for the replacement of up to 200 services in the next 5 years. 2.8 Promote the Neighborhood Watch Program. Community Police Academy Police Police Chief Police Captain Ongoing Q3’20: Complete schedule Q3’20: Classes start Q4’20: Graduation Value: The purpose of the Citizens Police Academy is to give citizens a better understanding about law enforcement and how police officers work within the community. The classes in law enforcement provide a fun and interactive way to educate and develop positive relations with our citizens. -2019 Citizen Police Academy was completed in December, 2019. -Department was featured in Western Cities Magazine for best practices in police community engagement: https://www.westerncity.com/article/making-it-personal-linking-public-engagement- public-safety -2020 Citizen Police Academy is currently scheduled to begin in September 2020 pending potential restrictions due to COVID-19. 2.9 Address impacts of homelessness on the City and consider forming a Task Force to coordinate with Santa Clara Valley Water District MOU Police Police Captain Ongoing Value: Written procedures provide consistency and mitigate against legal liability 10.C.a Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 8 local and regional efforts. Senior Management Analyst Quality of Life Team Police Police Chief Police Captain Pilot in First Year FY20 and Evaluate for FY21 Q1’20: Team recruitment Value: Quality of Life issues are at an all-time high in Gilroy. Having a specially trained team dedicated to handle this issue will help the City. Progress: Due to multiple sworn vacancies in the Police Department this program has been delayed. Re-assessment of staffing will be made in ‘Q3 2020 to include the effects of COVID-19 induced recession and potential budgetary reductions. 2.10 Support youth programs. South County Youth Task Force Police and Recreation Recreation Director Police Captain County Partnership Q2’19 and Ongoing: Police and Recreation Departments develop culturally relevant and community driven programming, workshops, classes and special events for San Ysidro residents Value: This collaboration is a cross-sector, multi-agency partnership that is implementing a multi-faceted, community-oriented approach to create culturally-responsive crime prevention and intervention practices. This program reaches youth where they are and provides safe and healthy opportunities for recreation and engagement in the community and increases trust in public safety and local government. Progress: Programming is ongoing Council accepted $220,000 for FY 19-20 and FY 20-21 from the County of Santa Clara District Attorney’s Office. ‘Q2 – Request for Council approval to accept $157,000 from the County of Santa Clara Juvenile Probation Department Neighborhood Services Unit. Additional funding will be included in the FY 21-22 budget process. 3. Revitalize Historic Downtown 3.1 Update the Downtown Specific Plan and address properties with historical significance. 3.1.a Establish Design Standards for the Downtown area. 3.1.b Review parking needs and requirements. 3.1.c Evaluate compatible “change in use”. 3.1.d Consider utilization of “alleys” for new business development. Downtown Specific Plan Update Community Development Community Development Director Community Development Deputy Director Planning Manager Senior Planner Q1’20: Council Update / Launch Q2’20 Engage consultant Q2’20: Begin outreach planning Q1’21: Adoption of Downtown Specific Plan (but only after General Plan Environmental Impact Report is finished) Value: Specific Plans can jump-start new development in depressed areas, and can ensure that the public gets the quality it desires in any new development. Progress: This project will proceed following the adoption of the 2040 General Plan. Not Started. 2040 General Plan Update Community Development Community Development Director Community Development Deputy Director Planning Manager Senior Planner Q4 2020 Q2’19: Launch Q3’19: Additional public review + General Plan Advisory Committee Q4’19: Planning Commission Review Q4’19: Preferred land use alternatives Q1’20: Initiate Environmental Impact Report Q4’20: Wrap up Value: Economic and other conditions change, and projects approved by the city or county must be consistent with the General Plan. Regularly updating the plan enables a local government to consider and plan for the community's needs based on thoughtful analysis, public input and current conditions. Progress: Public review of the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) slated to begin at the end of May. Policy document was approved for EIR analysis by City Council. On target Historic Resource Inventory Community Development Community Development Deputy Director Planning Manager Q3’19: Update to City Council Q4’19: Draft review with Planning Commission Q1’20: Final adoption by City Council Value: The Historic Resource Inventory lists properties and structures that represent the history or reflect a period of time in the City’s history. In essence, it is a database used by the City to identify properties of potential historical significance. Properties may receive property tax benefits and greater clarity as it pertains to alterations and rehabilitation projects. Progress: The draft Historic Resources Inventory Document is scheduled to go to the Historic Heritage Committee in May. On target Pilot Program to Activate Alley Public Works and Community Development Public Works