Monte Sereno City Council
December 20, 2022

AGENDA
City of Monte Sereno
Tuesday, December 20, 2022
City Council
7:00PM
18041 Saratoga - Los Gatos Road,
Monte Sereno, CA 95030

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND IN-PERSON

OR UTILIZE THE VIRTUAL OPTION
How to Participate
To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can access and participate in the meeting as follows:

To listen (only) by telephone dial US: +1 669 444 9171 or +1 719 359 4580 or +1 720 707 2699 or +1 253 205 0468 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 360 209 5623 or +1 386 347 5053 or +1 507 473 4847 or +1 564 217 2000 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 646 931 3860 or +1 689 278 1000 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 305 224 1968 or +1 309 205 3325 or +1 312 626 6799 .

When prompted by the system enter participation Webinar ID: 819 9673 2737 and Password: 928519.

To attend the meeting webinar with a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device:

Please click this URL to join https://us06web.zoom.us/j/81996732737?pwd=eUc4SlFxK2RMWllVais1aFpqdFBzZz09 Passcode: 928519
Or iPhone one-tap (telephone connection) :
+16694449171,,81996732737#,,,,*928519# US
+17193594580,,81996732737#,,,,*928519# US
Passcode: 928519.

You will be prompted to install the webinar client appropriate for your device. Attendees are encouraged to install the needed software in advance at the following locations depending on the device being used. If you are unable to participate in real-time, you may email to the City Clerk at [email protected] with the subject line "Public Comment Item #__ " (insert the item number relevant to your comment) or "Verbal Communications - Non Agenda Item." Comments received by email will be read into the record, with a maximum allowance of three (3) minutes per individual comment, subject to the Mayor's discretion.

All comments should be a maximum of 350 words, which corresponds to approximately three (3) minutes of speaking time. If a comment is received after the agenda item is heard but before the close of the meeting, the comment will still be included as a part of the record of the meeting but will not be read into the record. Any member of the public who needs accommodations should email or call the City Manager who will use his best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety in accordance with the City procedure for resolving reasonable accommodation requests. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Manager at 408-498-5285 or [email protected]. If requested of the City Manager, agendas and documents in the agenda packet can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability.

Page

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

ORDERS OF THE DAY
The Mayor, or a majority of the Council by vote, may change the order of business, except for public hearings on the agenda for a set time.

PRESENTATIONS

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Persons wishing to address the Council on any matter of City business not listed on the agenda may do so at this time. Each speaker will normally be allotted three minutes, subject to the Mayor or a majority of the Council’s ability to limit the amount of time allocated to speakers based on the number of speakers and the need for expedient administration of City business in light of the number and length of items on the agenda.

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Copies of communications have been provided to Council for review prior to this meeting. Council Members desiring to read or discuss any written communication may do so at this time. No action may be taken except to place a particular item on a future agenda for Council consideration.

1. Submitted Public Comments 6 - 8

CONSENT CALENDAR
It is recommended that all items listed below be acted on simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is required by a Councilmember. One public comment period will be provided, although speakers speaking on more than one item may be allocated additional time by the Mayor or a majority of the Council.

1. Accept the Treasurer's Report for the Period Ending September 30, 2022
Staff recommends the City Council accept the Treasurer's Report for the period ending September 30, 2022.

Staff Report - SR-22-285 - Pdf
9 - 10

2. Accept the LAIF Investment Report for September 30, 2022 Staff recommends the Council accept the LAIF Investment Report for September 30, 2022.

Staff Report - SR-22-284 - Pdf
11 - 13

3. Accept the Significant Full Year To Date Variances to Budget Narrative for the month of September 2022
Staff recommends the Council accept the Budget Narrative Variance to Budget Report for the month of September 2022.

Staff Report - SR-22-283 - Pdf
14 - 17

4. Accept Revenue and Expenditures Report for the Month Ending September 30, 2022
Staff recommends the Council accept the Revenues and Expenditures Report for the month ending September 30, 2022.
18 - 30

Staff Report - SR-22-282 - Pdf

5. Approve Warrant List Dated December 20, 2022 in the Amount $144,164.21
Staff recommends the City Council approve the Warrant List Staff Report - SR-22-281 - Pdf
31 - 33

6. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Continued Use of Monies Received from the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) to Provide Funding for Two Police Officers Assigned as Motorcycle Traffic Officers
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the continued use of monies received from the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) to provide funding for two full-time police officers assigned as motorcycle traffic officers.

Staff Report - SR-22-266 - Pdf
34 - 37

7. Waiver of Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. NS-232, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Monte Sereno Amending Section 10.06.140 (Accessory Dwelling Units) and 10.06.150 (Accessory Dwelling Unit Amnesty Program)
Staff recommends the City Council waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. NS-232.

Staff Report - SR-22-269 - Pdf
38 - 47

8. Authorize Approval of Settlement Agreement for Shevertalova v. City of Monte Sereno, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 19CV348222, and Execution by City Manager Subject to Minor Modifications Approved by City Attorney
Authorize the City Manager to execute the proposed settlement agreement, subject to minor modifications as may be approved by City Attorney
Staff Report - SR-22-289 - Pdf
48 - 61

9. Adopt a Resolution Declaring Noxious and Dangerous Weeds and Rubbish, Refuse, and Dirt to be a Public Nuisance and Setting a Public Hearing Date and Time and Consider All Objections to the Proposed Destruction or Removal of Weeds, Dirt, Rubbish, or Other Hazardous Material
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution declaring noxious and dangerous weeds and rubbish, refuse and dirt to be a public nuisance and setting February 21, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. as the Public Hearing date and time to hear and consider all objections to the proposed destruction or removal of weeds, dirt, rubbish or other hazardous material. The Public Hearing will be held both virtually via the 62 - 66

Zoom application and in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 18041 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, Monte Sereno, California.

Staff Report - SR-22-290 - Pdf

10. Housing Element Status Update
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Housing Element Status Update
Staff Report - SR-22-291 - Pdf
67 - 71

PUBLIC HEARINGS

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

NEW BUSINESS

1. Consider and Appoint Two (2) Additional Members to the 2022-2023 Monte Sereno Youth Commission
Staff recommends that the City Council consider two (2) additional applications for the 2022-2023 Monte Sereno Youth Commission and appoint the two applicants to the Youth Commission.

Staff Report - SR-22-288 - Pdf
72 - 78

2. Consideration of Appointment of Liz Lawler to Fill the One Vacancy on the Monte Sereno Better Streets Commission
Staff recommends the City Council appoint Liz Lawler to fill the one vacancy on the Monte Sereno Better Streets Commission.

Staff Report - SR-22-287 - Pdf
79 - 81

3. Consider and Approve the 2023 City Council Meeting Schedule Staff recommends the City Council consider its 2023 City Council meeting schedule and cancel the regular meetings of January 03, 2023, February 07, 2023, April 04, 2023, July4, 2023, July 18, 2022, September 05, 2023 and November 21, 2023.

Staff Report - SR-22-286 - Pdf
82 - 83

4. Discuss and Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Adopting a Resolution Establishing a Suicide Prevention Policy and Mental Health Promotion for the Community
Staff recommends the City Council direct staff to return to the City Council at a future meeting to adopt a resolution establishing a Suicide Prevention Policy and Mental Health Promotion.

Staff Report - SR-22-292 - Pdf
84 - 238

5. Consider and Approve City Council Committee/Commission for Calendar Year 2023
Staff recommends the City Council considers and approves the City Council Committee/Commission Assignments for Calendar Year 2023. 239 - 240

Staff Report - SR-22-293 - Pdf

COMMITTEE/COMMISSION REPORTS
This time is set aside to allow Councilmembers serving on Council committees or appointed by the City to serve on the boards, commissions or committees of other agencies to present a verbal report on the activities of the respective boards, commissions or committees on which they serve. No discussion or action may be taken other than to place the matter on a future agenda.

Ellahie Last Meeting Next Meeting
West Valley Mayors and Managers
Cities Association – Board of Directors
Cities Association – Legislative Action Committee
Cities Association – City Selection Committee
Turner
ALT Monte Sereno Youth Commission
West Valley Sanitation District 12/14/22 01/22/23
Joint Venture Silicon Valley Network
Association of Bay Area Governments 06/17/22
VTA State Route 85 Policy Advisory Board
Mekechuk
Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee 12/08/22 01/12/23 West Valley Clean Water Board 11/03/22 02/02/23
West Valley Solid Waste/Recycling JPA 12/05/22 02/02/23 ALT Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority 12/14/22 01/11/23 Vacant
League of California Cities Peninsula Division
Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority 01/25/23
Santa Clara County Library JPA 10/27/22 01/26/23
Santa Clara Valley Water District Commission 10/26/22 01/25/23 Comprehensive County Expressway Planning Study
Santa Clara/Santa Cruz Counties Airport Roundtable

COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS
This time is set aside to allow Councilmembers to make brief announcements or reports on the Councilmember’s own activities. No discussion or action may be taken other than to place the matter on a future agenda.

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
This time is set aside to allow Councilmembers to make a specific request for an item to be placed on a future agenda. No discussion or other action may be taken.

ADJOURN
* All items on the agenda are subject to action/or change by the City Council In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (408) 354-7635. If requested of the City Clerk, agendas and documents in the agenda packet can be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability.

Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II]

California Department of Insurance
Insurance Protection for All Californians
For more information us at
at
www.insurance.ca.gov
or call 1-800-927-4357
visit
us
by:
by:

Protecting Consumers
Overseeing insurer solvency
Licensing agents and brokers
Conducting market conduct reviews
Resolving consumer complaints
Investigating and prosecuting
insurance fraud
Providing Services
One-on-One insurance assistance
Assisting with catastrophes
Providing insurance informational guides
Making in person presentations on
potential scams, understanding insurance
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

<"~\ Governor'~Officeofd Research
( ~ _J Planning an · ..........

CALIFORNIA _ • Commission Public Utilities
Safer from Wildÿres in 1 2 3
Safer from Wildÿres is an interagency partnership between Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and the emergency response and readiness agencies in Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration to protect lives, homes, and businesses by reducing wildÿre risk.

With California experiencing devastating, climate change-intensiÿed wildÿres, homes and businesses need insurance they can rely on.

Commissioner Lara is using every tool available to improve insurance for our communities. Drawing on the direct experience of ÿrst responders and the latest research on wildÿres, the partnership created a consistent approach to reducing risk with a list of achievable and e°ective actions to help make existing homes and businesses safer from wildÿres. The ultimate goal is protecting consumers by reducing wildÿre risk in their communities, making insurance available and a°ordable for all Californians.

This “ground up” approach for wildÿre resilience has three layers of protection — for the structure, the immediate surroundings, and the community — to prevent wildÿres from catching and spreading to other homes and businesses in the neighborhood. • Class-A Fire rated roof
• Maintain a 5 foot ember-resistant zone around a home
(including fencing within 5 feet)
• Noncombustible 6 inches at the bottom of exterior walls • Ember and fire-resistant vents (See Low-Cost Retrofit List, and Chapter 7A)
• Upgraded windows (Double paned or added shutters)
• Enclosed eaves
Protecting the 1 structure Working together as a 3 community • A community should have clearly deÿned boundary and a local risk assessment in consultation with the local ÿre district or state ÿre agency; an identiÿed evacuation route, cleared of vegetative overgrowth, and evacuation plan contingencies; clear funding sources to implement community mitigation activities and meet clear risk reduction goals; and integrated and up-to-date local planning documents pertinent to community wildÿre risk. • Current examples include the Fire Risk Reduction Community designation under development by the Board of Forestry, Firewise USA communities in good standing, and
Shelter-in-Place designations.

Commissioner Lara is working to increase available
incentives for wildÿre safety. To view the list of insurance companies currently offering discounts visit
insurance.ca.gov.
• Cleared vegetation and debris from under decks
• Removal of combustible sheds and other outbuildings
from the immediate surroundings of the home, to at least a distance of 30 feet
• Defensible space compliance (including trimming trees, removal of brush and debris from yard, and compliance
with state law and local ordinances)
Protecting the immediate 2 surroundings

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Reynold Samoranos,
Department: Finance Manager
Title: Accept the Treasurer's Report for the Period Ending September 30, 2022 Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council accept the Treasurer's Report for the period ending September 30, 2022.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:

Treasurers Report 2022 09 30 (Final)

TREASURER'S REPORT For the period ending
September 30, 2022
September 30, 2022 August 31, 2022 Changes Higher /
(Lower) Comment
BEGINNING BALANCE $572,127.87 $726,253.96 ($154,126.09) Receipts and Interest Earned
Receipts for the period 175,871.82 $113,812.85 $62,058.97 In September 2022, received Waste Connection/West Valley franchise fees ($35.7k), Building Permits exceeding $5k from properties on Bruce ($27.5k), Daves ($11.2k), Zena ($8.2k), Via Bonita ($8k) and Kirkorian ($7.5k); Property Transfer Tax ($15.1k), Gas Tax Revenue ($8.8k), and SB-1 Revenue ($6.4k).

Investment receipts during the period $0.00
Interest earned $0.00
Total Receipts and Interest Earned $175,871.82 $113,812.85 $62,058.97 Less: Disbursements
Cash disbursements during the period $328,057.22 $216,989.10 $111,068.12 In September 2022, Police Services ($84.2k), net payroll checks to City Staff ($65.9k), COPS Grant pass-thru for 5 months ($41.7k), EMC Planning Group for the Housing Element Project ($14.1k), CSG Consulting for Building Inspector ($7.5k) and Code Enforcement Services ($6.2k), Burke, Williams & Sorensen for legal services ($8.3k), Alana Consulting for Building Official monthly hourly services ($9.5k) and e-Permit development ($7.9k), TL Engineering for Bruce Ave paving rehab ($12.4k), and West Valley Clean Water Authority assessment ($11.5k).

Invested during the period $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
GASB 68 Report & SSA fee $0.00 $700.00 ($700.00) Annual GASB 68 Report paid last month EFT(PERS retirement) $13,558.36 $13,711.15 ($152.79)
EFT (payroll taxes) $26,569.42 $22,755.12 $3,814.30
EFT (PERS health) $8,287.02 $8,287.02 $0.00
EFT (EDD payroll taxes) $6,263.77 $5,496.55 $767.22
Bank fees $0.00
Total Disbursements $382,735.79 $267,938.94 $114,796.85 ENDING BALANCE $365,263.90 $572,127.87 ($206,863.97)

BALANCE IN DEMAND ACCOUNTS
Checking $138,993.28 $134,852.99 $4,140.29
Savings $226,270.62 $437,274.88 ($211,004.26)
TOTAL DEMAND ACCOUNTS $365,263.90 $572,127.87 ($206,863.97)

FUND DISTRIBUTION IN DEMAND ACCOUNTS
General ($28,631.27) $151,996.91 ($180,628.18) Refer to detail above for cash disbursements.

Law Enforcement $34,917.14 $76,583.74 ($41,666.60) Net transfer from 03-015 to 01-015 for payment of COPS Grant pass-thru ($41.7k).

Traffic Safety $1,137.11 $854.66 $282.45
Gas Tax (2107) $285,376.41 $270,231.71 $15,144.70 Received Gas Tax Revenue ($8.8k) and SB-1 Revenue ($6.4k) Storm Drain $69,523.86 $69,523.86 $0.00
Surety Trust $72.75 $72.75 $0.00
Loma Serena Ltg $2,828.96 $2,825.30 $3.66
Rose/Andrews Ltg. $38.94 $38.94 $0.00
Total $365,263.90 $572,127.87 ($206,863.97)
Payout of PTO (earned and unused vacation) for Staff resignation ($4.4k)

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Reynold Samoranos,
Department: Finance Manager
Title: Accept the LAIF Investment Report for September 30, 2022 Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the Council accept the LAIF Investment Report for September 30, 2022.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:

LAIF Investment Report 2022 09 30 (Final 12-10-2022)

City of Monte Sereno
Investment Accounts
Local Agency Investment Fund Wells Fargo Accounts Custodian For the period ending
September 30, 2022

ALL FUNDS REPORT

LAIF GENERAL FUND RESERVE ACCOUNT
Undesignated Reserve
Economic Fluctuation Reserve
Capital Improvement Program Reserve
Property Improvement Reserve
Other Post Emplpoyment Benefits
(OPEB)
01-025 Subtotal Unrestricted Reserves
05-025 Trafffic Safety
12-025 2107 GAS TAX
25-025 Storm Drain
30-025 Surety Trust
Building Fund
40-024 Loma Serena Ltg.

Subtotal Restricted Reserve
Total General Fund Reserve -
LAIF
8/31/2022
Revenue Interest
and
(Disbursements)
Transfers within
WFB between 5508
and 2153
Transfer in/(Out)
(From WFB 5508 to
LAIF)
9/30/2022 Comments
`
655,504.51 655,504.51
3,500,000.00 3,500,000.00
500,000.00 500,000.00 No Activity
200,000.00 200,000.00

0.00 0.00
4,855,504.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,855,504.51

0.00 0.00
133,096.76 133,096.76
21,000.00 21,000.00 No Activity
27,042.53 27,042.53

0.00 0.00
6,751.00 6,751.00
187,890.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 187,890.29
5,043,394.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,043,394.80
NOTES:

Interest is deposited directly to LAIF account. This monthly report is in compliance with the City's investment policy and demonstrates the City's ability to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.

City of Monte Sereno
Investment Accounts
Local Agency Investment Fund Wells Fargo Accounts Custodian For the period ending
September 30, 2022

ALL FUNDS REPORT
SAVINGS ACCOUNT #5508
01-015 General
03-015 Law Enforecment
05-015 Traffic Safety
12-015 Gas Tax (2107)
25-015 Storm Drain
30-015 Surety Trust
40-015 Loma Serena Ltg.
50-015 Rose/Andrews Ltg
Total
WARRANT CHECKING ACCOUNT #2153
01-010 Total
Total All Funds
8/31/2022
Revenue Interest
and
(Disbursements)
Transfers within
WFB between 5508
and 2153
Transfer in/(Out)
(From WFB 5508 to
LAIF)
9/30/2022 Comments
17,143.92 210,247.68 (395,016.15) (167,624.55)
In September 2022, received Waste Connection/West
Valley franchise fees ($35.7k), Building Permits
exceeding $5k from properties on Bruce ($27.5k), Daves
($11.2k), Zena ($8.2k), Via Bonita ($8k) and Kirkorian
($7.5k); and Property Transfer Tax ($15.1k).
76,583.74 (41,666.60) 34,917.14 Net transfer from 03-015 to 01-015 for payment of COPS Grant pass-thru and check #19993 $41,667.
854.66 282.45 1,137.11
270,231.71 15,144.70 285,376.41 Received Gas Tax revenue ($8.8k) and SB-1 revenue ($6.4k)
69,523.86 69,523.86

72.75 72.75
2,825.30 3.66 2,828.96

38.94 38.94
437,274.88 225,678.49 (436,682.75) 0.00 226,270.62
134,852.99 (432,542.46) 436,682.75 138,993.28
In September 2022, Police Services ($84.2k), net payroll checks to City Staff ($65.9k), COPS Grant pass-thru for 5 months ($41.7k), EMC Planning Group for the Housing
Element Project ($14.1k), CSG Consulting for Building
Inspector ($7.5k) and Code Enforcement Services ($6.2k), Burke, Williams & Sorensen for legal services ($8.3k), Alana Consulting for Building Official monthly hourly services ($9.5k) and e-Permit development ($7.9k), TL Engineering for Bruce Ave paving rehab ($12.4k), and West Valley Clean Water Authority assessment ($11.5k).
5,615,522.67 (206,863.97) 0.00 0.00 5,408,658.70
NOTES:

Interest is deposited directly to LAIF account. This monthly report is in compliance with the City's investment policy and demonstrates the City's ability to meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Reynold Samoranos,
Department: Finance Manager
Title: Accept the Significant Full Year To Date Variances to Budget Narrative for the month of September 2022
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the Council accept the Budget Narrative Variance to Budget Report for the month of September 2022.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:

SIGNIFICANT YEAR TO DATE VARIANCES TO BUDGET NARRATIVE 2022 09 30 (Final 12- 12-2022)

1 | P a g e
Significant Revenue and Expenditures Narrative
September 2022

25.0% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget
Revenues
SIGNIFICANT FULL YEAR VARIANCES TO FY 2022-23 ADOPTED BUDGET NARRATIVE  Revenues $0.8 Million (15.8% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR) - Property Tax $17.6 Thousand, 0.8% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Received Supplementary Property Tax SB-813 ($4.6k).