Director Community Development Deputy Director Planning Manager Q2’19: Develop shared solid waste pilot structure Q4’19: Assess dual frontage possibilities Q1’20: Develop alley dual frontage pilot Q2’20: City Council direction of alley way pilot Q2’20: Construction of a centralized Value: Building frontage is very valuable. Increasing frontage available increases leasable space, net revenue per square foot, and opens opportunities to entrepreneurs. Progress: This project is currently on hold during SIP. Progress on this goal is largely dependent on the effort and participation of the downtown businesses. To date, there has been little communication with the downtown regarding activity along the alley, or any frontage pilot program. Public Works has work ed with the downtown to develop a concept plan for the construction of a centralized trash enclosure behind Gourmet Alley between Fifth and Sixth Streets. A project charter has been developed for funding 10.C.a Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 9 trash enclosure in the downtown consideration during the CIP Budget Process. 3.2 Support efforts that promote beautification of the physical environment. 3.2.a Support the efforts of Code Enforcement. 3.2.b Explore opportunities for façade improvement programs. Request for Qualifications to Establish On-Call Roster of Hearing Officers Community Development Community Development Director Community Development Deputy Director Attorney Human Resources Director Senior Management Analyst Management Analyst Trainee Q3’19: Request for proposal for hearing officers Q4’19: Engage with officers and conduct first hearing Value: There is a backlog of code enforcement cases because of limited staff available for this duty. An outside officer will immediately start relieving the backlog and increase follow through of code enforcement cases. This will also help with URM cases. Progress: The City has held two hearings following the signing of an on-call hearing officer; December 18th, 2019 and January 30th, 2020. The subjects of those hearings included blighted buildings and unreinforced masonry building compliance. Complete. The Downtown Facade Improvement Pilot Program Administration and Economic Development Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Planning Manager Senior Management Analyst Administration Fellow Pilot in First Year FY20 and Evaluate for FY21 Q2’19: Finalize policies and procedures Q3’19: Implement and start accepting /distributing awards Q4’19: Develop a quarterly report Q4’19: Distribute report to City Council Q3’20: Analyze success of pilot Value: Increase foot traffic and sales means more local revenue. More success in downtown means potential for more synergy and new investment. Progress: Pilot started, monitoring and evaluating. Preparing final report to provide to Council for after the end of the fiscal year. (Anticipating that COVID-19 has soiled the pilot by introducing new variables working against the success of downtown businesses.) Downtown Blighted Property Abatement Unreinforced Masonry Community Development Community Development Director Community Development Deputy Director Code Enforcement Officer Q2’19: Council direction on resolving longstanding blighted buildings and unreinforced masonry Q2’19: Code enforcement notifications to impacted properties Q4’19: Hold abatement hearings with performance agreements for blighted an unreinforced masonry Q1’20: Ongoing enforcement and progress reports Value: Unreinforced masonry present safety hazards and the impairment of property values which results from the neglect and deterioration of property. Providing hearings and enforcement will enable abatement. Progress: Two hearings brought forth a total of 3 blighted building cases and 16 unreinforced masonry cases. The hearings have resulted in actions on all cases which include expungement agreements and ongoing work towards compliance. On target. 3.3 Support sustainable programs to promote local businesses and/or improve the Downtown area. The Downtown Commercial Corridor Improvement Pilot Program Administration and Economic Development Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Senior Management Analyst Administration Fellow Pilot in First Year FY20 and Evaluate for FY21 Q2’19: Finalize policies and procedures Q3’19: Implement and start accepting /distributing awards Q4’19: Develop a quarterly report Q4’19: Distribute report to City Council Q3’20: Analyze success of pilot Value: Attract and retain businesses which contribute to the long-term economic sustainability of the community. Lower fees provide incentives to invest in downtown. Works well in combination with Federal Opportunity Zone and New Market Tax Credit Progress: Pilot started, monitoring and evaluating on target. (Anticipating that COVID-19 has soiled the pilot by introducing new variables working against the success of downtown businesses.) 3.4 Coordinate efforts with the Chamber of Commerce and regional economic interests to identify opportunities for development. Chamber of Commerce Partnership Administration and Economic Development Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Senior Management Analyst Administration Fellow Q3’19: Review draft deal points Q4’19: Finalize agreement Q1’19: Launch program Q1’20: Evaluate successes and adjust program Value: Leverages existing local partnerships to enhance Economic Development opportunities, providing more jobs and tax revenues. Supports the chamber in their existing effort to connect with local businesses. Progress: Pending. Waiting on staff position for Economic Development 3.5 Consider public art and structural amenities to Public Art Discussion Recreation Q2’20: Meeting discussion at an ACC Value: Engaging the committee on this topic will help open up new public art 10.C.a Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 10 enhance the Downtown experience. meeting on public art opportunities. With the consolidation of ACC and PAC, this matter will be included in their annual 2020 work plan. 3.6 Promote connectivity/mobility for multiple modes of transportation including bus, bike and pedestrian access, and ADA compliance. Bird Dockless Scooters Public Works Q3’19: prepare and present to council a white paper on topic Q1’20: develop a program policy document Q3’20: launch a pilot program Value: Implement a city wide bike share/scooter share program guided by a consistent policy document. The availability and advancement of smartphones and web-based applications, coupled with robust wireless networks, has stimulated the introduction and wide spread use of electric scooters in the US. Some of the challenges posed by motorized scooters include preventable accidents to riders, blockage of accessible travel ways and entries, lack of timely removal of defective or improperly placed scooters, and undue burden on city resources that deal with these problems. It is proposed to conduct a pilot program that allows one or more vendors with a predetermined fleet size and mode of operation, and develop a comprehensive policy that addresses the permit process/fees, equitable distribution of devices, and most importantly safety provisions and considerations, followed by review of progress and results. Progress: White paper presented to council in September 2019; RFP release and pilot program implementation in Spring 2020 delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. SAIC Innovation Center Pilot Study CANCELLED Administration and Economic Development City Administrator Senior Management Analyst Pilot in First Year FY20 and Evaluate Value: Hosting autonomous vehicle testing will elevate the status of the City and help attract new investment. Pilot will provide new mode of transportation options to visitors. Shuttle circulating service to access downtown and outlets. Progress: CANCELLED 4. Focus on Revenue Driven Economic Development 4.1 Implement permit streamlining to attract and support business activities within the City. Land Management System and GIS Selection and Implementation Community Development and IT Community Development Director Information Technology Director Q3’19: Request for Proposal and site visits Q4’19: intent to award Q2’20: Implementation Value: Digitalizing systems and permitting will increase satisfaction, reduce turnover times, and contribute to the overall efficiency of the city. Progress: Council has awarded a contract to Tyler Technologies for the implementation of their Land Management System. Project staff is currently working to solidify Tyler Implementation Team and begin implementation work. On target. One-Stop Development Services Center and Development Permit Streamlining Community Development and Public Works Community Development Director Public Works Director Pilot in First Year FY20 and Evaluate for FY21 Q1’20: Construction management Q2’20: Process mapping and streamlining Q3’20: Implementation Value: Customer service is a high priority because it leads to faster permit and building approvals and supports business activities within the city. Decreasing time spent on plans and getting shovels in the ground faster increase opportunities for economic development and new revenues. Progress: Staff is working on finalizing design plans. Upon completion, the project could be shelved due to COVID-19 pandemic and budget prioritization. Delayed. 4.2 Explore opportunities to hire an economic development manager. Hire Deputy Administrator for Economic Development Administration and Economic Development City Administrator Senior Management Analyst March 2020 Q3’19: First recruitment start Q1’20: Second recruitment start Q1’20: Onboard Deputy City Manager for ED and begin Implementation of Economic Development Guidelines and Place-Based Strategy Value: Demonstrates to business community that Economic Development is a priority. Keeps Economic Development vision top-of-mind and pushes economic development strategic plan and special projects to completion. Avoid burnout from reassigning staff to fill multiple roles. Progress: Recommending transition to Economic Development Manager 4.3 Pursue the opportunity for the Regional Sports Park. Gilroy Sports Park Administration and Economic Development City Administrator Deputy City Administrator for July 2020 Q3’19: Exclusivity Agreement / MNDA Q3’19: Ag land mitigation and site entitlements Value: Having the proposed facility operated by a national brand with a proven track record of operating recreational ice facilities would be a great opportunity for economic development and has the potential to heighten our position in the region as a destination location and increase travel and tourism to Gilroy. 