- Licenses and Permits $202.9 Thousand, 22.2% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: In September, processed 11 business licenses and received $50.1k in construction permits including project on Daves Ave ($6.7k), Twin Creeks ($4.1k), Bruce ($17.8k), Eaton ($1.5k) Zena ($8.0k) Valley ($2.5k) and Kirkorian ($7.1k).

Grading permits $12k from properties on Daves, Twin Oaks, Bruce and Kirkorian. - Franchise Fees $64.1 Thousand, 20.7% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Received $35.7k franchise fees from West Valley Collection
- Intergovernmental $1.3 Thousand, 0.5% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: In September 2022, received $1k for Abandoned vehicle abatement.
- Other Revenues $42.5 Thousand, 15.1% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Received $19.2k Road Impact Fees from projects on Karl Ave, Kirkorian Wy, Twin Creeks Rd., Eaton Ln, Kavin Ln, Bruce Ave, Palos Verdes Dr., and Ridgecrest Ave.
- Gas Tax $43.1 Thousand, 22.6% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Received ($8.8k) Gas Tax Revenue and $6.4k SB-1 Revenue.
- Real Property Tax $29.3 Thousand, 20.2% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: In September 2022.

Received $15.2k in real property transfer tax.
- Sales and Use Tax $2.3 Thousand, 19.4% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Received ($2.3k) sales tax from Board of Equalization September 2022 YTD.
- Federal Relief Funds and Other $409.9 Thousand, 53.1% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget Full Year:

Received $409.9k Corona Virus Fiscal Recovery 2021 Budget Act. - Investment Income/Interest $9.4 Thousand, 84.1% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Received LAIF investment interest $9.4k for last quarter ending June 30, 2022.

2 | P a g e
Significant Revenue and Expenditures Narrative
September 2022

25.0% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget
Expenditures
SIGNIFICANT FULL YEAR VARIANCES TO FY 2022-23 ADOPTED BUDGET NARRATIVE  Expenditures $0.8 Million, 15.3% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR - Personnel $344.9 Thousand, 22.9% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Slightly below budget with delayed hiring of combined Building Inspector/Enforcement Officer position. - Law Enforcement $168.4 Thousand, 15.2% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Paid monthly police services ($84.2k).
- Construction $761, 76.1% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: No activity in September 2022. Paid ($761) for Monte Sereno Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan (CIP-2022-F) September 2022 YTD. - General Government $184.6 Thousand, 40.5% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Paid ($10.9k) for photography services at Annual Picnic September 2022. Paid Dicar Networks for monthly maintenance of office computers and IT support ($1.3k) and EMC Planning Group $14.1k for the Housing Element Project. - Maintenance $31.7 Thousand, 3.2% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Paid $7.0k for Measure B Reimbursement - Walk to Breakfast, BMX Assemblies, 5th Grade, Bike Skills, Virtual Walk Assessment, KTUA $6.3k for Daves Ave Neighborhood Improvement Project and TL Engineering $12.4k for the Bruce Ave paving rehab project.
- Administration $88.3 Thousand, 16.7% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: In September, paid $25k Contract Services for Plan Check Consultant ($9.5k), ePermit Development ($7.9k), Building Inspector Consultant ($7.5k).
- City Attorney $9.0, 3.6% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Paid $7.1k for City Attorney Services and $1.1k for negotiation services and Padgett case.
- Building Maintenance $14.6 Thousand, 48.7% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Paid $1.1k for Landscape maintenance at City Hall, Janitorial services $660 and $0.8k to West Valley Sanitation District. - Equipment / Improvements $11.9 Thousand, 13.3% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: Paid ($4.3k) for various software licensing fee renewal.
- Building / Improvements $14.3 Thousand, 2.0% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: No activity in September.
- Engineering $11.2 Thousand, 33.8% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: In September, paid $11.2k for West Valley Clean Water Authority assessment.

3 | P a g e
Significant Revenue and Expenditures Narrative
- assessment
- S
- City Audit $1,927, 0.3.5% of FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget FULL YEAR: GASB 68 reporting service for FY 2022 Audit ($700).
-

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Reynold Samoranos,
Department: Finance Manager
Title: Accept Revenue and Expenditures Report for the Month Ending September 30, 2022
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the Council accept the Revenues and Expenditures Report for the month ending September 30, 2022.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Alternatives:

Conclusion:

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at the City Hall and the agenda in this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:

REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022)

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

REVENUES

PROPERTY TAX

LICENSE & PERMITS

FRANCHISE TAX

INTERGOVERNMENTAL

OTHER REVENUE

GAS TAX

INTEREST

REAL PROPERTY TAX

SALES TAX

FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDS AND OTHER
FINES

TOTAL REVENUE
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
2,326,700 2,733 17,571 (2,309,129) 0.8%
914,100 79,504 202,934 (711,166) 22.2%
310,000 35,661 64,141 (245,859) 20.7%
236,485 1,000 1,263 (235,222) 0.5%
280,700 21,417 42,462 (238,238) 15.1%
191,000 15,145 43,102 (147,898) 22.6%
11,200 0 9,425 (1,775) 84.1%
145,000 15,129 29,269 (115,731) 20.2%
12,000 144 2,332 (9,668) 19.4%
772,100 0 409,905 (362,195) 53.1%
3,000 282 507 (2,493) 16.9%
5,202,285 171,016 822,911 (4,379,374) 15.8%
Page: 1 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 19 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

PROPERTY TAX
01-202 Secured
01-204 Unsecured
01-210 Homeowners Exemption
01-214 SB 813 Supplemental
03-316 Law Enforcement Tax (See Notes
Below)
40-366 Secured
40-368 Unsecured
40-370 Homeowners Exemption
40-378 Homeowner Exempt/SB813
50-402 Assessment

TOTAL PROPERTY TAX
Notes to Law Enforcement Tax - $89,000
03-316
Police Special Tax Assessment
per Assessor's Report May 5,
2022 - Total $89,000

SALES TAX
01-296 Sales and UseTax

TOTAL SALES TAX
01-298 Coronavirus Relief Fund (State)

TOTAL FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDS
Notes to Relief Funds (Federal & Other) $772k
01-298 Silicon Valley Clean Energy ($18k) - Secured if usd for solar panel/battery Prop 68 Per Capita Program ($180k) - Secured if expended by 12/31/2023 Federal Relief Funds ($409.5k) - Awarded Coronavirus State and local Fiscal Recovery Funds.

Unidentified energy, Parks, or Rescue Funding ($164k) - To be determined FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
2,108,700 0 0 (2,108,700) 0.0%
89,000 0 0 (89,000) 0.0%
5,000 0 0 (5,000) 0.0%
35,000 2,730 17,547 (17,453) 50.1%
89,000 0 0 (89,000) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 4 24 24 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
2,326,700 2,733 17,571 (2,309,129) 0.8%
12,000 144 2,332 (9,668) 19.4%
12,000 144 2,332 (9,668) 19.4%
772,100 0 409,905 (362,195) 53.1%
772,100 0 409,905 (362,195) 53.1%
Page: 2 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 20 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

GAS TAX
12-328 Gas Tax
12-333 Gas Tax (SB-1)

TOTAL GAS TAX

FRANCHISE TAX
01-262 Gas
01-263 Electricity
01-264 Water
01-266 Refuse
01-267 Recycle HHW & JPA fees
01-268 Cable TV

TOTAL FRANCHISE TAX

REAL PROPERTY TAX
01-222 Real Prop Transfer Tax
01-225 SB 2 Real Estate Transactions
TOTAL REAL PROP. TAX

LICENSE AND PERMIT FEES
01-231 SB1186 Fees
01-232 Business License
01-234 ConstructionTax
01-235 SMIP
01-236 Construction Permits
01-237 Grading Permits
01-238 SB1473 (BSASRF)
01-240 Subdivision Fee
01-241 Site Development\Use\Variance\
01-242 Zoning Fees
01-243 Planning Miscellaneous
01-244 Encroachments
01-245 Community Planning Fee
. TOTAL LICENSE & PERMITS
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
109,000 8,761 24,577 (84,423) 22.5%
82,000 6,384 18,526 (63,474) 22.6%
191,000 15,145 43,102 (147,898) 22.6%
17,600 0 0 (17,600) 0.0%
38,000 0 0 (38,000) 0.0%
38,400 0 0 (38,400) 0.0%
130,000 34,100 38,210 (91,790) 29.4%
36,000 1,561 7,590 (28,410) 21.1%
50,000 0 18,341 (31,659) 36.7%
310,000 35,661 64,141 (245,859) 20.7%
145,000 15,129 29,269 (115,731) 20.2%
0 0 0 0 N/A
145,000 15,129 29,269 (115,731) 20.2%
680 44 668 (12) 98.2%
12,320 800 11,625 (695) 94.4%
36,000 4,553 5,260 (30,740) 14.6%
6,300 509 920 (5,380) 14.6%
697,000 50,138 134,705 (562,295) 19.3%
50,000 11,915 20,013 (29,987) 40.0%
3,000 158 368 (2,632) 12.3%
200 0 0 (200) 0.0%
8,500 350 3,650 (4,850) 42.9%
0 0 0 0 N/A
100 350 1,400 1,300 1400.0%
40,000 3,300 10,628 (29,372) 26.6%
60,000 7,387 13,696 (46,304) 22.8%
914,100 79,504 202,934 (711,166) 22.2%
Page: 3 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 21 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget
FINES
01-293 Alarm Soundings
05-322 Traffic Safety (Bails & Fines)

TOTAL FINES

INVESTMENT INCOME
01-282 Interest - General (See Notes
Below)
12-332 Gas Tax Interest
. TOTAL INTEREST
.

Notes to Interest - General - $11,200
01-282
LAIF interest payment received in
arrears - Estimated $11,200 FY
2023.

INTERGOVERNMENTAL
01-287 AB939 (recycle incentive)
01-288 Abandoned Vehicle Abatement
01-300 Motor vehicle (state)
01-305 Miscellaneous
03-318 COPS grant revenue
05-323 Miscellaneous (Measure B &VRF)
See Notes Below

TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
Notes to Miscellaneous (05-323) - $129,185
05-323
Measure B - Pavement
Management Program (Annual) -
$80,685
05-323
TDA - Highway 9 Safety
Improvement Gap Closure -
$26,500
05-323 VRF - To be determined
allocation - $22,000
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
0 0 0 0 N/A
3,000 282 507 (2,493) 16.9%
3,000 282 507 (2,493) 16.9%
10,000 0 7,834 (2,166) 78.3%
1,200 0 1,591 391 132.6%
11,200 0 9,425 (1,775) 84.1%
1,100 0 263 (837) 23.9%
2,000 1,000 1,000 (1,000) 50.0%
4,200 0 0 (4,200) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
100,000 0 0 (100,000) 0.0%
129,185 0 0 (129,185) 0.0%
236,485 1,000 1,263 (235,222) 0.5%
Page: 4 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 22 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget
. OTHER REVENUE
01-246 Road Impact fees
01-290 BCJPIA/State fund Ins. rebate
01-291 Microfilm Fee
01-292 Miscellaneous (See Notes Below)
01-294 Reimb. Publication
01-295 Election Candidate Fees
25-352 Storm drain dev fees
25-354 Storm Drain maintenance/Administration
General Fund Transfer for CIP
Beginning Equity Balance

TOTAL OTHER REVENUE
Notes to Miscellaneous (01-292) $283,600
01-292 Secured Grant for Annex Building
Project $198,600 (Budget)
01-292 Housing Element - Leap Grant
$65,000 (Budget)
01-292 Housing Element - Reap Grant
$20,000 (Budget)

TOTAL REVENUE
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
170,000 19,182 35,296 (134,704) 20.8%
500 0 0 (500) 0.0%
7,200 1,425 2,890 (4,310) 40.1%
85,000 0 0 (85,000) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 2,770 2,770 N/A
18,000 810 1,506 (16,494) 8.4%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
280,700 21,417 42,462 (238,238) 15.1%
5,202,285 171,016 822,911 (4,379,374) 15.8%
Page: 5 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 23 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

EXPENDITURES

PERSONNEL

LAW ENFORCEMENT

CONSTRUCTION

GENERAL GOVERNMENT

MAINTENANCE

ADMINISTRATION

CITY ATTORNEY

BUILDING MAINTENANCE

EQUIPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT

BUILDING AND IMPROVEMENT

CITY AUDIT

ENGINEERING

SPECIAL DISTRICTS

TOTAL EXPENDITURES

NET SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
1,506,832 123,406 344,871 (1,161,961) 22.9%
1,110,604 84,217 168,434 (942,170) 15.2%
1,000 0 761 (239) 76.1%
456,000 42,003 184,560 (271,440) 40.5%
975,000 25,726 31,657 (943,343) 3.2%
528,660 34,310 88,269 (440,391) 16.7%
249,550 8,980 8,980 (240,570) 3.6%
30,000 2,572 14,605 (15,395) 48.7%
89,600 4,253 11,883 (77,717) 13.3%
725,000 0 14,257 (710,743) 2.0%
54,600 393 1,927 (52,673) 3.5%
33,272 11,247 11,247 (22,025) 33.8%
2,980 224 270 (2,710) 9.1%
5,763,098 337,330 881,722 (4,881,376) 15.3%
(560,813) (166,313) (58,811) 502,002 10.5%
Page: 6 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 24 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

EXPENDITURES

GENERAL GOVERNMENT
01-505 Council Trvl, Mtgs,Protocol
01-506 Youth Commission Programs
01-507 Community Interface
01-515 Council Memberships
01-520 Elections
01-521 Municipal Code Revision
01-522 Environmental Services
01-523 GIS Mapping
01-531 Disbursement SMIP
01-532 SB1473 (BSASRF)
01-533 Disbruse SB1186 Fees
01-535 Professional Services
01-540 Insurance & Bonding
01-545 Code Enforcement
01-550 Community Based Organizations
01-555 Emergency Services
01-560 Annexation
01-565 Legal Ads/Notices/Recording fees
01-570 General Plan Revise
01-575 Misc/Refunds
01-576 Sales Tax
01-585 Animal Control

TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
2,000 0 12,230 10,230 611.5%
3,000 0 0 (3,000) 0.0%
15,000 10,938 12,838 (2,162) 85.6%
2,000 0 0 (2,000) 0.0%
15,000 0 0 (15,000) 0.0%
3,000 0 0 (3,000) 0.0%
12,000 1,622 1,622 (10,378) 13.5%
15,000 0 0 (15,000) 0.0%
6,300 0 0 (6,300) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
215,000 15,401 19,057 (195,943) 8.9%
89,000 0 93,646 4,646 105.2%
0 5,205 5,205 5,205 N/A
20,000 0 21,000 1,000 105.0%
12,500 0 0 (12,500) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
10,000 861 3,009 (6,991) 30.1%
0 0 0 0 N/A
200 0 0 (200) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
36,000 7,976 15,952 (20,049) 44.3%
456,000 42,003 184,560 (271,440) 40.5%
Page: 7 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 25 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

PERSONNEL
01-605 Regular Full Time
01-615 Part Time
01-620 Long Term Disablity Ins
01-625 Retirement Employer
01-627 Retirement Employee
01-630 Health Insurance
01-635 Dental Insurance
01-642 Workers Comp. Insurance
01-645 Social Security
01-647 Medicare
01-650 Unemployment
01-660 Deferred Compensation
01-665 Benefits Allowance

TOTAL PERSONNEL

ADMINISTRATION
01-705 Office Utilities
01-710 Office Supplies
01-711 Postage
01-715 Office Equip Maintenance
01-718 Bank Fee Finance Charge
01-720 Communications
01-725 Reproduction/Printing
01-740 Mtgs/Trvl/Mileage reimb.
01-745 Publications/Memberships
01-755 Professional Services
01-765 Contract Services
01-770 Training
01-775 Miscellaneous
01-885 Horticultural/Arborist Services
01-999 City Mangers Revolving Account

TOTAL ADMINISTRATION
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
1,091,235 93,557 256,480 (834,756) 23.5%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
95,593 7,771 23,314 (72,278) 24.4%
24,824 2,105 6,316 (18,508) 25.4%
135,177 8,287 24,854 (110,322) 18.4%
7,260 0 940 (6,320) 12.9%
8,400 0 2,398 (6,002) 28.6%
68,877 5,956 16,367 (52,511) 23.8%
16,143 1,393 3,828 (12,316) 23.7%
336 0 0 (336) 0.0%
38,586 2,637 5,273 (33,313) 13.7%
20,400 1,700 5,100 (15,300) 25.0%
1,506,832 123,406 344,871 (1,161,961) 22.9%
8,800 68 971 (7,829) 11.0%
14,580 1,682 7,546 (7,034) 51.8%
1,500 0 0 (1,500) 0.0%
40,760 705 1,891 (38,869) 4.6%
250 0 0 (250) 0.0%
24,300 2,183 13,697 (10,603) 56.4%
7,100 1,089 2,423 (4,677) 34.1%
19,700 800 5,032 (14,668) 25.5%
22,470 2,753 11,870 (10,600) 52.8%
0 0 0 0 N/A
361,000 24,955 41,373 (319,628) 11.5%
18,700 75 3,469 (15,231) 18.5%
0 0 0 0 N/A
7,000 0 0 (7,000) 0.0%
2,500 0 0 (2,500) 0.0%
528,660 34,310 88,269 (440,391) 16.7%
Page: 8 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 26 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

EQUIPMENT/IMPROVEMENTS
01-805 Office
01-810 Field
01-811 Computer, Hard/Software

TOTAL EQUIPMENT / IMPROVEMENTS

BUILDING/IMPROVEMENTS
01-814 Building Acquisition
01-815 Building Improvements

TOTAL EQUIPMENT / IMPROVEMENTS
Notes to Building Improvement (01-815) $725k
01-815 Annex Building Project $600,000
(Budget)
01-815 City Hall Retrofit Parking Lot
$125,000 (Budget)

LAW ENFORCEMENT
03-545 Police Services
01-546 Booking & CAL-ID
03-548 Disburse COPS grant funds

TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

BUILDING MAINTENANCE
01-860 Building & Ground Maint
01-920 Building & Ground Const

TOTAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE

MAINTENANCE
01-845 Pavement Management Program
12-845 Pavement Management Program
05-850 Storm Drain Maintenance
05-870 Traffic Safety (signs & markings)
05-880 Traffic Safety (emergency calls&repairs)
05-890 Traffic Safety ( street lighting)
12-865 Street Sweeping
25-850 Storm Drain Maintenance

TOTAL MAINTENANCE
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
15,000 0 0 (15,000) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
74,600 4,253 11,883 (62,717) 15.9%
89,600 4,253 11,883 (77,717) 13.3%
0 0 0 N/A
725,000 0 14,257 (710,743) 2.0%
725,000 0 14,257 (710,743) 2.0%
1,010,604 84,217 168,434 (842,170) 16.7%
0 0 0 0 N/A
100,000 0 0 (100,000) 0.0%
1,110,604 84,217 168,434 (942,170) 15.2%
30,000 2,572 9,985 (20,015) 33.3%
0 0 4,620 4,620 N/A
30,000 2,572 14,605 (15,395) 48.7%
310,000 0 0 (310,000) 0.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
627,000 25,726 31,657 (595,343) 5.0%
12,000 0 0 (12,000) 0.0%
3,000 0 0 (3,000) 0.0%
11,000 0 0 (11,000) 0.0%
12,000 0 0 (12,000) 0.0%
975,000 25,726 31,657 (943,343) 3.2%
Page: 9 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 27 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

CONSTRUCTION
01-905 Gen Fund Road Proj.(FY2018/19)
01-915 Neighborhood St. Improve Project
05-905 Traffic Safety Project
05-925 Traffic Safety Misc Bike/Ped Improv
12-915 Gas Tax Road Project
25-910 Storm Drain Project

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION

ENGINEERING
Mapping and Records System
12-875 Congestion Management
25-805 WV Clean Water Administration

TOTAL ENGINEERING

SPECIAL DISTRICTS
40-935 Loma Serena Lighting
50-945 Rose/Andrews Lighting

TOTAL SPECIAL DISTRICTS
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 761 761 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
1,000 0 0 (1,000) 0.0%
1,000 0 761 (239) 76.1%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
33,272 11,247 11,247 (22,025) 33.8%
33,272 11,247 11,247 (22,025) 33.8%
2,040 177 177 (1,863) 8.7%
940 47 93 (847) 9.9%
2,980 224 270 (2,710) 9.1%
Page: 10 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 28 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

CITY ATTORNEY
01-425 Retainer
01-427 Litigation
01-430 City Attorney litigation
01-435 Mtg, Trv, Prot.