10.C.a Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 11 Economic Development Senior Management Analyst Q4’19: Negotiations and Due Diligence Q1’19: Draft report on potential Gilroy Sports Park and Sharks Entertainment PPP Q2’20: Adoption of plan Progress: Agricultural land has been mitigated successfully. Environmental Impact Report for the Sports Park Expansion is scheduled to go to Council in June. 4.4 Explore opportunities for incubator business programs. SkyVentures and Postscapes Administration and Economic Development City Administrator Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Senior Management Analyst Q2’20: Introductory meeting Q3’20: AgTech Incubator Conference in San Jose Q3’20: Analyze opportunities and draft prospectus Q4’20: Develop program guidelines and recruit partnerships Q4’20: City Council to review and provide direction Value: Most small businesses fail within the first few years. Providing a safe space for new innovative business ideas to grow will create new business opportunities locally that would not have materialized without the incubator. Progress: Pending. Waiting on staff position for Economic Development 4.5 Coordinate efforts with local and regional economic development interests, including the Chamber of Commerce, Gilroy Gardens and Silicon Valley Partnership. Marketing Coordination Program Administration and Economic Development Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Senior Management Analyst Administration Fellow Q3’19: Review draft deal points Q4’19: Finalize agreement Q1’19: Launch program Q1’20: Evaluate successes and adjust program Value: Leverages existing local partnerships to enhance Economic Development opportunities, providing more jobs and tax revenues. Supports the chamber in their existing effort to connect with local businesses. Would have capacity to explore options with Trader Joes. Progress: Pending. Waiting on staff position for Economic Development 4.6 Pursue diverse businesses to locate in the City of Gilroy such as: a Emerging technologies, research and development, b Agricultural tourism, and c Food manufacturing, packaging and distribution. Economic Development B.E.A.R. Programming Administration and Economic Development Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Q2’19: Adopted guiding principles Q4’19: Ongoing efforts Value: A focus on economic development helps economic growth keep going Progress: Pending. Waiting on staff position for Economic Development 4.7 Review policies for Transient Occupancy Tax and Short-Term Rentals (i.e.; Air BNB). Over-the-top Media Services Franchise Fees Finance City Attorney Finance Director Finance Manager - Budgeting Pending decision in Labell v. City of Chicago appeal Value: Expands tax base and increases annual ongoing revenue. TOT for AirBNB Progress: Labell v. City of Chicago appeal. Illinois Supreme Court denied to hear the case in late March 2020, allowing City of Chicago at the state level to apply an amusement tax to streaming services. However, staff is still researching to determine if the federal case regarding this matter will be heard. Staff will continue to monitor for resolution of the case at the Federal Level, which may impact the City’s ability to proceed with the establishment of such a fee. No specific timeframe is currently available. 5. Retain Stability in the City’s Workforce 5.1 Develop and implement organization wide staff succession planning. Succession Planning Administration Department Heads FY18: Management Partner Training Annual Santa Clara Leadership Academy Annual Gilroy Leadership Academy Q1’20: Annual Employee Engagement Survey Q2’20: Increase opportunities for temporary/acting director positions Q2’20: Increase knowledge transfer with trainings and mentorship, like CGL program Value: Our workforce is aging. Unemployment rates in the industry are near all-time lows. Retaining talent and institutional knowledge is key to providing excellent customer service and maintaining service levels. Progress: All departments are working on various succession planning efforts; employees are currently attending Leadership Gilroy and the RGS Supervisor Academy; SCCLA canceled for 2020 due to COVID-19; we regularly have employees working in stretch assignments/projects and/or temporary appointments to higher job classificatio ns (i.e. TA to Fire Division Chief, Fire Captain, Fire Engineer, Police Sergeant, Police Corporal, Interim City Administrator, Interim Finance Director, etc.) 10.C.a Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 12 5.2 Develop and implement specialized customer service training across all departments. Customer Service Training Human Resources Human Resources Director Community Development Director Q1’20: Research and develop parameters for new program Q3’20: Finalize pilot program Q4’20: Introduce customer service training pilot programs Value: Customers deserve the best. When employees are appropriately equipped with the right training customer satisfaction can improve along with City approval. Progress: Executive Management Team held an off-site meeting to brainstorm steps to re- establish a more formal customer service training program. A subcommittee was formed to work on this effort – this occurred just prior to the Shelter in Place order. Sub- committee will resume planning once SIP over. Interim City Administrator has committed to personally implement and deliver customer service training for city employees. 5.3 Support employee training, enrichment and recognition, including team building opportunities. Expanded Harassment & Discrimination Prevention Training Human Resources Human Resources Director Q3’19: Research and develop parameters for new training offering Q4’19: Implement new trainings Value: Creating a culture of awareness of harassment and discrimination policies will increase engagement and retention, in addition to reduce exposure Progress: Completed: all employees have attended expanded in-person or online training; new hires completing online training. Training will continue on an ongoing basis. Wellness Program Human Resources Human Resources Director Q3’20: Research and develop parameters for new program Q4’19: Implementation Q4’19: Receive Workforce Health Grant Value: Reduce health risks for employees, maintain healthy/engaged workforce Progress: Completed: 2019 Employee Wellness Program completed with all grant funds expended; new Gilroy CARES wellness program in place with several wellness activities for employees completed in 2019 (fitness tracking activity, walking maps, training sessions, etc.); new activities for 2020 being planned and developed. Credentialed Government Leadership Certificate Program w/ ICMA and MMANC Administration City Administrator Senior Management Analyst Mid-Managers and Management Analyst Roundtable Q4’19: First cohort starts three-year program at MMANC annual conference FY19-FY24: attend trainings FY24: Certifications awarded Value: Many of Gilroy’s mid-managers are either (1) new to their role in government or (2) have experience in only one area of government. CGL will help the City by addressing these two needs by broadening their familiarity with various municipal operations and providing mentorship opportunities to deepen their skills. Progress: Initiated first cohort. May be delayed due to financial impacts of COVID-19. 5.4 Establish clear performance standards for the workforce and provide annual employee reviews. Coaching Mindset Human Resources City Administrator Human Resources Director Department Heads Q4’19: Research and development of new employee evaluation format Q4’19: Initiate pilot with department heads Q2’20: Full training and implementation Value: Coaching promotes authentic relationships and enables empowerment, engagement and creative thinking, all of which drive higher performance Progress: Began process to implement new coaching model for employee performance evaluations to include training for supervisors/managers and employees (FY 21) 5.5 Conduct a review of the City’s management tools, systems and resources. Implement HR Module of ERP (FY 21) Information Technology and Human Resources Information Technology Director Human Resources Director Finance Director Q4’20: Pending Enterprise Resource Planning launch and evaluation Value: Digitalizing workflows for Human Resources systems increases overall efficiency. Progress: Planning for ERP implementation in FY 21 work plans. Evaluate New Intranet and Work Management Solution (See 1.6 - Performance Management System) Administration Senior Management Analyst Information Technology Director Management Analyst Roundtable Department Liaisons Vendor June 2020 Q3’19: Needs assessment Q4’19: Design and Demonstrations Q1’20: Selection and Contracting Q2’20: Build Q3’20: Alpha launch Q4’20: User testing and beta Q3’21: Launch Value: Automating task flows and approvals increases productivity. Improved internal communications increases knowledge transfer and engagement. Progress: Work management demo completed with analysts. Intranet scaffold successfully built into existing website. Both projects temporarily on hold due to the SIP order and furloughs. 10.C.a Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 13 5.6 Conduct a spatial analysis of staff work environments, which considers workability, safety, and ergonomics. City Hall Facility Assessment and Ergonomics Public Works Director of Public Works Deputy Director of Public Works Community Development Director Human Resources Director Facilities Superintendent Q3’19: Ergonomics training offered Q3’20: Adjust floor plan after one-stop shop implementation Value: Maximize use of space for greater efficiency. Upgrade City Hall HVAC to address repeated heating and cooling issues in City Hall Progress: Turley and Associates completed the design of the City Hall HVAC system and has proposed an installation scenario. Staff requested additional scenarios and associated cost for consideration. - Ergonomic evaluations for employees scheduled and implemented on a regular basis. Ergonomics training is a regular offering as part of the Citywide safety training program. 6. Provide Opportunities for Meaningful Public Engagement 6.1 Proactively communicate news about the City to residents, businesses and surrounding communities. Earned Media Strategy Administration Communication and Engagement Manager Ongoing Value: Increasing brand awareness promotes local businesses and tourism Progress: Successfully appeared in Western Cities Magazine for best practices in police community engagement. 6.2 Use social media to disseminate positive news, milestones and accomplishments throughout the community. Social Media Strategy Administration Communication and Engagement Manager Ongoing Value: Increasing positive news showcasing to residents all that City Council is able to accomplish with limited resources. Progress: We were able to leverage part-time employees, as opposed to contractors, to assist with this effort and created three videos and multiple posts with the goal of engendering a sense of pride in our community. Additionally, we opened up an Instagram account and post regularly with scenes and history of Gilroy. 