TOTAL CITY ATTORNEY

CITY AUDIT
01-470 Audit
12-472 Gas Tax Audit
01-480 Misc/Bank charges

TOTAL CITY AUDIT

TOTAL EXPENDITURES

NET SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
84,550 7,145 7,145 (77,405) 8.5%
165,000 1,835 1,835 (163,165) 1.1%
0 0 0 0 N/A
0 0 0 0 N/A
249,550 8,980 8,980 (240,570) 3.6%
45,300 0 700 (44,600) 1.5%
3,000 0 0 (3,000) 0.0%
6,300 393 1,227 (5,073) 19.5%
54,600 393 1,927 (52,673) 3.5%
5,763,098 337,330 881,722 (4,881,376) 15.3%
(560,813) (166,313) (58,811) 502,002 10.5%
Page: 11 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 29 of 240

THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO

REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES REPORT

FOR THE MONTH OF
September 2022

25.0% OF FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget

TOTAL FUND RESERVES

WARRANT CHECKING ACCOUNT
01-010 TOTAL WARRANT CHECKING

SAVINGS ACCOUNT
01-015 General
03-015 Law Enforecment
05-015 Traffic Safety
12-015 Gas Tax (2107)
25-015 Storm Drain
30-015 Surety Trust
40-015 Loma Serena Ltg.
50-015 Rose/Andrews Ltg

TOTAL SAVINGS

TOTAL DEMAND ACCOUNTS

LAIF GENERAL FUND ACCOUNT
Undesignated Reserve
Economic Fluctuation Reserve
Capital Improvement Program Reserve
Property Improvement Reserve
Other Post Emplpoyment Benefits (OPEB)
01-025 Subtotal Unrestricted Reserve
05-025 Trafffic Safety
12-025 2107 GAS TAX
25-025 Storm Drain
30-025 Surety Trust
40-024 Loma Serena Lighting District
Subtotal Restricted Reserve

TOTAL GENERAL FUND RESERVE

TOTAL ALL FUNDS
FY 2022-23
Adopted Budget

CURRENT MONTH
September 2022
FY 2022-23 YTD
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23 YTD
vs. FY 2022-23 Full
Year Adopted
Budget -
Higher/(Lower)
% OF YTD
ACTUAL VS.

Full Year
Adopted
Budget
Actual Year End
Balances
June 30, 2022
117,450 4,140 138,993 21,543 118.3%
83,711 (184,768) (167,625) (251,336) -200.2%
241,391 (41,667) 34,917 (206,474) 14.5%
630 282 1,137 507 180.6%
242,274 15,145 285,376 43,102 117.8%
69,524 0 69,524 0 100.0%
73 0 73 0 100.0%
2,805 4 2,829 24 100.8%
39 0 39 0 100.0%
640,447 (211,004) 226,271 (414,176) 35.3%
757,897 (206,864) 365,264 (392,633) 48.2%
647,671 0 655,505 7,834 101.2%
3,500,000 0 3,500,000 0 100.0%
500,000 0 500,000 0 100.0%
200,000 0 200,000 0 100.0%
0 0 0 0 N/A
4,847,671 0 4,855,505 7,834 100.2%
0 0 0 0 N/A
131,506 0 133,097 1,591 101.2%
21,000 0 21,000 0 100.0%
27,043 0 27,043 0 100.0%
6,751 0 6,751 0 100.0%
186,300 0 187,890 1,591 100.9%
5,033,970 0 5,043,395 9,425 100.2%
5,791,868 (383,209) 5,408,659 (383,209) 93.4%
Page: 12 of 12 File: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES MONTHLY REPORT 2022 09 30 (Final 12-07-2022) Page 30 of 240

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Reynold Samoranos,
Department: Finance Manager
Title: Approve Warrant List Dated December 20, 2022 in the Amount $144,164.21
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council approve the Warrant List Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impact with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda, and this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:
2022 12 20 Warrants List

CITY OF MONTE SERENO
REGISTER OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AS OF THESE DATES:

December 20, 2022
CHECK
NO. TO FOR AMOUNT ACCOUNT NO.
20096 Anago Franchising, Inc Janitorial services for City Hall 330.00 01-860 20097 Apex Asphalt Paving Grind 3 raised concrete areas and level sidewalk on Winchester Blvd. 890.00 05-880
20098 Association of Bay Area
Government Natural gas for City Hall 236.12 01-705
20099 Bay Area News Group Publish classified notice of 2022 Building Code Adoption 400.20 01-565
20100 BKF Engineers
Hwy 9 Safety Improvement Gap Closure
through Monte Sereno Project (CIP-2022-
E)
1,135.50 05-870
20101 Burke,Williams &
Sorensen, LLP
City Attorney services ($8018) and
General Litigation Matters ($395) 8,413.08 01-427 01-425 20102 CIVICPLUS Municode Administrative Support fee 250.00 01-720 20103 COMCAST Internet service for City Hall 106.67 01-720 20104 corodata Shredding,
Inc.

Standard record storage carton,
blueprint tube carton and plan cartons 52.90 01-710
20105 Dicar Networks, Inc.

Managed Total Care IT Services for two
months ($2650) and software license
renewal for two months ($2012)
4,662.00 01-535
01-811
20106 EMC Planning Group,
Inc. Housing Element Update 1,200.85 01-535
20107 First Choice Coffee
Services Drinking water service for City Hall 10.50 01-710 20108 Frankie's Awards Gavel plaque award, custome logo disk and WFF-CN gold acrylics 316.64 01-505
20109 Frontier
Communications Landlines for City Hall 119.88 01-720
20110 Gloisy GonzalezLangarica
Attend City Clerks New Law and
Elections Seminar (reimbursement) 300.00 01-770
20111 Hillview Design Print
Media Business cards for Gloisy and Charlotte 167.06 01-725 20112 Ishaan Prasad
Historical cataloguing, forensic
examinations, organizing and
preservation of reports
5,000.00 01-725

CITY OF MONTE SERENO
REGISTER OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AS OF THESE DATES:

December 20, 2022
20113 KTUA Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (CIP2022-F) 2,000.00 05-925 20114 McKim Corporation 2022 Annual Pavement Improvement Project (PMP Annual) 19,894.90 01-845
20115 Pacific Gas & Electric Electricity for Rose Andrews Lighting District 46.60 50-945
20116 Void Void Void Void
20117 San Jose Water Water services for Annex Building
($263) and City Hall ($251) 514.13 01-705
20118 Silicon Valley Animal
Control
3rd Quarter Payment for Animal Control
services 7,975.75 01-585
20119 State Compensation Ins
Fund Workers Comp premium 444.25 01-642
20120 Town of Los Gatos
Finance Department Police Services 84,217.00 03-545
20121 Vantagepoint Transfer
Agent-30 Funding 457 Plan for November 2022 1,500.54 01-660 20122 Wells Fargo Bank
General office supplies ($766), Office
phone service and Zoom ($398),
International Code Council Pennisula
Chapter ($445), California Assn of Code
Enforcement Conference ($1200),
Software license renewal ($347) and
Building maintenance supplies ($264)
3,420.28
01-710
01-720
01-745
01-770
01-811
01-860
20123 RICOH USA, INC. B&W and Colored copies quarterly
charge. 559.36 01-725
Total $144,164.21

I, REYNOLD SAMORANOS, FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATION OFFICER DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE

PROCEEDING ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN CHECKED AND FOUND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica,
Department: City Clerk
Title: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Continued Use of Monies Received from the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) to Provide Funding for Two Police Officers Assigned as Motorcycle Traffic Officers
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the continued use of monies received from the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) to provide funding for two full-time police officers assigned as motorcycle traffic officers.

Background Information:

In 1996, California legislation AB3229 created the Citizens Options for Public Safety (COPS) program allocating $100,000,000.00 to local governments yearly for front-line law enforcement.

These funds are to be distributed through an established Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF). The SLESF is maintained by the County of Santa Clara and payments are distributed to participating cities on a quarterly basis.

Each year participating cities must submit an approved spending plan outlining use of these funds. The funds cannot be used to replace resources but instead must be used to supplement existing resources and can only be used for front-line law enforcement services. The Police Department’s proposed use of these funds in Fiscal Year 2022- 2023 is to continue to supplement funding for one of two motorcycle officer positions which has been done for the past few years.

Analysis:

Pursuant to AB 329, the City of Monte Sereno receives a share of the state SLESF of $100,000. Upon receipt of funding, the City of Monte Sereno is required by contractual agreement for law enforcement services to grant those funds to the Town of Los Gatos within 30 days of receipt of the monies from the State of California. The Police Department will provide additional traffic enforcement within the city limits of Monte Sereno in exchange for the $100,000 awarded by the State of California to the City of Monte Sereno. A combined total of $200,000 in SLESF funds ($100,000 from each jurisdiction) will be used to supplement the salary, equipment, and training costs of

approximately $400,000 for both motorcycle officers.

The Department’s traffic motor units provide services to both jurisdictions through:
• Specialized traffic enforcement and accident investigation • Consistency of effort between patrol personnel and traffic personnel • Coordinate targeted traffic enforcement including the ability to quickly and flexibly respond to traffic concerns
• Speed of response to dangerous conditions or accidents • Coordinate service addressing traffic impacts affecting both communities • Personal connection between individual officers and individual communities the department serves
The two motorcycle assignments are staff by sworn personnel on a four-year rotational basis.

Fiscal Impact:

With City Council approval of the proposed resolution, the County will disburse $25,000 to each jurisdiction in quarterly payments over the next fiscal year. The Town of Los Gatos will receive a combined total of $200,000 in SLESF funding to supplement costs associated with the motorcycle officers.

Public Noticing:

The City Council’s agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s website.

Attachments:

Draft Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. 22-XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO AUTHORIZING THE

CONTINUED EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FROM THE SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

SERVICES FUND FOR THE FUNDING OF TWO POLICE OFFICERS ASSIGNED AS MOTORCYCLE

TRAFFIC OFFICERS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 6.7 of Division 3 of Title 3 of the Government Code, the City of Monte Sereno is entitled to receive approximately $100,000 which will be disbursed in four equal installments from the County Supplement Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESF) if specified requirements are met; and
WHEREAS, such funding cannot be used to replace other City funding for law enforcement and must be expended exclusively for front line law enforcement services; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the written request separate and apart from the allocation of general funds for police services.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Monte Sereno, as follows:

1. The City Council hereby accepts the allocation of funding set forth above and directs the City Manager to take all necessary actions for receipt and disbursement of money received from the County SLESA Account, and to cause such funding to be deposited into the City’s SLESF account.

2. The City Manager is directed to promptly remit to the Town of Los Gatos all funding deposited in the SLESF fund to be used for the funding of two Police Officer positions to be assigned as motorcycle traffic officers.

3. The City Manager is directed to submit all required reports concerning the expenditure of SLESF funds to the Santa Clara County Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee.

REGULAR ADOPTED AND PASSED this 20th day of December 2022, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
___________________________
BY: Bryan Mekechuk, Mayor
ATTESTED:
__________________________
Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica, City Clerk

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Diana Perkins, City Planner
Department: City Planner
Title: Waiver of Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. NS-232, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Monte Sereno Amending Section 10.06.140 (Accessory Dwelling Units) and 10.06.150 (Accessory Dwelling Unit Amnesty Program)
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. NS232.

Conclusion:

The City of Monte Sereno's council meeting agenda was posted on the bulletin board outside of Monte Sereno City Hall and the agenda with this staff report can be accessed on The City of Monte Sereno's website located at www.montesereno.org.

Attachments:

1. Ordinance No. NS-232

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
ORDINANCE NO. NS-232

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO AMENDING SECTION 10.06.140 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) AND 10.06.150 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AMNESTY PROGRAM)
WHEREAS, Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 897 and Assembly Bill 2221 into law, amending Government Code section 65852.2 to make it easier for property owners to create accessory dwelling units in proposed or existing single family and multifamily homes; and
WHEREAS, AB 345 requires local jurisdictions to authorize the separate sale of accessory dwelling units meeting specified requirements in Government Code Section 65852.26, for benefit of a qualified low or moderate income buyer or nonprofit corporation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City Monte Sereno desires to amend the regulations for accessory dwelling units in the Monte Sereno Municipal Code to be consistent with the new state laws.

NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of Monte Sereno does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Amendment of Section 10.06.140. Section 10.06.140 of the Monte Sereno Municipal Code is amended to read in entirety as follows:

10.06.140 Accessory dwelling units; junior accessory dwelling units; standards and requirements.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be constructed without prior submission of an application to the Building Official and approval of a permit. The Building Official shall, with the Planning Director, review each application ministerially for compliance with the standards in this Section without public hearing. The decision of the Building Official shall be final, and notwithstanding any other provisions of this code, shall not be subject to further appeal or review to the City Council. The following standards and requirements shall apply to all accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units, and in the event of conflict with any provision of this code, the below standards shall be deemed to apply:

A. Accessory Dwelling Unit Standards:

1. Accessory dwelling units shall be permitted on all residential lots in accordance with the requirements of this Section.

2. The accessory dwelling unit shall be either attached to the existing primary dwelling or located within the living area of the existing dwelling, or attached to an existing accessory structure, or detached from the existing primary dwelling and located on the same lot as the existing primary dwelling. However, separate sale

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
or conveyance of an accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted where required under Government Code section 65852.26.

3. Size. Accessory dwelling units are limited to the following sizes:

Zoning District Size Limitation
R-1-8 850 sq. ft. or 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom, with or without parking.

R-1-20 850 sq. ft. or 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom, with or without parking.

R-1-44 1,200 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom, with or without parking.

RM-Multi-Family
Residential District
850 sq. ft. or 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom, with or without parking.

P 850 sq. ft. or 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom, with or without parking.

PD 850 sq. ft. or 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom, with or without parking.

The floor area of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the existing living area of an existing primary dwelling up to a maximum of 850 square feet, unless the accessory dwelling unit will include more than one (1) bedroom. However, where a restriction to fifty percent (50%) of existing living area would result in a maximum size of less than eight hundred (800) square feet, an attached accessory dwelling unit of no more than eight hundred (800) square feet shall be permitted, subject to the zoning regulations and development standards in this section.

4. Parking. At least one (1) parking space shall be provided for each accessory dwelling unit in addition to the minimum number of parking spaces required for the primary dwelling. No additional driveways shall be permitted, except for corner lots. Parking may be provided in setback areas or in a tandem configuration on an existing driveway, unless the Director determines that that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions.

Should a garage, carport or covered parking structure be demolished in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit or converted to an accessory dwelling unit, the off-street parking spaces shall not be required to be replaced.

No parking shall be required for any accessory dwelling unit that meets any of the following criteria:

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
a. The accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile of public transit; or
b. The accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district; or
c. The accessory dwelling unit is part of the existing primary residence or an existing accessory structure; or
d. When onstreet parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.
e. When there is a car share vehicle located within one (1) block of the accessory dwelling unit.
f. Where an application for construction of an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with an application to construct a new single family dwelling or multi-family dwelling on the same lot, and the accessory dwelling unit satisfies any of the other criteria listed in this paragraph.

5. Access. An accessory dwelling unit which is attached to or within the primary residence on the lot shall not have any direct access to the primary residence but shall have a separate exterior entry which shall not be located on the same side of the primary residence as the principal exterior entry to the primary residence.

The entry to any accessory dwelling unit shall be so configured and located that only one (1) main entrance to any property is visible from the adjacent street or road.

6. Locations Permitted. The accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed only on a lot or parcel which is connected to sanitary sewers and has access to a street conforming to City of Monte Sereno street standards.

7. Coverage Limits and Exceptions. The accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the structural and impervious coverage limits of the applicable zoning district.

Notwithstanding any provision in this code, should the construction of an accessory dwelling unit cause the lot to exceed the allowed structural or impervious coverages permitted under the applicable zoning district, an eight hundred (800) square foot accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted.

8. Height limits.
a. The height limit for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be a maximum of sixteen (16) feet, except that a detached accessory dwelling unit located with one half a mile walking distance of a major transit stop or high quality transit corridor, as defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, can have a height limit of eighteen (18) feet plus an additional two feet in height to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.
b. The height limit for an accessory dwelling unit attached to the main house shall comply with the height limits of the zoning district, except that the accessory dwelling portion may be no more than twenty-five feet in height in any front, side, or rear setback applicable to the main house set forth in Chapter 10.05. c. The height limit for an accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multi-family, multi-story building shall be eighteen (18) feet.

9. Setbacks.

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
a. An accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the front setback required for an accessory structure in the residential zoning district within which it is located, unless the accessory dwelling unit is not more than 800 square feet and there is no alternative location on the lot that would allow for an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit with four foot side and rear setbacks to be constructed.
b. An accessory dwelling unit shall have no less than a four-foot side and fourfoot rear yard setback. c. No setback shall be required for an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit. d. Notwithstanding any other provision of the code, a setback of no more than four (4) feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.

10. Design. Accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following design standards:
a. The dwelling unit shall use a minimum of two exterior materials that match those of the main house. These exterior materials include, but are not limited to, roofing, siding, and windows.
b. The roof pitches used on the dwelling unit shall match those on the main house.
c. Accessory dwelling units shall also comply with any applicable objective design standards adopted in the City’s design guidelines.

11. No certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit shall be issued before a certificate of occupancy has been issued for the primary dwelling.

12. Utility Connections. For an accessory dwelling unit constructed within the proposed space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure and that involves an expansion of not more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure, the accessory dwelling unit shall not be required to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility unless the accessory dwelling unit shall be constructed concurrently with a new single-family dwelling.

13. Fire Sprinklers. Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to have fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. Fire sprinklers shall be considered "required for the primary dwelling unit" in any of the following circumstances:
a. When fire sprinklers are currently installed in the primary dwelling unit; b. When fire sprinklers will be installed in a new primary dwelling unit constructed concurrently with an accessory dwelling unit; or

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
c. When fire sprinklers will be installed in an existing primary dwelling unit as the result of an addition to the primary dwelling unit, except for an addition solely for the purpose of constructing an accessory dwelling unit, which addition triggers any requirement for retroactive installation of fire sprinklers in the primary dwelling unit.

The construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not trigger a requirement for fire sprinklers to be installed in any existing dwelling.

14. No minimum lot area or lot size. Notwithstanding anything in this code, no minimum lot area or lot size shall be required or imposed for approval of a permit for an accessory dwelling unit.

B. Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Standards. The following provisions shall apply to junior accessory dwelling units:

1. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or a new dwelling unit for purposes of applying building or fire codes. Installation of fire sprinklers in a junior accessory dwelling unit of any type shall be required only if they are required for the primary dwelling unit. Fire sprinklers shall be considered "required for the primary dwelling unit" under the circumstances as specified in Subsection A.13 of this Section.

2. Floor Area. The minimum floor area for a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be one hundred fifty (150) square feet. The maximum floor area for a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed five hundred (500) square feet. If the sanitation facility (i.e., bathroom) is shared with the remainder of the single-family dwelling, it shall not be included in the square footage calculation for the junior accessory dwelling unit.

3. Setbacks. Setbacks for a junior accessory dwelling unit constructed with a new single-family dwelling shall be that of the underlying zoning district. No setback shall be required for a junior accessory dwelling unit contained within the existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure. However, as permitted in this section, an expansion to an accessory structure of up to one hundred fifty (150) square feet to accommodate ingress and egress may be constructed only if the following setbacks are maintained:
a. A front setback accordance with the applicable zoning district. b. A minimum side yard setback of four feet.
c. A minimum rear yard setback of four feet.

4. No parking shall be required for a junior accessory dwelling unit.

5. Coverage Limits. No structural or impervious coverage requirement shall apply to a junior accessory dwelling unit.

6. Height. No height restriction shall apply to a junior accessory dwelling unit; however, the primary structure shall comply with any height restrictions for the zoning district.

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2

7. Utilities. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be required to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the junior accessory dwelling unit and the utility.

8. A junior accessory dwelling unit may be constructed on a site that does not meet the minimum lot or parcel size requirements or minimum dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning district, provided that it is constructed in compliance with all building standards and other standards of this division.

Notwithstanding anything in this code, no minimum lot area or lot size shall be required or imposed for approval of a permit for a junior accessory dwelling unit.

9. An expansion to an accessory structure of up to one hundred fifty (150) square feet to accommodate ingress and egress for a proposed junior accessory dwelling unit must meet applicable design criteria in Subsection A.10 of this Section.

10. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall include an efficiency kitchen, including a cooking facility with appliances and a food preparation counter and storage cabinets.

C. Owner occupancy and use restrictions.

1. Accessory dwelling units shall not be subject to an owner occupancy restriction.

For accessory dwelling units permitted prior to January 1, 2020, the City Planner is authorized to record such documents as may be required to remove any existing deed restrictions requiring owner occupancy, upon application by the current property owner and payment of any application fee as may be established by resolution of the City Council.

2. For junior accessory dwelling units, owner-occupancy is required unless the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization. The owner may reside in either the remaining portion of the primary structure or the newly created junior accessory dwelling unit.

3. The following restrictions shall apply to junior accessory dwelling units unless the owner is a government agency, land trust, or housing organization:
a. The property owner shall record a deed restriction with the County Recorder Office and file a copy of the recorded deed restriction with the City. The deed restriction shall prohibit the sale or other conveyance of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the single-family dwelling; specify that the deed restriction runs with the land and is therefore enforceable against future property owners; and restrict the size and features of the junior accessory dwelling unit in accordance with this Section. b. The site's owner may at any time offer for rent either the single-family dwelling unit or the junior accessory dwelling unit. The site's owner shall be required to reside in the single-family dwelling unit as its primary residence at any time while the junior accessory dwelling unit is occupied by a tenant. c. A site's owner shall not allow occupancy of a junior accessory dwelling unit by a tenant for any reason, with or without payment of rent, unless the site owner maintains occupancy of the primary dwelling unit as its primary residence.

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
D. Short-term Rentals Prohibited. No accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall be rented for a period of less than thirty (30) consecutive days.

E. Waiver of fees. The planning fees associated with an accessory dwelling unit shall be waived in the event the owner agrees to rent the accessory dwelling unit for a period of no less than ten (10) years to people who qualify as low income or very low income households. Such agreement shall be evidenced by a deed restriction recorded against the property on which the accessory dwelling unit is located and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the accessory dwelling unit. For purposes of this paragraph, "low-income household" means a household with an adjusted income which is not less than fifty (50%) nor more than eighty percent (80%) of median income. "Very-low-income household" means a household with less than fifty (50%) of median income.

F. Applicable Animal Regulations. The number of animals which may be kept on each lot as specified in the zoning regulations for the residential zoning district within which the lot is situated, shall remain unchanged after construction of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit.

G. Enforcement. Enforcement of notices to correct a violation of any provision of any building standard for any accessory dwelling unit shall comply with Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code.

H. State Law Mandated Approval. Notwithstanding anything in this code to the contrary, the Building Official shall ministerially approve permits required to create any of the following within a residential or mixed-use zone:

1. One (1) accessory dwelling unit and one (1) junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if all of the following apply:
a. The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of a singlefamily dwelling or accessory structure and may include an expansion of not more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress.
b. The accessory dwelling unit has exterior access that is separate from the exterior entrance for the proposed or existing single-family dwelling. c. The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. d. The junior accessory dwelling unit complies with the standards for a junior accessory dwelling unit set forth above.

2. One detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit per lot, that does not exceed four-foot side and rear yard setbacks for a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling, is subject to the following requirements:
a. A total floor area limitation of not more than eight hundred (800) square feet. b. A height limitation of sixteen (16) feet, or 18 feet if within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor as defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, plus an additional

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
two feet in height to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.

The new construction detached accessory dwelling unit in this Subsection may include a junior accessory dwelling unit described in Subsection H.1 above.

3. On a lot that has an existing multi-family dwelling, not more than two (2) detached accessory dwelling units that are located, subject to a height limit of 18 feet and four-foot rear yard and side yard setbacks.

4. Conversion of portions of existing multi-family dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, into new accessory dwelling units, provided that each unit shall comply with state building standards for dwellings.

The number of new accessory dwelling units authorized for conversion under this Subsection shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the existing dwelling units in the multi-family dwelling structure or one (1) new accessory dwelling unit, whichever is greater.

Existing multi-family dwellings with a side or rear yard setback of less than four feet shall not be required to be modified as part of a condition of approving an accessory dwelling unit.

I. Numerical limitations. The total number of accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units per lot or parcel shall not exceed the total number of such units that that may be permitted under Subsection H.

J. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.21(f), no accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted on any lot if (1) an urban lot split has been approved pursuant to chapter 13.06 on such lot; and (2) two residential units have been approved for construction on each lot of the urban lot split pursuant to section 10.05.080.

SECTION 2. Amendment of Section 10.06.150. Section 10.06.150 of the Monte Sereno Municipal Code is amended to read in entirety as follows:

10.06.150 - Accessory dwelling unit amnesty program.

Owners of unpermitted accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units which were constructed or otherwise in existence prior to December 31, 2020, may apply for a retroactive building permit in accordance with Health and Safety Code section 17958.12 without being subject to penalty for violation of this code.

In accordance with Government Code section 65852.23, no permit shall be denied for units constructed before January 1, 2018, for violations of building standards under Health and Safety Code 17960 et seq., or non-compliance with state or local accessory dwelling unit regulations, unless the correction of the violation is necessary to protect the health and safety of the public or the occupants of the structure.

SECTION 3. Environmental Review.

The City Council finds and determines that enactment of this Ordinance is statutorily exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"),

OAK #4882-1882-5531 v2
pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 as this action is to adopt an ordinance to implement the requirements of sections 65852.2 of the Government Code.

SECTION 4. Effective Date.

This ordinance shall be in full force and effective 30 days after its adoption.

SECTION 5. Severability.

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision of such Ordinance and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.

SECTION 6. Certification.

The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be posted and/or published in the manner required by law.

This Ordinance was introduced at the meeting of the City Council on the 15th day of November 2022, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 20th day of December 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Bryan Mekechuk, Mayor
Attest: ___________________________
Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica, City Clerk

Approved as to form:
___________________________________
Sergio Rudin, City Attorney

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Sergio Rudin,
Department: City Attorney
Title: Authorize Approval of Settlement Agreement for Shevertalova v. City of Monte Sereno, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 19CV348222, and Execution by City Manager Subject to Minor Modifications Approved by City Attorney
Recommendation(s):

Authorize the City Manager to execute the proposed settlement agreement, subject to minor modifications as may be approved by City Attorney
Background Information:

On October 15, 2018, plaintiff Tatiana Shevertalova filed a government code claim against the City of Monte Sereno alleging that she tripped on a rubber mat installed on Saratoga Los Gatos Road, and was allegedly injured, resulting in claimed damages. On December 4, 2018, the City Council of the City of Monte Sereno rejected the claim. A lawsuit, Shevertalova v. City of Monte Sereno, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 19CV348222, was filed on May 30, 2019. The City filed a cross-claim against the City of Saratoga for indemnity and contribution, based on their involvement in the design and construction of the project. A reciprocal cross-claim was filed by Saratoga against Monte Sereno. These cities have filed dismissals of their claims against each other with prejudice, allowing the City of Monte Sereno to settle its claims with the plaintiff.

Analysis:

The key points of the settlement are that plaintiff agrees to accept the sum of $775,000 and payment of the plaintiff’s portion of the mediation fees in exchange for a waiver and release of all claims against the City of Monte Sereno. The proposed settlement does not involve any admission of liability and would be entered into to avoid the expense and uncertainty of further litigation. All settlement proceeds would be paid for by BJCPIA, the City’s risk management pool, and would not be paid for out of the City’s general fund. Under the City’s memorandum of coverage, BJCPIA has authority to control the defense and settlement of this case, however, the City’s approval of the settlement agreement is still required by the City Council.

Fiscal Impact:

None.

Public Noticing:

The City Council’s agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s website.

Attachments:

Shevertalova_Settlement_MTB SIGNED
Court - Request for Dismissal - File Endorsed

14

A conformed copy will not be returned by the clerk unless a method of return is provided with the document.

3. TO THE CLERK: Consent to the above dismissal is hereby given.** Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL Form Adopted for Mandatory Use
Judicial Council of California
CIV-110 [Rev. Jan. 1, 2013]

FOR COURT USE ONLY
CASE NUMBER:

1. TO THE CLERK: Please dismiss this action as follows:
on (date):
on (date):
a. (1) With prejudice (2) Without prejudice
b. (1) Complaint (2) Petition
(3) Cross-complaint filed by (name):
(4) Cross-complaint filed by (name):
(5) Entire action of all parties and all causes of action (6) Other (specify):*
Date:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY) (SIGNATURE) Attorney or party without attorney for:

Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendant/Respondent
Cross Complainant
(SIGNATURE)
Attorney or party without attorney for:

Plaintiff/Petitioner Defendant/Respondent
Cross Complainant
** If a cross-complaint – or Response (Family Law) seeking affirmative relief – is on file, the attorney for cross-complainant (respondent) must sign this consent if required by Code of Civil Procedure section 581 (i) or (j).

PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY)
*If dismissal requested is of specified parties only of specified causes of action only, or of specified cross-complaints only, so state and identify the parties, causes of action, or cross-complaints to be dismissed.
(To be completed by clerk)

4. Dismissal entered as requested on (date):
5 Dismissal entered on (date): as to only (name):

6. Dismissal not entered as requested for the following reasons (specify):

7. Attorney or party without attorney notified on (date):
a copy to be conformed means to return conformed copy
Date: Clerk, by
b. Attorney or party without attorney not notified. Filing party failed to provide , Deputy
Code of Civil Procedure, § 581 et seq.;
Gov. Code, § 68637(c); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1390 www.courts.ca.gov
CIV-110

2. The court did did not waive court fees and costs for a party in this case. (This information may be obtained from the clerk. If court fees and costs were waived, the declaration on the back of this form must be completed). a.
(Complete in all cases except family law cases.)
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address):

FAX NO. (Optional):

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:

TELEPHONE NO.:

E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):

ATTORNEY FOR (Name):

STREET ADDRESS:

MAILING ADDRESS:

CITY AND ZIP CODE:

BRANCH NAME:

DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL
This form may not be used for dismissal of a derivative action or a class action or of any party or cause of action in a class action. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.760 and 3.770.) X Dismissed as to the City of Monte Sereno. Each party to bear its own costs and fees.

Tatiana Shevertalova
City of Monte Sereno, et al.

City of Saratoga and State of Cal. Dept. of Transportation 19CV348222
Jennifer A. Emmaneel
Jennifer A. Emmaneel (Bar # 231580)
McDowall Cotter, APC
2070 Pioneer Court, San Mateo, CA 94403 (650) 572-7933
X
(650) 572-0834
LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms X
X
X
[email protected]
CIVIL
San Jose 95113
191 North First Street
191 North First Street

SANTA CLARA
X
City of Saratoga August 21, 2020
December 12, 2022
Electronically Filed
by Superior Court of CA,
County of Santa Clara,
on 12/12/2022 12:10 PM
Reviewed By: A. Floresca
Case #19CV348222
Envelope: 10686056
12/12/2022 12:10 PM
12/12/2022 12:10 PM
X
12/12/2022 12:10 PM
A. Floresca
X

Declaration Concerning Waived Court Fees
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: CASE NUMBER:

DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:

CIV-110

1. The court waived court fees and costs in this action for (name):

3. All court fees and court costs that were waived in this action have been paid to the court (check one):

2. The person named in item 1 is (check one below):
a not recovering anything of value by this action. .
b. recovering less than $10,000 in value by this action. c. recovering $10,000 or more in value by this action. (If item 2c is checked, item 3 must be completed.) CIV-110 [Rev. January 1, 2013] REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL Page 2 of 2 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the information above is true and correct.

Date:
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (SIGNATURE) PARTY MAKING DECLARATION) Yes No

COURT'S RECOVERY OF WAIVED COURT FEES AND COSTS
If a party whose court fees and costs were initially waived has recovered or will recover $10,000 or more in value by way of settlement, compromise, arbitration award, mediation settlement, or other means, the court has a statutory lien on that recovery. The court may refuse to dismiss the case until the lien is satisfied. (Gov. Code, § 68637.)
LexisNexis® Automated California Judicial Council Forms City of Monte Sereno, et al. 19CV348222
Tatiana Shevertalova

-1-
PROOF OF SERVICE Case No.: 19CV348222
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 David S. Rosenbaum, Esq. (SBN. 151506)
[email protected]
Jennifer A. Emmaneel, Esq. (SBN. 231580)
[email protected]
W. Ethan McCallum, Esq. (SBN. 331014)
[email protected]
MCDOWALLCOTTER, A.P.C.
2070 Pioneer Court
San Mateo, CA 94403
Tel: 650-572-7933
Fax: 650-572-0834
Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Defendant, EXEMPT FROM FILING FEES CITY OF SARATOGA and Defendant (GOV. CODE SECTION 6103) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through
the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

UNLIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION

TATIANA SHEVERTALOVA
Plaintiff,
vs.

CITY OF MONTE SERENO, CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
DOES 1 TO 50, et al.,
Defendants.

CITY OF MONTE SERENO,
Cross Complainant,
vs.

CITY OF SARATOGA, AND ROES 1-50,
Inclusive,
Cross-Defendants.

Case No.: 19CV348222

PROOF OF SERVICE

-2-
PROOF OF SERVICE Case No.: 19CV348222
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 PROOF OF SERVICE

1. At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. My business address is 2070 Pioneer Court, San Mateo, California 94403.

2. On December 12, 2022, I served the following document or documents:
 REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

3. I served the document or documents on the person or persons listed below:

Attorney for Plaintiff
Svetlana Shirinova., Esq.

Svetlana Shirinova Attorney at Law
870 Market St Ste. 948
San Francisco, CA 94102
Tel: 415-947-0703
[email protected]
Co-Attorney for Plaintiff
Aleksandr A. Volkov, Esq.
1200 Mount Diablo Blvd., Suite 205
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Tel: 415-987-7000
[email protected]
Attorneys for City of Monte Sereno
Ann N. Asiano, Esq.

Matthew T. Brand, Esq.

Clark Hill LLP
1 Embarcadero Center, Ste 400
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: 415-984-8500
[email protected]
[email protected]

3. Manner of Service of Document:

IMPORTANT NOTICE: In this time of COVID-19, our office is working remotely. We do not have any persons on site to either accept mail, or to print or serve document by mail. Under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1010.6, this party requests e-service of all documents and notices in this case until further notice. By this notice, we give you permission to serve documents by email to the following address: [email protected]. Please use this for official service only. Under Section 1010.6, our office will use the statutory two days (“+2) for calendaring for incoming and outgoing documents, unless otherwise agreed to by counsel
By electronic service. Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the electronic notification addresses listed in item 3. The electronic notification address from which I served the documents is [email protected]
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated December 12, 2022, at Santa Clara, California. ______________________________
Jazz Kristophe S. Legaspi

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica,
Department: City Clerk
Title: Adopt a Resolution Declaring Noxious and Dangerous Weeds and Rubbish, Refuse, and Dirt to be a Public Nuisance and Setting a Public Hearing Date and Time and Consider All Objections to the Proposed Destruction or Removal of Weeds, Dirt, Rubbish, or Other Hazardous Material
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution declaring noxious and dangerous weeds and rubbish, refuse and dirt to be a public nuisance and setting February 21, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. as the Public Hearing date and time to hear and consider all objections to the proposed destruction or removal of weeds, dirt, rubbish or other hazardous material. The Public Hearing will be held both virtually via the Zoom application and in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 18041 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, Monte Sereno, California.

Background Information:

The City has a weed abatement process set forth in the City’s Municipal Code in Chapter 8.02.

As a first step, the City Council adopts a resolution declaring the existence of as nuisance caused by weeds, brush, dirt and other similar hazards existing on properties within the City (Municipal Code Section 8.02.050). The resolution identifies the problem properties and creates a deadline to address problem conditions. Per the Municipal Code, the owners must clean up those problem conditions within 30 days, unless that period is extended by written agreement with the City Engineer/Fire Marshal. Notice is given to the property owners by posting and by mailing once the City Council adopts the resolution declaring the nuisance. The resolution declaring the nuisance also sets the date for a public hearing for submitting objections by the affected property owners. After the 30-day period has passed, the City Council has a public hearing for considering objections to why the City should not cause abatement to take place on any parcels where the owners have not cleaned up their weeds, brush, dirt, and other hazards.

After the public hearing, the City Council can adopt an order to abate. Under the Municipal Code, City staff or contractors are authorized to enter the properties after the City Council adopts an order to abate and remove the weeds and to assess the costs of abatement as a lien on the property. Liens are imposed after providing the owner with a report of costs that is confirmed by the City Council following another public hearing. The costs of such abatement

can then be collected via the tax roll. This process allows the City to undertake uniform code enforcement simultaneously across all problem parcels in the City. The City contracts with the County of Santa Clara for abatement of weeds and that the work will be performed in accordance with a fee schedule adopted by the County.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council’s agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s website.