6.3 Promote regional interaction and coordination with surrounding communities and service providers including schools, economic development interests, transportation, and non- profit agencies. Community Promotion Administration and Economic Development Deputy City Administrator for Economic Development Ongoing Value: Staff can coordinate with other local agencies to cross-promote. Increasing brand awareness promotes local businesses and tourism. Progress: Pending. Waiting on staff position for Economic Development 6.4 Conduct a Community Survey to identify residents’ priorities. Community Engagement Effort for Police and Fire Revenue Measure / Glen Loma Station Administration and Economic Development City Administrator Police Chief Fire Chief Finance Director Senior Management Analyst Consultants July 2019 to November 2020 Q2’19: Community Polling Q3’19: Report to Council Q3’19: Listening and Feedback Sessions Q4’19: Report to Council, direction Value: Expanded outreach to address awareness of police and fire needs to increase citizen engagement Progress: 2nd follow-up community poll finished, provided report to Council. Complete. 6.5 Conduct a Series of Community Forums to explore key community issues. Community Forum Series Administration Communication and Engagement Manager Q3 2020 Q1’20 Develop Plan Q2’20 Provide support to departments Q2’20 Launch Value: Provides opportunities for residents to provide feedback on city services. Progress: Community forum for general plan update and the second attempt for Gilroy’s COVID-19 response “Straight Talk” were successful. Complete. General Plan Community Workshops Community Development Community Development Director Planning Manager Communication and Engagement Manager Q4 2020 Q3’19: Land Use Alternatives Workshops Q4’19: Equity and Engagement Workshop Value: Interactive workshops for residents and other interested parties enable opportunities to explore the alternatives, ask questions, and express preferences Progress: Both the Land Use Alternatives and Equity and Engagement workshops have been completed. Complete. 10.C.a Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3) 14 7. Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services 7.1 Provide consistent and equitable street maintenance City-wide. Capital Pavement Maintenance Public Works Public Works Director City Engineer December 2019 Q4’19: complete 2019 Capital pavement phase project Q1:20: Advertise SB-1 and capital pavement projects Q2’20: Construct SB-1 and capital pavement projects Q4’20: complete 2020 SB-1 and capital pavement projects Value: Improve the pavement condition index (PCI) of City streets by providing various maintenance treatments (i.e., slurry seal, cape seal, asphalt overlay). Includes new striping to comply with complete streets ordinance where applicable and costs to design, construct and manage construction. Progress: On target. Presented state of the streets pavement condition to council in January 2020 -Received council approval on SB-1 list of projects for FY21 -Anticipated bidding in June 2020 Upgrade Residential Fire Hydrants Public Works Public Works Director Public Works Deputy Director for Ops PW Water section Supervisor December 2020 Q4’19: prepare action plan Q1:20: start phase 1 replacement Q4’20: complete 2020 hydrant replacement projects Value: Upgrade residential fire hydrants that do not meet the current City standard with commercial fire hydrants equipped with two 2 ½” outlets and a 4” pumper nozzle. The pumper nozzle can connect directly to a pumper truck thereby increasing the efficiency of Fire Department response. Progress: On target 7.2 Provide and maintain parks throughout the City. Park Trees Assessment Public Works Public Works Director Public Works Deputy Director for Ops Parks and Landscape Section Supervisor December 2020 Q4’19: prepare and issue RFP Q2’20: Conduct pilot assessment in Las Animas Veterans Park Q3’20: Prepare report for findings and recommendations Value: All trees have the potential to fail and/or fall. The degree of risk will vary with the size of the tree, type and location of the defect, tree species, and the impacted item/target. Park tree condition assessment is done to better evaluate trees in City Parks in keeping with industry standards set by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Through professional expertise in risk management, conditions that present the highest risk to pub lic safety and property are assessed systematically and addressed accordingly. Progress: On target Staff reached out to West Coast Arborists, the City contract tree trimming company, for a quote to provide a condition assessment of all park trees. The estimate exceeded what’s available in the budget so staff will be seeking additional quotes from other vendors. 7.3 Review the Residential Development Ordinance Policy. Residential Development Ordinance Policy Update CANCELLED DUE TO SB 330 Community Development Community Development Director Attorney Planning Manager Senior Planner Pending General Plan Completion +1Q: Update City Council and review policy CANCELLED DUE TO SB 330 Value: Growth control and management leads to balanced growth and risk avoidance. Progress: CANCELLED DUE TO SB 330 10.C.a Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Gilroy FY20 and FY21 IAP Council 2020-05-18 - Q3 Report (2808 : Implementation Action Plan FY20 and FY21 Report Q3)