Attachments:

Draft Resolution
2023 Monte Sereno Commencement Report

RESOLUTION NO. 22-XXXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTE SERENO DECLARING NOXIOUSAND

DANGEROUS WEEDS AND RUBBISH, REFUSE, AND DIRT TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE WHEREAS, certain weeds, dirt, rubbish, and other hazardous material are growing, located, or existing upon private property or properties, and in sidewalks, streets, or alleys within the City of Monte Sereno, more specifically identified by address or parcel set forth in Exhibit A, hereby incorporated into this resolution; and
WHEREAS, said weeds are of a kind which, when mature, bear wingy or downy seeds and which attain such a large growth as to become a fire menace when dry, or which are otherwise noxious or dangerous, and which weeds are seasonal and recurrent nuisances; and WHEREAS, said weeds, dirt, rubbish and other hazardous material constitutes a public nuisance and require the abatement thereof as provided by law; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code sections 39501 and 39502, Monte Sereno Municipal Code Chapter 8.02 sets forth the process and the authority for the abatement of weeds within the City of Monte Sereno and for the assessment of the costs of removal by lien.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Monte Sereno, as follows:

1. That the weeds, dirt, rubbish, and other hazardous material constitute a public nuisance and that the said public nuisance should be abated in the manner provided in Chapter 8.02 “Weed Abatement” of the Monte Sereno Municipal Code.

2. In accordance with Monte Sereno Municipal Code Section 8.02.050, the nuisances identified in this resolution must be abated by the property owner within thirty (30) days after the adoption of this resolution, or within such other time as may be established by written agreement with the Fire Marshal or City Engineer. If not abated within such time as set forth herein, the City of Monte Sereno shall cause such nuisance to be abated, and the expense of such abatement assessed upon the property requiring weed removal.

3. After passage of this resolution, the City Clerk shall mail notice to the affected property owners as soon as practicable and cause notice of its passage to be conspicuously posted in three (3) prominent places in the City of Monte Sereno at least ten days prior to the time fixed by the City Council for hearing objections, and which notice shall be in form prescribed in Section

8.02.060 of the Monte Sereno Municipal Code.

4. The City Council shall hear and consider all objections to the proposed destruction or removal of weeds, dirt, rubbish, or other hazardous material at a public hearing to be held virtually and in person at 7:00 p.m. on the 21st day of February 2022 via the Zoom application and in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 18041 Saratoga-Los Gatos Road, Monte Sereno, California. By motion or resolution at the conclusion of said hearing, the City Council shall either allow or overrule any objections.

5. If objections have not been made, or after the City Council has disposed of those objections made, the City Council shall order by resolution that the City Manager or the City Engineer, or their designated representatives, abate any nuisance caused by weeds that have not yet been abated by the property owner, and that the expense of abatement be assessed upon the property requiring such abatement.

REGULAR ADOPTED AND PASSED this ___ day of December 2022, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN
APPROVED:
_______________________
Bryan Mekechuk, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica, City Clerk

Situs APN CITY/STATE
2023 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM

COMMENCEMENT REPORT

CITY OF MONTE SERENO
T
Exhibit A
1 15301 ROBIN ANNE LN 409-41-026 MEHRANY, ANAHITA TRUSTEE & ET 15301 ROBIN ANNE LN MONTE SERENO CA 95030-2236 16-0 2 16215 N SEABORN CT 410-20-047 HIGHWAY 9 VENTURES LLC 111 MARKET ST N #300 SAN JOSE CA 95113 16-0 3 16219 N SEABORN CT 410-20-048 HIGHWAY 9 VENTURES LLC 111 MARKET ST N #300 SAN JOSE CA 95113 16-0 4 16221 N SEABORN CT 410-20-049 HIGHWAY 9 VENTURES LLC 111 MARKET ST N #300 SAN JOSE CA 95113 16-0 5 0 BECKY LN 410-42-013 WONG, GILBERT TRUSTEE 'P O BOX 700005 SAN JOSE CA 95170 16-0 6 15136 VIA LOMITA 410-43-018 KHAN, ZULKI TRUSTEE & ET AL 15136 VIA LOMITA MONTE SERENO CA 95030-2138 16-0 7 15890 MATILIJA DR 510-07-038 MILLER, RONALD J AND JOAN T 15890 MATILIJA DR MONTE SERENO CA 95030-3073 16-0 8 16005 GREENWOOD LN 510-10-041 26455 ST FRANCIS LLC 18640 SUTTER BL STE 100 MORGAN HILL CA 95037-0000 16-0 9 18240 BANCROFT AV 510-12-002 MASSIH, MALIHEH 17260 NALOR CT LOS GATOS CA 95032-0000 16-0 10 16301 RIDGECREST AV 510-21-036 FARZANFAR, SAMAD TRUSTEE & ET 14302 CRYSTAL TR RIVERSIDE CA 92508 16-0 11 16363 RIDGECREST AV 510-21-069 BANDA, SUMANTH AND REDDY, 2212 CORONET DR SAN JOSE CA 95124-6003 16-0 11 records of 11 Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program Page 1 Page 66 of 240

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: CONSENT CALENDAR
Staff Contact: Diana Perkins, City Planner
Department: City Planner
Title: Housing Element Status Update
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends that the City Council receive the Housing Element Status Update Background Information:

The Housing Element is part of the City’s General Plan and identifies policies and programs to meet the housing needs of the city’s current and future residents. State law (Government Code Sections 65580-65589.8) requires that every city and county in California adopt a Housing Element, approximately every five or eight years. In addition, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) reviews and certifies that each Housing Element meets all the requirements of the law. Monte Sereno’s current Housing Element was adopted in 2015 and the new document must be adopted by January 2023, but the state’s approval process can take several months.

The Housing Element Process has mandatory public participation requirements:
• Prior to submittal of the first draft within a planning period to HCD, the local government must make the draft available for public comment for 30 days and if any comments were received, take at least 10 business days to consider and incorporate public comments.
• Submit draft to HCD for review/approval.
• Revise and adopt (or adopt without changes).
• For any subsequent revisions, the local government must post the draft revision on its website and email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting the draft revision to HCD.

Housing Element Overview
Monte Sereno’s current Housing Element covered 2015 to 2023 and was adopted on May 19, 2015. The updated Housing Element will be for the 2023 to 2031 planning period. The Housing Element typically includes the following major components:

1. Housing Needs Assessment: An analysis of housing needs of the City's population, including analysis of population, housing characteristics, projected housing needs by income group, housing needs of special needs populations (including elderly, persons with disabilities, etc.), existing housing stock conditions, and existing units in need of replacement or rehabilitation.

2. Constraints Analysis: An analysis of housing constraints that impact housing production, including city land use controls, local ordinances, permit requirements, fees, and the way that they may impact housing production.

3. Evaluation of Past Performance: Assess progress in implementing the policies and programs from the prior Housing Element.

4. Housing Sites Inventory: Identify housing sites available for development or redevelopment, ensuring that there is sufficient capacity to address the Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

5. Policies and Programs: Establish policies and programs to address the identified housing needs.

6. Community Outreachand Engagement: Conduct a thorough program of community engagement, with a particular focus on outreach to traditionally underrepresented groups.

7. Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH): Actions that promote and further fair housing opportunities, including descriptions of fair housing enforcement and analysis of integration and segregation patterns and trends.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
Every city in California receives a required number of homes to plan for. This is called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Monte Sereno’s RHNA for this upcoming Housing Element is 193, an over 300% increase from last cycle’s RHNA of 61. Under state law, cities are not responsible for building such housing, but do need to identify adequate housing sites, as part of their sites inventory, and put in place the proper zoning and address development constraints, so that the private sector can build the housing. The RHNA is broken down by income category, Monte Sereno’s income specific RHNA is:

Very Low Income: 53
Low Income: 30
Moderate Income: 31
Above Mod Income: 79
Total: 193
Almost all jurisdictions in the region (and in other regions) had a higher RHNA this cycle. This is primarily due to changes required by state legislation to account for existing overcrowding.

This cycle, a jurisdiction’s RHNA is based on the following factors:
• Projected 2050 population according to Plan Bay Area
• Proximity to jobs (both by car and public transportation) • The percent of households living in high opportunity areas (based on school, environmental hazards, jobs, etc.)

Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element
The City Council approved the draft Housing Element at the September 6, 2022 City Council meeting. The draft Housing Element consists of the following sections:

1. Introduction: Explains the purpose, process, and contents of the Housing Element.

2. Goals, Policies, and Programs: Details specific policies and programs the city will undertake over the 2023-2031 Planning Period to address the housing goals.

3. Overview of Housing Needs and Constraints: Reviews governmental constraints, including land use controls, fees, and processing requirements, as well as nongovernmental constraints, such as construction costs, availability of land and financing, physical environmental conditions that may impede the development, preservation, and maintenance of housing.

4. Vacant and Available Sites: Describes the city’s strategy to achieve the RHNA requirements and identifies land suitable to accommodate these additional housing units.

5. Energy Conversation: Identifies opportunities and programs for energy conservation.

The Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element also includes seven technical appendices with detailed analysis and information that supports the findings and conclusions in the main document. The following is a summary of the major elements of the Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element:

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)
One of the new requirements for the 6th cycle Housing Element Update is AFFH.

Assembly Bill (AB) 686, passed in 2018, created new requirements for jurisdictions to affirmatively further fair housing. According to AB 686, affirmatively furthering fair housing means to take “meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.” The four main goals are to:
• Address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity • Replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns • Transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity • Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws AFFH is discussed in Chapter 1 and more thoroughly analyzed in Appendices A and G.

Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs
The Housing Goals in Chapter 2 are organized into the following categories:

• Goal H-1: Facilitate Housing Construction
• Goal H-2: Provide New Affordable and Equal Opportunity Housing • Goal H-3: Maintain and Improve the Existing Housing Stock • Goal H-4: Publicize Resources
The list of policies and programs in this chapter include the policies approved by the City Council at the June 21, 2022 meeting, including the addition of water conservation requirements discussed at that meeting (Program S), and additional policies suggested by the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative and the consultant team for compliance with HCD requirements.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and Sites Inventory In January of 2022, HCD approved the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) adopted Final RHNA Plan which establishes a total RHNA of 441,176 residential units for the San Francisco Bay Area’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update. Monte Sereno’s assigned RHNA for this housing cycle is 193 units distributed across four income categories as follows:

Very Low
Income Low Income Moderate Income
Above Moderate
Income Total
53 30 31 79 193
To meet the RHNA, the city’s strategy is to create a robust outreach program to encourage the creation of ADUs within the city. Ad Hoc Committees to spearhead this goal were created by the City Council and the Site and Architectural Commission. The Committees developed a community-wide public outreach program to encourage creation of ADU units which includes the following:
• Informational postcards mailed to each resident/property owner; • Door-to-door neighborhood canvassing;
• Direct e-mails to interested parties, contractors, architects/designers; • Social media postings; and
• Information to be provided at the City-wide picnic on August 21, 2022 Additionally, the City Council approved a 50% reduction in building permit and plan review fees for building permit that create a new ADU, through new construction of the conversation of an existing structure (i.e. pool house, garage).

Next Steps
The draft Housing Element was submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review and comments are scheduled to be provided to the city no later than January 10, 2023.

Staff has reached out to the HCD staff to request a mid-review cycle meeting but have not yet been able to schedule such a meeting. Staff will continue to make efforts to schedule such a

meeting in order to understand the scope of comments to begin researching and addressing them.

The January 17, 2023 City Council meeting will include an agenda item with the comments that were made by HCD and a staff recommendation on how to address each comment. Staff will work with our consultant, EMC Planning Group, to make the necessary changes to the Housing Element to address the comments from HCD.

As required by the Municipal Code section 12.04.010.F, the Site and Architectural Commission shall review and provide a recommendation to the City Council on any amendments to the General Plan. In order to expedite the adoption of the Housing Element, a special joint meeting with the City Council and Site and Architectural has been scheduled for January 31, 2023 to consider adoption of the Housing Element.

Public Noticing:

The City of Monte Sereno's council meeting agenda was posted on the bulletin board outside of Monte Sereno City Hall and the agenda with this staff report can be accessed on The City of Monte Sereno's website located at www.montesereno.org.

The draft Housing Element is available on the Housing Element website at www.AtHomeinMonteSereno.com.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: NEW BUSINESS
Staff Contact: Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica,
Department: City Clerk
Title: Consider and Appoint Two (2) Additional Members to the 2022-2023 Monte Sereno Youth Commission
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends that the City Council consider two (2) additional applications for the 2022- 2023 Monte Sereno Youth Commission and appoint the two applicants to the Youth Commission.

Background Information:

The Youth Commission ordinance calls for appointments of Youth Commissioner annually and allows for up to fifteen (15) Youth Commissioners. Each member of the City Council can appoint one member of the Youth Commission. The remaining ten appointments are at-large appointments. The City received additional applications from the following two Monte Sereno youth:
• Jeremias Stauch
• Zoe Swanson
The appointed applicants will be required to fill out and sign the Monte Sereno Youth Volunteer Waiver and Release of Liability form.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:

Monte Sereno Youth Volunteer Waiver and Release of Liability Form Application - Jeremias Stauch - Youth Commission
Application - Zoe Swanson - Youth Commission

OAK #4827-3493-4715 v1

CITY OF MONTE SERENO YOUTH VOLUNTEER

WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY FORM
In consideration of being allowed to participate in a City of Monte Sereno commission or volunteer program, I acknowledge and agree that:

1. My child (or I) is volunteering my services for the City of Monte Sereno on a voluntary basis without anticipation of payment of any kind.

2. I acknowledge that the City of Monte Sereno may extend its workman's compensation coverage to authorized volunteers and I agree to accept that coverage.

3. My child (or I) will perform tasks that are within his/her (or my) physical capability to the best of his/her (or my) ability, and my child (or I) will not undertake tasks that are beyond his/her (or my) ability. I certify to the best of my knowledge, that my child's (or my) current physical condition is satisfactory for participation in this activity, and that he/she (or I) am free of any health problem that would affect his/her (or my) ability to participate.

4. I agree to inform my child (or I agree) not to use any equipment or tools with which my child (or I) am unfamiliar or do not know how to operate safely.

5. I agree to inform my child (or I agree) to perform only those tasks assigned, observe all safety rules, and use care in the performance of assignments.

6. I agree that my child (or I) may be photographed, videotaped or recorded and that said photographs, videos or recordings may be used for promotional materials by the City. I understand that my child (or I) will not receive compensation for the use of these and that my child (or I) will not be given notice of when these materials are used.

7. I acknowledge that the City will defend and indemnify my child (or myself) in any claim or action arising from my child's (or my) acts that are within the scope of my child's (or my) duties as a volunteer, but only to the extent that such indemnification or defense is expressly required by law. I further acknowledge that the City is not required to indemnify my child (or me) against a claim for punitive damages except as authorized by the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 825 (b). I agree, however, to defend and indemnify the City in any claim or action arising from my child's (or my) acts that are outside the scope of my child's (or my) volunteer duties.

8. In the event that my child (or I) use a personal vehicle in order to participate in any City-related commission or volunteer activity, I agree to maintain my own automobile liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage, which shall be the primary insurance coverage, and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City shall be considered excess of such insurance and shall not contribute with it. I hereby also grant a waiver of any right of subrogation which any such insurer may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss.

9. I acknowledge that loss or damage to my child's (or my) personal property used while providing volunteer services may not be reimbursable under City regulations.

10. I hereby authorize and give my consent for medical care to be given in an emergency situation to the below named child (or to me) while volunteering.

11. THIS AGREEMENT IS BINDING ON MY HEIRS, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES, NEXT OF KIN, SPOUSE AND ASSIGNS.

Volunteer's Name (print) ___________________________________________ Date of birth ____/____/____
Address __________________________________________________________ City ___________________________ Zip _______-_____ Phone # ( )_______________ Emergency Phone #'s ( )______________________/ ( )______________________ Volunteer's Signature (if participant is 18 years or older) ________________________ Date Signed ____/____/____
Parent/Legal Guardian signature required if volunteer is 17 years of age or younger.

This is to certify that as a parent/legal guardian of this volunteer, I do consent to his/her waiver and release as set forth above. My child has my permission to volunteer. I realize that participation in this program is voluntary.

Parent/Guardian Name (print) _______________________________ Relationship______________________ Parent/Guardian Signature __________________________________________ Date Signed ____/____/____

City of Monte Sereno
Commission Application
Date Received: October 23, 2022
Applying for: Youth Commission
Name: Jeremias Stauch
Length of Residency: 4
Previously Held Elected or
Appointed Governmental
Positions:

Please include organization name, position/office held, and dates.

Civic or Charitable Organizations
You Have Belonged To:

Please include organization name, position/office held, and dates.

Education: Please include school name, degree obtained, and dates.

Raymond J. Fisher Middle School, Grade 8
Why do you want to be on the
selected Commission?:

I want to have an impact for this city to and create a safer and better environment for people of all ages.

Tell us about your skills,
experience, or interests that
relate to the Commission that
you feel would assist us in
considering your application:

I do volunteering for One Community LG and Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation. I am a Teacher Assistant in school. I am interested in learning to better environments for everybody.

Please list your current
commitments:

Taekwondo, Swimming, color guard, school, and volunteering What strengths do you possess
that you believe will make you a
successful commissioner?:

I am determined and if I see a goal I will try to achieve it. I really want to create safer environments for people. There are issues that need to be fixed so by contributing ideas in the discussions too create solutions that everyone agrees with.

What do you see as the
important issues in Monte
Sereno?:

One if the most important issues I see in Monte Sereno are how the streets are laid out for the safety of pedestrians, bikers, and wildlife.

What strengths do you possess
that you believe will make you a
successful commissioner?:

I am determined and if I see a goal I will try to achieve it. I really want to create safer environments for people. There are issues that need to be fixed so by contributing ideas in the discussions too create solutions that everyone agrees with.

What, if any, career interests do
you have currently?:

I want help people by contributing to their well being, there are many ways to do that but I will be heading the direction of bioengineering , and leadership.

City of Monte Sereno
Commission Application
Date Received: December 12, 2022
Applying for: Youth Commission
Name: Zoe Swanson
Length of Residency: 14 years
Previously Held Elected or
Appointed Governmental
Positions:

I have been a part of student council and leadership since third grade. I was elected as co-head in eighth grade by my entire school. This year, I am the Junior Class President at Los Gatos High School.

Civic or Charitable Organizations
You Have Belonged To:

I am a co-founder of a nonprofit called Savanna Sisterhood where we buy handmade bracelets made by female artisans in Kenya and all the proceeds from each bracelet sold go to anti-poaching foundations in Kenya. The bracelets are made by Maasai women and they create a sustainable livelihood for Maasai tribes through financial independence for women, fair wages, and food and water security for their families.

I am also a part of BBYO, a Jewish youth group that focuses on creating more meaningful Jewish experiences.

Education: I am a Junior at Los Gatos High School. I take my mathematics courses at Stanford Online High School.

Why do you want to be on the
selected Commission?:

My non-profit impacts communities all the way across the world. However, I want to leave a postive impact on my local community. The Youth Commission would be the perfect way for me to serve my community.

Tell us about your skills,
experience, or interests that
relate to the Commission that
you feel would assist us in
considering your application:

I also organized a tennis camp to teach tennis at a local elementary school. The camp served as an introduction to the fundamentals of tennis with an emphasis on female empowerment and had collegiate tennis athletes from local universities as guest lecturers. This demonstrates that not only do I have the leadership skills necessary for the Youth Commision, I am able to strategically plan events and communicate effectively with others.

I created a blog with the goal of using the platform to educate readers on Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investment that many big banks, funds, and angel investors are adopting. This is an especially important topic for young students aspiring to go into the financial sector. To do this, I explore how to objectively measure environmental and social impact, analyze ESG performances, curate news and research around this new type of investment, and educate readers on how they can take part. I also started an ESG Investment club to continue this goal. We explore the same topics and are planning on entering investment and economic competitions. I am interested in investment and business and it would be really interesting for me to be a part of the conversation about allocating where certain funds should be received.

Please list your current
commitments:

I have tennis afterschool about five days a week. However, my tennis scedule is flexible. I also have a Stanford mathematics course two days a week.

What strengths do you possess
that you believe will make you a
successful commissioner?:

I posess the leadership qualities, as seen in my extensive leadership background. I am a diligent worker and will always be willing to put in extra effort. I was able to sucessfully start a non-profit organization, which demonstrates that I have the necessary skills of public speaking, delegation, and management.

What do you see as the
important issues in Monte
Sereno?:

I have seen three prevalent issues in Monte Sereno. The first issue is affordable housing, specifically re-zoning issues. Secondly, the cross over expenses with the town of Los Gatos. Third, there have been quite a few robberies recently. This issue has become extremely important in our community, so much so that there is a plan to set up a camera, in order to dissuade from future attempts and to catch the thieves.

What strengths do you possess
that you believe will make you a
successful commissioner?:

I posess the leadership qualities, as seen in my extensive leadership background. I am a diligent worker and will always be willing to put in extra effort. I was able to sucessfully start a non-profit organization, which demonstrates that I have the necessary skills of public speaking, delegation, and management.

What, if any, career interests do
you have currently?:

I am interested in business and finance. I am specifically interested in Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Investment.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: NEW BUSINESS
Staff Contact: Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica,
Department: City Clerk
Title: Consideration of Appointment of Liz Lawler to Fill the One Vacancy on the Monte Sereno Better Streets Commission
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council appoint Liz Lawler to fill the one vacancy on the Monte Sereno Better Streets Commission.

Background Information:

On October 17, 2017, the City Council took action to form the Better Streets Commission for the purpose of advising the City Manager on design, operations, and maintenance of the City’s street system and identifying and advising on integrated, coordinated, environmentally sustainable and economically efficient street rehabilitation solutions that address the multiple street system demands such as underground utilities, street trees, stormwater management and contamination runoff issues.

The Ordinance establishing the Commission specified that the Commission consist of five (5) members of the public selected by a majority of the City Council. The term for one (1) seat on the Commission will expire on December 31, 2024.

As a result of the City's recruitment to fill the seats, an application was received from one (1) qualified resident:
• Liz Lawler
Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this staff report.

Public Noticing:

The City Council’s agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s website. In addition, recruitment notices were posted on the City website, sent to our e-mail distribution list, and posted on the Nextdoor social media

website.

Attachments:

Application - Liz Lawler - Better Streets Commission

City of Monte Sereno
Commission Application
Date Received: December 7, 2022
Applying for: Better Streets Commission
Name: Liz Lawler
Length of Residency: 10 years
Previously Held Elected or
Appointed Governmental
Positions:

Please include organization name, position/office held, and dates.

Monte Sereno City Council 2018-2022
Civic or Charitable Organizations
You Have Belonged To:

Please include organization name, position/office held, and dates.

President, Children’s Chain CHLA 2003 Kiwanis Los Gatos (joined 2022) Board Member, Saint Francis High School (current)
Education: Please include school name, degree obtained, and dates.

UC Berkeley, B.A. Political Science 1987
Why do you want to be on the
selected Commission?:

I have served on the BSC when it was first created. I recently completed my term as a council member and wish to continue to give back to our community. The BSC has done great work to improve pedestrian, cyclist and road safety in Monte Sereno and I hope to again serve on this commission.

Tell us about your skills,
experience, or interests that
relate to the Commission that
you feel would assist us in
considering your application:

I have served on the Better Streets Commission as one of the original commissioners, and having served on council I understand how the city works and can bring that experience to the commission.

What strengths do you possess
that you believe will make you a
successful commissioner?:

I have experience as a former commissioner and city council member, and can run efficient meetings and engage the public and fellow commissioners in meaningful discussion.

What do you see as the
important issues in Monte
Sereno?:

Traffic and parking issues that will result from additional housing, pedestrian safety, and the need for crosswalks on Winchester.

What strengths do you possess
that you believe will make you a
successful commissioner?:

I have experience as a former commissioner and city council member, and can run efficient meetings and engage the public and fellow commissioners in meaningful discussion.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: NEW BUSINESS
Staff Contact: Steve Leonardis,
Department: City Manager
Title: Consider and Approve the 2023 City Council Meeting Schedule Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council consider its 2023 City Council meeting schedule and cancel the regular meetings of January 03, 2023, February 07, 2023, April 04, 2023, July4, 2023, July 18, 2022, September 05, 2023 and November 21, 2023.

Background Information:

In the past, it has been the City Council’s practice to consider the upcoming calendar year and set the City Council meeting schedule for that period. The practice of setting or cancelling meetings for the upcoming calendar year at the end of the current calendar year allows for adequate notice to the public, as well as assists the City Council and staff with workload management and vacation planning.

Analysis:

Many local jurisdictions routinely cancel certain meetings to allow for Councilmember vacations. Some years City Council meetings conflict with holidays or election days. This coming year (2023) there are no meeting dates that conflict with a holiday.

In past practice, the City Council has canceled the first meeting in July since it tends to fall close to the Independence Day holiday. Cancellation of both July meetings creates a block of time to allow for Councilmember vacations. Therefore, staff proposes cancellation of the July 5 and July 19 City Council meetings.

Below is a listing of regular City Council meeting dates for 2023. The dates in bold are the meetings recommended for cancellation.
2023 City Council Meeting Dates
January 03, 2023
January 17, 2023
February 07, 2023
February 21, 2023
March 7, 2023
April 04, 2023
April 18, 2023
May 2, 2023
May 16, 2023
June 6, 2023
July 04, 2023
July 18, 2023
August 1, 2023
August 15, 2023
September 05, 2023
October 3, 2023
October 17, 2023
November 7, 2023
November 21, 2023
December 5, 2023

March 21, 2023 June 20, 2023 September 19, 2023 December 19, 2023 Fiscal Impact:

There is no fiscal impact with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council’s agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s website.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting: City Council - Dec 20 2022
Agenda Heading: NEW BUSINESS
Staff Contact: Gloisy Gonzalez-Langarica,
Department: City Clerk
Title: Discuss and Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Adopting a Resolution Establishing a Suicide Prevention Policy and Mental Health Promotion for the Community
Recommendation(s):

Staff recommends the City Council direct staff to return to the City Council at a future meeting to adopt a resolution establishing a Suicide Prevention Policy and Mental Health Promotion.

Background Information:

Suicide is a serious public health problem that can have lasting harmful effects on individuals, families, and communities.

According to the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, in 2020, 45,979 people died by suicide in the United States. For every suicide death, there are also:
 4 hospitalizations for suicide attempts
 8 emergency department visits related to suicide
 27 self-reported suicide attempts
 275 people who seriously considered suicide
Individuals of all races, genders, ages, and other social characteristics express, attempt or die by suicide.

The negative effect of suicide on a community goes well beyond the individual life lost. The emotional toll impacts first responders (e.g. Public Safety Dispatchers, Police Officers, Firefighters, Paramedics, etc.) as well as loved ones (e.g. family, friends, neighbors, colleagues, classmates, faith community, etc.).

In August 2010, and revised in 2011, the County of Santa Clara Behavioral Health Services Department (County) created a County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan (The Plan). It's vision is to prevent death by suicide and create a healthier community.

Fiscal Impact:

There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts with this agenda item.

Public Noticing:

The City Council's agenda was posted at City Hall and the agenda and this report appear on the City's website.

Attachments:

Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan (The Plan)
City of Santa Clara Suicide Prevention Policy Resolution Additional Suicide Prevention Resolution from Neighboring Cities

SANTA CLARA COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ACT
suicide prevention strategic plan
SANTA CLARA COUNTY | SUICIDE PREVENTION INITIATIVE
SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUICIDE PREVENTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE | JUNE 2010 pe p
help
and hope
giving

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 2 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 3 of 136 This document is dedicated to Santa Clara County residents who have lost their lives to suicide, those who have experienced the tragic loss of a loved one by suicide, those who are survivors of suicide attempts, and those who may contemplate suicide now or in the future.  May this document serve to inspire individuals, organizations and communities to implement strategies needed to protect our county’s greatest resource—our residents.

This work is intended to honor and memorialize all whose loss and struggle has inspired us to take action.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee Co‐Chairs
Hon. Liz Kniss, Santa Clara County Supervisor, District 5 Victor Ojakian, Santa Clara County Mental Health Board Member Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
Hon. Ken Yeager, District 4, President
Hon. Dave Cortese, District 3, Vice President
Hon. Donald F. Gage, District 1
Hon. George Shirakawa, District 2
Hon. Liz Kniss, District 5
County Executive
Dr. Jeffrey Smith

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 4 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 5 of 136 If you or someone you know or love is in crisis, there are services, resources and help available at Santa Clara County’s ‐
Suicide and Crisis Services (SACS) Hotline
Toll-Free
1-855-278-4204
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
1-800-273-TALK (8255)
For Veterans
1-800-273-TALK (8255) press 1
Additional resources also are listed on the Santa Clara County’s Mental Health Department website: www.sccgov.org/spac under the Suicide Prevention and Local Resources section on the Suicide Prevention Resources page.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 6 of 136 Giving People Help and Hope
Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Action Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A Message from Supervisor Liz Kniss and Vic Ojakian,
Co‐Chairs of the Santa Clara County
Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee         9
Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee Members and Staff List with Special Acknowledgements     10 Introduction                 13
I. Why We Care               17
ƒ The Impact of Suicide in Santa Clara County       17
II. What We Did                 21
ƒ The Committee Planning Process         21
ƒ The Planning Approach             22
ƒ Planning Steps               25
III. What We Learned               29
ƒ Language Counts             29
ƒ Local and National Suicide Data         30
ƒ Suicide by Age             31
ƒ Suicides by Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Individuals   32 ƒ Suicide by Race and Ethnicity         33
ƒ Suicide by Gender           33
ƒ Suicide by City               34
ƒ Suicides among Custody Populations       35
ƒ Suicides by Military Personnel—Active Duty, National Guard, Reservists and Veterans           36
ƒ Other Possible Correlations:  More Data Is Needed   38 ƒ Suicide Risk and Mental Illness           41
ƒ Suicide Risk and Alcohol Consumption         43
ƒ Suicide Risk Factors and Warning Signs     44

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 7 of 136 ƒ Factors that May Protect Against Suicide       45
IV. Review and Summary of Local Needs         49
ƒ Local Needs Across the Lifespan         49
ƒ Additional Strategies:  Community Education and Information 55 ƒ Additional Strategies: Communication Practices     55 ƒ Additional Strategies:  Policy and Governance Advocacy   56 ƒ Additional Needs: Data Monitoring and Evaluation     57 ƒ Local Suicide Resources:  A Range of Services       57 ƒ Pending and Future Additional Prevention Resources     58 ƒ What Experts Recommend           59
ƒ Best Practices – Evolving Knowledge         59
V. What We Recommend – Five Overarching
and Interconnected Prevention Strategies     63
ƒ Strategy One ‐ Implement and coordinate suicide prevention and intervention programs and services for targeted high risk populations               64
ƒ Strategy Two ‐ Implement a community education and information campaign to increase public awareness of suicide and
suicide prevention               68
ƒ Strategy Three ‐ Develop local communication “best practices” to improve media coverage and public dialogue related to suicide 72 ƒ Strategy Four ‐ Implement policy and governance advocacy to promote systems change in suicide awareness and prevention 75 ƒ Strategy Five ‐Establish a robust data collection and monitoring system to increase the scope and availability of suicide‐related data and to evaluate suicide prevention efforts       79
VI. Next Steps                 85
VII. Appendix                 87
ƒ Attachment 1: Suicide in Santa Clara County by Zip Code, 2000‐2006 Suicide‐Homicide Comparison Table     89
ƒ Attachment 2: Santa Clara County Community Agencies and Programs that Interface with Suicide Attempters, Victims, and Loved Ones        93
ƒ Attachment 3: Best Practices Recommendations     97
ƒ Attachment 4: Summary of Public Forum Input     103
ƒ Attachment 5: Palo Alto Unified School District Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Promotion Policy         125
ƒ Attachment 6: References           131

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 8 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 9 of 136 A Message from County Supervisor Liz Kniss and Victor Ojakian Co‐Chairs, Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee
Suicide devastates families and takes a tremendous toll within communities. Our nation loses approximately 30,000 lives to this tragedy each year.  Every 16 to 18 minutes another person dies by self‐inflicted causes.  In Santa Clara County, death by suicide occurs, on average, every three days.

When someone dies by suicide, the tragedy isn't limited to the loss of life and human potential.

The heartbreaking pain, intense grief and overwhelming sorrow loved ones experience are complicated by feelings of anger, shock, and second‐guessing.

The issue of suicide was brought to the forefront of our communities’ attention in 2009, prompted by the suicide of four adolescents in a less than six‐month period.  With a renewed focus on coordinated and effective suicide prevention services throughout Santa Clara County, the Board of Supervisors supported development of an action based strategy through a broad‐ based group of expert‐professionals from a wide range of fields.

Vic Ojakian and I are pleased to have served as Co‐Chairs of this dynamic group of individuals and organizational representatives.  Vic is a member of the Santa Clara County Mental Health Board, a former Mayor of Palo Alto and, along with his wife Mary, a national advocate for improved prevention services since they lost their son to suicide in 2004.

The Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee diligently reviewed data, listened to experts and community members, and studied best practices in prevention and response in order to formulate an action plan in Santa Clara County.  We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to the individuals who served on this committee for their significant contribution to the development of this draft plan.

In addition, we thank members of the public who attended committee meetings and/or participated in the April 28, 2009, Public Forum at which the data, deliberative process and preliminary conclusions of the Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee were enriched.  Our thanks go out to each and every one of you who devoted your time, energy and expertise to this critically important endeavor.

While the current plan is a working document that is subject to change as it continues to be reviewed by the community – it is nevertheless an important blueprint for next steps.  I urge all Santa Clara County residents to read this plan, think about ways in which you can add to its recommendations and/or help to implement its recommendations, and become active in this vital effort to save lives.

Hon. Liz Kniss, Supervisor, District 5       Victor Ojakian

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 10 of 136

SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUICIDE PREVENTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE This broad and diverse group of individuals, representing a cross‐section of our county, dedicated six months to create this plan.  The work of this committee was imbued with the passion that comes, in large part, from personal experience with the pain of suicide.  More than 60% of the individuals in this committee have either lost a loved one or friend to suicide or have attempted to take their own lives but, fortunately for us, lived so they could share their knowledge and achieve our goal to reduce the number of deaths by suicide.

Members:

Jeff Arnold, M.D.

Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Emergency Room
Maryann Barry
Santa Clara County Custody Health Services
Dennis Burns
Palo Alto Police Department
Ginny Cutler
EMQFF Child and Adolescent Mobile Crisis Program
Robert (Bob) Garner
Santa Clara County
Department of Alcohol and Drug Services
Mitch Gevelber, M.D.

Santa Clara Valley Medical Center,
Adolescent Medicine
Kelly Green, Alternate
San Mateo County Transit District
Michael Haberecht, M.D., Ph.D.

Stanford Counseling and Psychological Services
Melanie Hale, M.S., LCSW
Foothill College
Tiffany Ho, M.D.

Santa Clara County
Mental Health Department
Hope Holland
Suicide Attempt Survivor / California Network of
Mental Health Clients/ Santa Clara Chapter of
National Alliance on Mental Illness
Don Johnson, Member
Mental Health Department’s Ethnic and Cultural
Community Advisory Committee
Jennifer Jones
Suicide Attempt Survivor / Santa Clara County
Mental Health Department’s Consumer Affairs
Sheila Mitchell
Santa Clara County Probation Department
Dave Newman
Law Enforcement Liaison, South County
Bernie (Deacon) Nojadera
Interfaith Advisory Committee,
Diocese of San Jose
Cary Matsuoka
Santa Clara County Superintendents’ Association
ThuHien Nguyen, Ph.D.

Santa Clara County Mental Health Department,
Mental Health Services Act
Cultural Competency Coordinator
Erin O’Brien
Association of Mental Health Contract Agencies
Joseph O’Hara, M.D.

Santa Clara County
Medical Examiner‐Coroner Office
Mary Ojakian
American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
Chris Pacheco
Council on Aging Silicon Valley
Dan Peddycord, R.N., M.P.A./H.A.

Santa Clara County Public Health Department
Hon. Joe Pirzynski, Vice Mayor
Town of Los Gatos,
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Janin Rimper
Suicide and Crisis Services Volunteer

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 11 of 136 Amari Romero‐Thomas
211 Santa Clara County, United Way Silicon Valley
Mark Simon
SamTrans, Caltrain, San Mateo County
Transportation Authority
David Sisson
Suicide Attempt Survivor/ Community Member
Wiggsy Sivertsen
San José State University
Kevin Skelly
Palo Alto Unified School District
Pamela Smith Martin
Hospital Council of Northern and Central California
Tasha Souter, M.D.

Veterans Administration Hospital, Trauma Recovery
Nicole Squires
Policy Aide to Supervisor Kniss
Eddie Subega
Santa Clara County
Suicide and Crisis Services (Hotline)
Paul Taylor, Alternate
Momentum
Kris Wang, Alternate
Santa Clara County Cities Association
Lorraine Zeller, Alternate
Survivor and Peer Mentor
Staff:

Nancy Dane Peña, Ph.D., Director, Santa Clara County Mental Health Department Elena Tindall, M.Ed., Santa Clara County Mental Health Department Prevention and Early Intervention Consultant and temporary Liaison to the State Office of Suicide Prevention Ky Le, Santa Clara County Mental Health Department Mental Health Services Act Manager Jean McCorquodale, Mental Health Department Consultant
Tracy Hern McGreevy, Photographer
And, with Special Thanks to:

IInterpret‐ for simultaneous translation
EMQ for hosting meetings
Christine Nguyen for assistance at the public forum
CTI for Suicide Prevention Website Support
MIG, Inc. for graphic design and meeting facilitation

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 12 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 13 of 136 Introduction
When someone dies by suicide, the loss of that precious human life and the loss of that person’s potential is only one of the anguishing outcomes:   There can be no more heartbreaking pain than having a loved one end his or her life.  Along with intense grief from the gaping hole in one’s life, there is overwhelming sorrow about the loss that is typically mixed with a surplus of other tormenting emotions.

In Santa Clara County, death by suicide is the 10th leading cause of death.  Our County ranks 54th out of California’s 58 counties (with 58 being the worst) in the rate of adolescent self‐inflicted injury.1
Death by suicide occurs, on average, every three days; and there are 2 suicide attempts every day, and an estimated 14 suicidal gestures every day in Santa Clara County.

This troubling reality of suicide in Santa Clara County stands in stark contrast to our positive identity—to our sense of pride in being the largest member of the economic region called Silicon Valley, a world leader in development of new technologies and industries, where our cities are frequently ranked among the highest in the nation in overall health and safety.  We pride ourselves as being civic‐minded and welcoming of all who choose Santa Clara Valley as their home; and yet, one out of every ten deaths is the result of someone taking their own life.

This plan is the effort of many who endeavor to understand the enigma of suicide in Silicon Valley and to take a stand, together as a community, to prevent it.  Our belief is one death by suicide is one death too many.  One person struggling with despair and the contemplation of taking his/ her own life is one person too many.

Our mission is to bring community awareness to the issue of suicide and to engage a community effort to stop it.  Additionally, as we do so, we hope to enlist the public in our effort to contribute to the success of other communities that endeavor to take action to prevent suicide.

We have organized the following report so that you, the reader, will understand how we went about our planning work, what we learned about suicide as we planned, and how we arrived at the five overarching recommendations of this Plan.  Those recommendations, discussed in detail in Section V. What We Recommend, focus on community‐wide education, policy development, data collection and evaluation, communication and media practices, and an array of suicide prevention programs and services.  Some of the services recommended for all ages include:
ƒ Screening and referral resources in primary care and other caregiving settings ƒ Training for professionals, service providers and community members on identification and response to individuals at risk
ƒ Crisis Hotline and a single, countywide access point/telephone number ƒ Accessible, affordable and appropriate crisis, counseling and support services ƒ Mobile crisis unit
ƒ Self‐help centers in communities

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 14 of 136 ƒ Phone consultation services
ƒ Post‐incident care for individuals and families after a 5150 episode (involuntary admission to residential psychiatric care for up to 72 hours) ƒ Public recognition of  individuals who connect people at risk of suicide to resources ƒ Incorporating individuals who have survived their own attempts to die by suicide and individuals who have lost a loved one to suicide in the efforts to increase awareness and prevention
The Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee is proposing broad recommendations to:

One: Implement and coordinate suicide intervention programs and services for targeted high risk populations
Two: Implement a community education and information campaign to increase public awareness of suicide and suicide prevention
Three: Develop local communication “best practices” to improve media coverage and public dialogue related to suicide
Four: Implement a policy and governance advocacy initiative to promote systems change in suicide awareness and prevention
Five: Establish a robust data collection and monitoring system to increase the scope and availability of suicide‐related data and evaluate suicide prevention efforts Each of these broad recommendations, once endorsed by the Mental Health Board and local stakeholders and approved by the Board of Supervisors, will be developed into implementation plans, including well defined deliverables with budgets and specific procurement recommendations.  It is expected that a significant portion of the funding for the plan components will be funded through Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Prevention and Early Intervention Statewide Project funds; however, it also is anticipated that funding will be sought from other community resources, insuring this is truly a community‐supported effort.

These recommendations and strategies are described in more detail beginning on page 63.  In response to public feedback, this document has been designed to provide an overview in the introduction of the recommendations, followed by the details of how these recommendations were selected, and culminating in a more detailed explanation of each strategy and next steps.

The Next Steps section of this document begins on page 85.

Please join us in a community‐wide education and action campaign to reduce the unnecessary loss of life from suicides.  Join us in choosing hope and action over hopelessness and inaction.

You can help by learning about warning signs, reaching out to friends and family who are in distress with encouragement and information about ways to seek help, breaking the taboo by discussing suicide, and sharing the most important assets we have as human beings:  empathy, comfort, support for our fellow human beings and the knowledge and ability to act as needed.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 15 of 136 I.   Why We Care

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 16 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 17 of 136 I.   Why We Care
Most people are surprised to learn that every year more than one million deaths worldwide are caused by suicides; and every year there are an additional 10 to 20 million suicide attempts, often accompanied by serious injuries.  Even in our own County, suicide is the leading cause of death by fatal injury.2 The numbers are truly too large for us to ignore.

While suicide is confounding, suicide is usually preventable, given the right education, services and supports.  Prevention for natural disasters and communicable diseases is typically centered on risk reduction.  Likewise, prevention for suicide must be centered on risk reduction through a variety of means.  Suicide is most often a fatal complication of different types of mental illnesses which are treatable.  Just as with diseases of the body, the earlier treatment is sought, generally the better the outcome and the lower the risk of other complications.  We are inspired by the success Australia has had in reducing the number of deaths among youth ages 16‐24 by 57%3 and of the total national population by 30%4 between 1999‐2005.  We know that we, too, can make a difference in reducing suicide deaths in Santa Clara County.

As we did our planning, we learned that most services focus on intervention during a crisis, such as counseling someone who talks about taking their life, rather than on true prevention and earlier intervention.  Most programs that play a role in preventing suicides do so only indirectly.

As we did our research, it became clear that an effective community suicide prevention effort must consist of multiple strategies that knit together a comprehensive effort to impact suicide through broad, community‐level education, public policies, formal media communication practices, and an array of coordinated and accessible culturally and socially relevant services.

Fundamentally, the most significant prevention strategy is for a troubled person to be able to seek help and talk about how they are feeling with someone they trust.  Offering this  support and encouragement to get help is something we are all capable of doing. (Suicide and Crisis Services (SACS) Hotline, Toll‐Free 1‐855‐278‐4204; National Suicide Prevention Lifeline – 1‐800‐ 273‐TALK [8255]).

The Impact of Suicide in Santa Clara County
An important step in our process was
gaining an understanding about suicide in
Santa Clara County.

In 2007, the most recent year for which this
data is available, the suicide rate in Santa
Clara County was 7.8 per 100,000.5  In
contrast to the 7.8 suicide rate, the
homicide rate in the same year was 2.6 per
100,000.6  Many more people kill
themselves than are killed by others and
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
Number of
Deaths
‘99 ‘00 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06 ‘07
1999 to 2007
Santa Clara County
Annual Suicides 1999 - 2007

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 18 of 136 this is consistent with national data that
show suicide is the 8th leading cause of
death in the U.S., compared to homicide
which is the 13th leading cause of death.

The 7.8 per 100,000 suicide rate equates to
140 individuals7 who lost their lives in 2007
due to their personal despair and loss of
hope.  Among older people (65+ years), the
rate jumps to 14.8 per 100,000.8  Among
males, the rate soars to 18.5 per 100,000.9
In addition, over the period 1999 through
2006, there were 5,971 suicide attempts, an
average of 750 suicide attempts per year.

Most attempt survivors had used poisoning
or cutting/piercing as the means.  Whites
lead in the number of attempters (3,435 or
58% of attempters), followed by Hispanics
(1,142 or 19%), and Asians (912 or 15%).

Females attempted at almost twice the rate
of males (3,925 to 2,046).  Almost half of all
attempters were in the age group of 21 to 44
years old.

In Santa Clara County, the hospitalization
rate for self‐inflicted injury among children
and youth ages 5 to 20 is 30.6 per 100,000.10
This is the rate of self‐inflicted but non‐fatal
injury hospitalizations and includes suicide
attempts well as self‐mutilation.  This
equates to more than 100 children and youth
each year who so seriously hurt themselves
or try to kill themselves that they require
hospitalization.

This above data alone should serve as the
community’s “wake‐up call” because we
know, too, that 30% to 40% of persons who
complete suicide have made a previous attempt.  Although the majority of people who die by suicide have not tried before to take their life, nevertheless, a serious suicide attempt is a clear risk factor for suicide death.11  The risk of completed suicide is more than 100 times greater than average in the first year after an attempt—80 times greater for women, 200 times greater for men, 200 times greater for people over 45, and 300 times greater for white men over 65.12 A Closer Look at Who We Are
ƒ Santa Clara County population  1,857,621; sixth largest county in California; largest among 9 Bay Area counties ƒ 95% of the population is urban
ƒ 15 cities
ƒ San Jose is the largest city: population 1,006,892; 3rd largest city in California; 10th largest city in the U.S. ƒ Santa Clara County residents are:
à 7.5% under 5 years of age,
à 16.8% 5 to 17 years,
à 64.9% 18 to 64 years,
à 10.8% 65 years and over,
à median age is 34.
à 7,000 people are homeless in Santa Clara County
ƒ Ethnicity:
à White (Non Hispanic) 38%
à Asian 31.2%
à Hispanic 26%
à Black 2.9%
à American Indian and Alaska Native .8%
à Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander .4%
à Two or More Races 2.7%
à More than 100 languages and dialects are spoken
ƒ In 2007, SCC became one of only 10 counties in the U.S. where more than 50% of residents speak a language other than English at home.
ƒ A community‐wide survey of the county’s five largest
immigrant groups revealed that immigrants from China
(60%), Mexico (48.9%) and Vietnam (47.6%) were most
likely to report not enough English as a barrier to obtaining services and education.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 19 of 136 II. What We Did

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 20 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 21 of 136 II. What We Did
The Committee Planning Process
The Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee (SPAC) is a 36‐member, broad‐ based group of experts in the field; professionals in related fields such as educators and school administrators, law enforcement, public transportation, public officials, and many others; specialists in various age groups; mental health consumers and family members from diverse cultures and backgrounds; suicide attempt survivors; individuals surviving the death of a loved one by suicide; and concerned members of the public.  More than 60% of the members have personal experience with either the loss of a loved one to suicide or as suicide attempt survivors.  The personal knowledge of loss by suicide infused the committee’s efforts with a particularly deep commitment to saving lives.

The SPAC was formed as a result of a recommendation from the Mental Health Department to create a local planning group for the purpose of developing a local suicide prevention plan and the acceptance of this recommendation by the Board of Supervisors’ Health and Hospital Committee at its meeting of September 16, 2009.  Already Santa Clara County, like other California counties, had contributed substantial amounts of its local MHSA Prevention and Early Intervention funding allocation to the California Department of Mental Health (DMH) to support state‐administered, statewide projects.  In December 2008, the Board of Supervisors assigned $1.9 million in PEI funds to DMH annually for four years.  One of these statewide projects was the development of the California Strategic Plan on Suicide Prevention.  The Strategic Plan was intended to guide the development of future statewide as well as local suicide prevention efforts.  Thus, with Board of Supervisors approval and under the leadership of the Health and Hospital Committee Chairperson Liz Kniss, the SPAC was established to create a local Santa Clara County suicide prevention plan.

The SPAC held its first meeting on December 9, 2009.  Between December 2009 and May 2010, the committee met the second and fourth Wednesday of every month.  Members of the public also attended the meetings and their participation was welcomed in all of the discussions and deliberations, including the “break‐out” sessions which followed the whole‐group dialogues and focused on needs and strategies by age categories.

On April 28, 2010, the SPAC’s findings and preliminarily selected strategies were shared more broadly with the
community at an extensively publicized and well attended Public Forum.  Translators provided live translations from English into Santa Clara County’s additional four
threshold languages (Mandarin, Vietnamese, Spanish and
Tagalog) and one of the break‐out groups was conducted
entirely in Vietnamese to better insure that all who
wished to contribute were able to do so.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 22 of 136 The Mental Health Department website was an important, ongoing communication link between SPAC members, staff and the public.  On the website’s Suicide Prevention page, meetings were publicized; all data and information that was shared at the SPAC meetings were available on an ongoing basis; and summaries of steps taken and preliminary decisions were presented.  During the six‐month SPAC planning period, the website received a total of 4,291 visits for a combined total of 6,954 “views,” which is defined as the number of times visitors viewed particular pages.

The final plan will be forwarded to the Santa Clara County Mental Health Board in July 2010 for its review and further solicitation of public comment.  It is anticipated that the plan will be submitted for review by the Board of Supervisors in August 2010.  Implementation efforts will commence after formal approval by the Board of Supervisors.

The Planning Approach
The SPAC members were informed by
the California Suicide Prevention Plan
and studied both its approach and
recommendations.  They also were
informed by each other and the vast
experience of the group and other
participants who came to share personal
stories and information.  It was clear at
the onset of the planning process that
the work was a matter of the heart as
much as it was strictly an effort in
strategic planning.  From the first
evening, members moved through the planning process in a way that honored the deep emotional impact of suicide while they absorbed data and information and brainstormed about the needs in our community.  This quality within the planning group resulted in guiding values for the planning work that were arrived at from the beginning of the process.

Guiding Values

1. Suicide is a community problem.  It cannot be addressed effectively by only one system or agency.

2. The plan should be informed by the people
most affected by suicide—the survivors, the
family members, the loved ones.

3. People involved in this work should feel
engaged.

4. Suicide risk factors should be considered for
every age group across the lifespan.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 23 of 136

5. The resulting plan should not duplicate existing efforts but rather leverage them.

6. The community should own this plan.

7. The work must be culturally sensitive and competent.

8. The plan and efforts must be focused on continuous process improvement.

9. It is important that the plan is informed by public input.

Planning Goals
Also, early in the process SPAC members agreed upon the following goals for the prevention plan:

1. Reduce deaths from suicide in Santa Clara County.

2. Increase awareness of why people contemplate suicide and how to access available resources.

3. Improve monitoring of suicides using clear and comprehensive data.

4. Empower people to respond to a person who is considering suicide through training and education.

Conceptual Framework
During the process of developing a planning approach, the committee members were offered a conceptual framework to assist their thinking about suicide prevention that had proven successful with the County Mental Health Department’s (MHD) public planning efforts related to the Mental Health Services Act.  The approach incorporates a lifespan perspective within an adapted public health model that aligns a continuum of health needs (in this case suicide) with levels of promotion, prevention, postvention, early intervention, and intervention strategies.

The postvention strategy was added to the standard public health model to accommodate a strategy unique to suicide which is
described below.

This framework allowed the committee
and other stakeholders to consider suicide
prevention needs from multiple
perspectives—age, need and risk,
intervention strategies, and recipient or
target of the strategies discussed.

Working definitions of various types of
interventions were utilized, again drawing
from public health definitions used to
differentiate types and intensities of
Promotion
Prevention
Early Intervention
Intervention
Family
Community
Social Systems
Lifespan
Need and Risk
Public Health Model for
Suicide Prevention Planning:

Postvention

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 24 of 136 interventions.  The committee also was informed that, generally speaking, strategies that are more preventive in nature are usually less expensive per individual served and can reach many more individuals than intervention strategies.  By their nature, strategies that are more intervention focused serve fewer people for a higher cost per person served.

Promotion.  While there is no precise, universally accepted definition of health promotion, the MHD utilizes the common characterization of promotion as “the enhancement of the capacity of individuals, families, groups or communities to strengthen or support positive emotional, cognitive and related experiences.”13  Strategies for mental health promotion are related to improving the quality of life and potential for health rather than amelioration of symptoms and deficits.

Prevention is concerned with avoiding disease, while promotion is about advancing health and well‐being.  Promotion and prevention overlap and should be complementary activities.  “To prevent,” of course, means “to keep something from happening.”  The Institute of Medicine prevention category is divided into three classifications—universal, selective and indicated.

Universal prevention strategies address the entire population (local communities, schools, neighborhoods).  In the context of mental health, selective prevention strategies target subsets of the total population that are deemed to be at risk for mental illness by virtue of their membership in a particular population segment (victims of child abuse, witnesses to traumatic events, etc.)  Indicated prevention strategies are designed to prevent the onset of mental illness in individuals who do not meet diagnostic criteria for mental illness but who are showing early signs of distress (changes in thoughts, emotions or conduct).

Postvention consists of interventions after a suicide has occurred aimed at reducing the impact of suicide on surviving friends and relatives, as being exposed to the death of a loved one by suicide is itself a risk factor that greatly increases one’s risk of suicide, especially in youth. 14 Early intervention involves
identification of warning
signs for individuals at risk for
mental health problems and
intervening early to mitigate
factors that put them at
further risk for developing
mental disorders.  Early
intervention can prevent
problems from worsening.

Intervention is used to
describe practices and
programs that are offered to
individuals who are
experiencing health problems
Postvention
Institute of Medicine’s Adapted Range of Interventions
Postvention

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 25 of 136 such as mental illness, and typically is associated with “treatment” and ongoing care provided by practitioners with specialized training in treating health conditions such as mental illness, substance abuse, and physical illness.

Planning Steps
The planning team designed and facilitated the committee process in a manner that the group followed ten planning steps in preparing the plan.  It was agreed that the initial phase of plan development would focus on high level
recommendations that would be further shaped into an
implementation plan once approved.  The planning steps
are listed below:

1. Established plan goals

2. Identified personal values and guiding principles

3. Reviewed local, state and national data on
suicide

4. Brainstormed needs across the lifespan

5. Aligned needs by age to available data,
risk populations, and potential
strategies

6. Identified additional plan strategies
beyond those that are age and
population‐related

7. Organized recommendations into
five overarching strategies

8. Held a public forum for dialogue
and input on the committee work

9. Incorporated the public input into
the plan

10. Adopted a finalized plan for
Mental Health Board review and
Board of Supervisors approval.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 26 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 27 of 136 III.   What We Learned

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 28 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 29 of 136 III.   What We Learned
Committee members learned from members who had first‐hand experience with the tragic loss of life by suicide or attempting their own suicide that language counts.

Traditionally, our society has not encouraged open
and honest discussion about suicide and what leads
people to contemplate suicide.  Moreover, cultural
norms influence how we communicate about suicide,
and these norms can lead to unintended negative
consequences.  Wording can communicate our
deepest bias.  People who have survived their own
suicide attempts or who are grieving the loss of a
loved one by suicide are acutely sensitive to the
judgments communicated by word choice, for
example:
ƒ People "die by suicide" not by "committing
suicide."  The word commit often is associated
with crime or sin.
ƒ There is no "successful suicide" only a
“completed suicide."  Success in our American
culture is an achievement to be celebrated
and applauded.  Death by suicide is not a
success, it is a loss.

Language was recognized as affecting a large number
of people.  Sixty percent of the committee members,
a broad cross‐section of our county, have had
personal experience with suicide and there is
probably someone in your own personal network of
family and friends who has first‐hand knowledge of
the pain of suicide—regardless of income, race, or
country of origin.

The committee adopted the language that the
developing field of suicidology is promoting and
recommending.  Additional guidance and resources
are provided in the insert to the left, Language
Counts.

Language Counts
To ensure the most emotional support
possible, consider the following:
• People "die by suicide" not by
"committing suicide."
• There is no "successful suicide" only a
“completed suicide".
• There is probably someone in your own
personal network of family and friends
who has first‐hand knowledge of the
pain of suicide‐ regardless of income,
race, or country of origin.
• Suicide attempt survivors. Individuals
who have survived a prior suicide
attempt.
• Suicide survivors. Family members,
significant others, or acquaintances who
have experienced the loss of a loved one
due to suicide.  Among the general public
this term is also used to mean suicide
attempt survivors.
• Suicidal act (also referred to as suicide
attempt). Potentially self‐injurious
behavior for which there is evidence that
the person probably intended to kill
himself or herself; a suicidal act may
result in death, injuries, or no injuries.
• Suicidal behavior. A spectrum of
activities related to thoughts and
behaviors that include suicidal thinking,
suicide attempts, and completed suicide.

Resources for immediate assistance for you or
someone you love who is struggling with suicide
or despair
Suicide and Crisis Services (SACS) Hotline
Toll‐Free 1‐855‐278‐4204
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
1‐800‐273‐TALK (8255)
For Veterans
1‐800‐273‐TALK (8255) press 1

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 30 of 136 Local and National Data
It is evident that individuals or a group cannot meaningfully “fix” a problem they do not fully understand.  With this understanding, the committee Co‐Chair Vic Ojakian led the group in a review of who dies by suicide, what common problems the suicide victims faced, other risk factors, and warning signs.  While many of the committee members have significant experience and expertise in some aspects of suicide and with certain age or other population groups, the data review process gave everyone a similar foundation of basic knowledge.  Several questions were considered as data was reviewed, including:

1. Who is dying by suicide?

2. Who is at risk of suicide?

3. What factors may contribute to suicide?

4. What are the warning signs of suicide?

5. What factors may protect against suicide?

6. What resources are available in our community to address suicide and suicide risk?

7. What do experts recommend are “best practices” in suicide prevention?

8. What are the critical needs and recommended strategies for our community? In keeping with the overall planning approach, an emphasis was placed on studying suicides and contributing factors by age groups across the lifespan.  Other data provided information about suicides by gender, race and ethnicity, and various categories of high risk.  While available data was limited, further collection and analysis will continue during the Plan implementation phase.

For example, it was learned that Santa Clara County was selected as one of three sites in California to participate in a California Violent Death Reporting System.15  A 2005 study of these data revealed that at least one of the following circumstances was identified in 80% of the suicides:
ƒ The most frequently noted circumstances were associated with mental health problems, especially for females and young people.
ƒ Females (22%) more often had an alcohol or drug problem than males (14%). ƒ Males were much more likely to have a job problem (10%) than were females (0%). ƒ Male suicides were twice as likely to be precipitated by intimate partner relationship problems (18%) than female suicides (9%).
ƒ Suicide victims ages 45 and older were more likely to have a physical health problem that contributed to the suicide (38%) than victims under age 45 (6%).

In addition to research and review of available data, the committee also discussed the lack of many types and categories of data that would better inform professionals as well as the public about danger signs.  One of the committee’s five key recommendations supports ongoing data

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 31 of 136 collection and efforts to encourage more detailed recordkeeping, data analysis, and availability of information related to suicides.

Suicide by Age
Children and Youth.  In 2005, 270 children (ages 10
through 14) in the U.S. completed suicide.16  Suicide is the fourth leading cause of death among children between the ages of 10 and 14 years.17  Between 1999 and 2007, nine 10 to 14 year olds in Santa Clara County died of suicide.18 Youth and Young Adults.  In Santa Clara County, among
teenagers ages 15 through 19, suicide is the third leading cause of death.19  Santa Clara County’s 2005‐07 suicide rate average among youth ages 15 through 24 was 7.0 per 100,000.20  That is consistent with national figures, as shown in the box
on the following
page.21  For the nine year period 1999‐2007, 113 Santa
Clara County youth (15‐24 years old) died of suicide, the majority, almost 75%, were males.22
Nationally, suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students.23  College students have an
“increased incidence of depression,” according to a
study from the Suicide Prevention Resource Center.24
Another study reports that “students experience more
stress, more anxiety, and more depression than a
decade ago.  Some of these increases were dramatic.

The number of students seen each year with depression
doubled, while the number of suicidal students tripled, and the number of students seen after a sexual assault
quadrupled.”25
However, while some college‐related factors may
contribute to suicidal behavior, it is important to note that same‐aged youth who are not in college are actually at a higher risk for suicide attempts than are college
students.26
Adults.  The largest number of deaths by suicide occurs in the adult age group.  It is also our county’s largest age group (25‐65 year olds) at 55.6% of the total population.

National Figures on Youth and Suicide
ƒ Suicide ranks as the third leading cause of
death for young people (ages 15 through
19 and 19 through 24); only accidents and
homicides occur more frequently.
ƒ Approximately 12 young people between
the ages of 15 through 24 die every day by
suicide.
ƒ Every 2 hours and 11 minutes, a person
under the age of 25 completes suicide.
ƒ Among 15 through 24 year olds, suicide
accounts for 12.3% of all deaths annually
(CDC, 2008).
ƒ In 2005, 32,637 people completed suicide.

Of these, 4,212 were completed by people
between the ages of 15 and 24.
ƒ For every completed suicide by youth, it is
estimated that 100 to 200 attempts are
made.
ƒ In 2007, 14.5% of students (grades 9‐
through 2) had seriously considered
suicide in the previous 12 months—18.7%
of female students and 10.3% of male
students (CDC, 2008).
ƒ In the past 60 years, suicide rates have
quadrupled for males 15 through 24 years
old and have doubled for females of the
same age.

Youth Suicide Fact Sheet
www.suicidology.org

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 32 of 136 Among that group (ages 26 through 59), the biggest number occurs in the 45 to 54 year‐old category, according to national data.  This equates to 7,426 deaths or a rate per 100,000 of

17.19.27  For adults, there is a “clear and direct relationship between suicide and unemployment.  At the individual level, unemployed individuals have between two and four times the suicide rate of those employed.”28  For the nine year period 1999‐2007, 810 Santa Clara County adults (25 through 64 years old) died of suicide, the majority, almost 75%, were males.29
Older Adults.  National data show that the elderly comprise 12.6 percent of the population yet account for 16 percent of suicides.  However, even this may not reflect the true total.  Suicide by senior citizens is thought to go unrecognized more than with other age groups.  For the nine year period 1999‐2007, 203 older adults (25‐64 years old) in Santa Clara County died of suicide, the majority, almost 75%, were males.30
Older white men have the highest suicide rate of all age groups.  Among males, adults age 75 years and older have the highest rate of suicide (rate 37.4 per 100,000 population).31  Most elderly suicide victims are seen by their primary care provider a few weeks prior to their suicide attempt and diagnosed with their first episode of
mild to moderate depression.32
Suicides by Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and
Transgender Individuals
The majority of research on lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people who attempted suicide concludes
that young LGBT people have a significantly
higher risk of attempting suicide than
heterosexual young people and that most
attempted suicides among LGBT people occur
during adolescence or young adulthood.33 34
Suicide attempt rates (over the course of a
person’s lifetime) range from 52.4% (9th and
12th grade) for lesbian and bisexual females to
29% for gay and bisexual (9th and 12th grade) males.35  This is in comparison with heterosexual suicide attempt rates of 4.6%, according to the National Comorbidity Survey.36  Nationally, LGB teenagers have been found to be more than three times (3.41) as likely to attempt suicide as other youth, and young men are at particular risk.37 One significant factor that may increase this risk is the stigma around LGBT identity and the fear of being “found out.” These youth experience a perceived or actual loss of a peer group or of family support resulting in social alienation from the groups that might otherwise provide protective support.

There has been a paucity of data examining the high vulnerability of LGBT youth to suicide attempts.  This lack of data demonstrates the need for further assessment from both a public health and a social justice perspective.  An understanding of the impact of isolation from peers

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 33 of 136 and family and the attendant shame and low self‐esteem experienced by LGBT youth also may provide insight into the risk of suicide for other groups of youth experiencing social alienation and a lack of family/community support.

Suicides by Race and Ethnicity
In the developing field of suicidology, little is known of how everyday stressors such as racism can impact a group or individuals.  That said, according to the available data reviewed, suicide rates vary by race and ethnicity.  In Santa Clara County, the suicide rate for  Blacks/African Americans is 15.0 per 100,000, American Indians/Native Americans is 13.0 per 100,000, Whites is 10.7 per 100,000, 2 or more races is 9.3 per 100,000, Asian is 5.2 per 100,000 and Hispanic is

5.1 per 100,000.38
However, these data only provide a partial picture.  The table below compares data on Santa Clara County’s racial and ethnic diversity to the percentage of total suicide deaths in Santa Clara County in 2007.  While the rates of suicide are probably underreported, combined we begin to see a fuller picture of our county in relation to suicide risk.

Comparison table between racial and ethnic make‐up of Santa Clara County as a percentage of population and as a percentage of total suicide deaths39 Race and ethnicity Total percentages of Santa Clara
County population 2007
Percentages of total suicide deaths
in Santa Clara County 2007
White 47.1% 57.1%
Asian 26.9% 17.9%
Hispanic 25.4% 16.4%
Black/African American 2.6% 5%
2 or more races 2.4% 2.9%
American Indian 0.4% 0.7%
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0.7% 0.0%
Suicides by Gender
A woman takes her own life every 90 minutes in the U.S., but it is estimated that one woman attempts suicide every 78 seconds.
• Women attempt suicide three times as much as men.
• The higher rate of attempted suicide in women is attributed to the elevated rate of mood disorders among females, such as major depression and seasonal affective disorder.
• Although women attempt suicide more often, men complete suicide at a rate four times that of women.
• More women than men report a history of attempted suicide, with a gender ratio of 2:1. • Firearms are now the leading method of suicide in women, as well as men. • Suicide is more common among women who are single, recently separated, divorced, or widowed.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 34 of 136 • The precipitating life events for women who attempt suicide tend to be interpersonal losses or crises in significant social or family relationships.40 Suicides by City
These data are based on zip code data being correlated to city boundaries as closely as possible.

Please note that zip code and city boundaries are not always contiguous and that there may be some inaccuracies for this reason.  Nevertheless, it is informative to look at suicide rates by Santa Clara County cities.  This reveals that the relationship of socioeconomic status and suicide is not clear.  It might be expected that structural social inequalities, which result in groups of people with poor access to resources, including social capital, would lead to higher rates of suicide, since this occurs for other indicators of poor physical and mental health.  However, data reveal that the highest rates of suicide appear to be in higher income areas of the county, with the highest rates of suicide being in Palo Alto, Los Altos/Los Altos Hills, Sunnyvale and Morgan Hill; while lower rates in general are in Milpitas, Santa Clara and San Jose.  However, a closer look at suicides by zip codes reveals that frequent numbers of suicides are found in both higher income areas as well as in certain lower income neighborhoods.

Please see Attachment 1 in the Appendix for numbers of suicides by zip code and a comparison of suicide deaths with homicides.

Table 1.  Suicide Rates by Santa Clara County Cities, 2000 ‐ 2006 During the seven years that were reviewed, 2000 through 2006, certain zip codes more frequently had higher numbers of suicides, for example, 95086 and 95123.  It is unclear, what, if any, these zip codes have in common.  Would the pattern hold over a longer period of analysis? Much work remains to be done to more fully understand the dynamics of suicide.

City Population
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Total Avg.
/Yr.

Rate per
100,000
Campbell 36,984 1 2 4 4 4 1 7 23 3.28 8.5
Cupertino 55,000 4 2 1 2 2 2 4 17 2.43 4.4
Gilroy 48,448 5 5 5 2 3 4 3 27 3.86 7.97
Los Altos / Hills 36,065 1 6 4 6 2 1 8 28 4.0 11.09
Los Gatos 28,971 4 2 0 3 4 5 1 19 2.71 9.35
Milpitas 65,235 3 2 3 4 6 6 1 25 3.57 5.47
Monte Sereno 3,511 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Morgan Hill 37,066 0 3 7 6 4 3 3 26 3.71 10.00
Mountain View 71,947 7 11 7 9 8 3 4 49 7.0 9.73
Palo Alto 62,108 4 10 6 6 15 8 8 57 8.14 13.1
San Jose 953,058 65 47 61 65 73 60 47 418 59.7 6.26
Santa Clara 110,700 8 6 5 6 6 5 7 43 6.14 5.55
Saratoga 30,815 3 2 3 3 9 1 0 21 3.0 9.74
Sunnyvale 133,458 13 17 16 13 18 10 10 97 13.4 10.04
Unincorporated 98,244 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total County 1,771,610 118 115 122 129 154 109 103 850 121.4

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 35 of 136 Suicides among Custody Populations
Several interesting questions are raised when reviewing data about suicides among in‐custody populations.  For example, youth entering juvenile facilities are at greater risk of suicide than similar youth in the U.S. population; however, the suicide rate in U.S. juvenile facilities in 2002 was nearly equal to the rate for similar youth in the general population.

The presence of increased risk factors among juvenile justice‐involved youth can be confirmed with Santa Clara County data.  Emotional problems were cited as the most significant underlying factor contributing to their delinquency by both boys and girls in custody with the Santa Clara County Probation Department.  Forty percent of boys and 58% of girls in custody said “something very bad or terrifying” had happened to them.  Nearly one‐quarter of all girls surveyed as they entered juvenile hall said they wished they were dead.41  Of all boys interviewed, 81% had one or more trauma factor noted, compared to 91.7% of the girls.42 Among out‐of‐custody boys on probation supervision, 95.6% had at least one trauma factor noted, while more than one‐quarter (26.7%) of boys had three or more trauma factors noted.

However, all girls reported at least one trauma factor, and 72.7% noted four or more trauma factors in their histories.43
How does this translate into suicides or attempted suicides?  According to the Santa Clara County Probation Department’s Institution Incident Report database, which was first implemented in September 2004, there have been no deaths by suicide during the period since then among youth in custody.  The decrease in suicide attempts is attributed to changes made in overall custody program and protocol, as well as changes made to the suicide risk protocol and response by the Mental Health staff in the Hall.  Mental Health staff and Probation Juvenile Hall staff have received more training in trauma‐informed care and all staff members are involved in increased care coordination for youth considered at risk.

Suicide attempts by youth in custody were as follows:44 Youth in Santa Clara County  Probation Department Custody Year     Number of Attempted Suicides
2004            7
2005         39
2006 11
2007            5
2008 0
2009 3
Total 65
Nationally, the suicide rate in jails has decreased 70% from 1983 to 2003 and has decreased 50% in prisons over the same time period.  In 2002 the suicide rate in local jails (47 per 100,000 inmates) was more than three times the rate in State prisons (14 per 100,000 inmates).45 However, the suicide rate in both settings remains high.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 36 of 136 In California, between 2001 and 2006, there were
190 suicides by inmates in California.  This is far
fewer than the number of deaths by illness but
much greater than any other cause, including more
than double the number of homicides.46
In Santa Clara County, during the years 2000
through 2009, there were 212 suicide attempts in
the Main Jail and 81 suicide attempts at Elmwood.

During that same time period, there were 12
completed suicides in the Main Jail and two
completed suicides at Elmwood.47
Suicides by Military Personnel—Active‐Duty,
National Guard, Reservists and Veterans
With our nation’s current level of international
military engagements, the active‐duty military
personnel, National Guard, reservists and veterans
are another group identified as facing higher risk
for suicide.  The number of suicides among active‐
duty personnel has been rising, with 147 reported
suicides in the Army from January through
November 2009—an increase from 127 in the same
period of 2008.  Among non‐active‐duty reserve
soldiers, 50 suicides were reported in 2008; but the
number had risen to 71 during the first 11 months
of 2009.48
The Navy reports “For the past 10 years, it (suicide)
has been the second or third leading cause of death
among active duty Sailors.”49
According to “Suicide Rivals The Battlefield in Toll on U.S. Military” by Jamie Tarabay as reported by National Public Radio on June 26, 2010, “Nearly as many American troops at home and abroad have committed suicide this year as have been killed in combat in Afghanistan.

Alarmed at the growing rate of soldiers taking their own lives, the Army has begun investigating its mental health and suicide prevention programs.”  However, the article goes on to say that the tough challenge is “changing a culture that is very much about ‘manning up’ when things get difficult.”
Other experts agree that, similar to the general public, one of the main reasons that military personnel do not seek help with mental and emotional health issues is due to stigma and fear It takes the courage and
strength of a warrior to ask
for help.  Help is available
for veterans 24 hours a day.

VA Suicide Prevention Hotline
number is:
1‐800‐273‐TALK (8255). Push “1”
for Veteran services
Veteran Suicide Chat Service at
www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org
VA Palo Alto
Telephone Care Line       800‐455‐0057
VA Palo Alto
Main Number             650‐493‐5000
____________________________
Military personnel and veterans are
not the only ones who can seek help.

Military members, spouses, and
their families who need assistance
with locating services
in their area can contact:

Military One Source   800‐342‐9647
or www.militaryonesource.com

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 37 of 136 that seeking help will negatively impact their
careers.  “A study published in the New
England Journal of Medicine in 2004 showed
that of those active duty service members
who screened positive for a mental health
problem (PTSD, major depression,
generalized anxiety disorder), only 23‐40%
sought mental health care.  Perceived
barriers to seeking treatment included fear
of being seen as weak, of being treated
differently by unit leadership, and of other
members of their unit having less confidence
in them.”50
Correspondingly, veterans, regardless of
when they served or in which branch, are
twice as likely as the general population to
die by suicide, according to an article in the
Journal of Epidemiology and Community
Health (July 2007).51  Suicides among United
States military veterans ballooned by 265
from 2005 to 2007, according to statistics
released by the Veterans Affairs (VA)
department.  The VA estimated that in 2005,
the suicide rate per 100,000 veterans among
men ages 18‐29 was 44.99, but jumped to

56.77 in 2007.52
“Of the more than 30,000 suicides in this
country each year, fully 20% of them are acts
by veterans,'' said VA Secretary Eric Shinseki.
“That means on average 18 veterans die by
suicide each day.  Five of those veterans are
under our care at VA."  Suicide rates among
veterans in all four branches of the military
service are significantly higher than in the
general population.53
Veterans are more likely than the general
public to use firearms as a means for suicide.
“The odds of firearm use (among suicide
decedents) among male and female veterans
were 1.3 and 1.6 times higher, respectively,
than among their nonveteran counterparts
If you are a veteran or know a veteran in
need of medical or mental health
services, the following resources are
available:

Suicide Prevention Lifeline       800‐273‐8255
(TALK)
VA Palo Alto:

Main Number     650‐493‐5000
Telephone Care Line     800‐455‐0057
Returning Veterans   650‐493‐5000
Coordinator     x60007
Addiction Consultation Team 866‐717‐1978
Homeless Veterans
Rehabilitation     800‐848‐7254
Men's and Women's
Trauma Recovery     650‐614‐9997
x24692
VA Palo Alto Website
http://www.palo‐alto.med.va.gov
VA Palo Alto on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/vapahcs
Veteran Suicide Chat Service
www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org
National Center for PTSD
www.ncptsd.va.gov
VA Palo Alto Health Care System Locations:

Palo Alto Division located at 3801 Miranda
Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94304; phone: 650‐493‐
5000.

Menlo Park Division located at 795 Willow Road,
Menlo Park, CA 94025; phone: 650‐614‐9997.

San Jose CBOC located at 80 Great Oaks
Boulevard, San Jose, CA 95119; phone: 408‐363‐
3000.

Monterey CBOC located at 3401 Engineering
Lane, Seaside, CA 93955; phone: 831‐883‐3800
Capitola CBOC located at 1350 N. 41st St., Suite
102, Capitola, CA 95010; phone: 831‐464‐5519
Local Vet Center Locations:

Peninsula Vet Center located at 2946 Broadway
Street, Redwood City, CA 94062; phone: 650‐299‐
0672
San Jose Vet Center located at 278 North 2nd
Street, San Jose, CA 95112; phone: 408‐993‐0729

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 38 of 136 after adjusting for age, marital status, race and region of residence.” 54 U.S. Census data show there are 106,430 veterans in Santa Clara County.55  Approximately 40,000 of that number are veterans of the Vietnam‐era service, however, the theaters of service for an increasing number are Iraq and Afghanistan.

Data compiled for the Veterans Administration Palo Alto Health Care System show that among its patients there were 126 suicide attempts and 1 completed suicide from October 2007 through September 2008.  There were 96 suicide attempts and 7 completed suicides from October 2008 through September 2009.  There were eight attempts and zero completed suicides in December 2009 alone.

Other Possible Correlations:  More Data Is Needed
Varying levels of forensic analysis often may be needed to determine if a death was caused by suicide, homicide, accident or natural causes.  More extensive collection, maintenance and analysis of data related to suicides will be key to ongoing efforts to effectively prevent suicides and to decision‐making about where to allocate prevention resources.

Suicides by Occupation.  Dr. John Q. Baucom, Ph.D., writes in his book, Fatal Choice, "More professionals commit suicide than others.  Farm workers have the lowest incidence among occupational groups.  Dentist and physicians take their lives at the rate of 6½ to one over the general population.  Lawyers commit suicide at a ratio of five to one over the general population."  A web site, straightdope.com, cites an unnamed California study which found that dentists were surpassed in suicide rates only by chemists and pharmacists.  Presumably, a Washington State study found that dentists had a suicide rate second only to sheepherders and wool workers.  However, our review could not substantiate that these data are accurate.

One of the largest studies on this topic was conducted by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in 1995, which concluded that the medical field definitely has a higher suicide rate.  But beyond that, NIOSH researchers said the picture is equivocal:  Often the studies are only of one geographic area, sometimes they have methodological problems, and sometimes they contradict each other.

In another study, a sociology researcher at the University of California, Riverside, Augustine Kposowa, Ph.D., looked at records over nine years for about half a million people of whom 545 died by suicide.  After controlling for such variables as age, income, race, marital status and region of residence, he found that only laborers and the unemployed had significantly higher risks.  On the other hand, he found "dramatic" differences for suicide among the industries where people work.  At highest risk were those in mining, business and repair services, wholesale and retail trade and construction.  Again, which, if any, of these data are accurate is unclear and there is no data to examine whether these conclusions apply to Santa Clara County.

Police‐Involved Suicides.  Some of the first research into “suicide by cop” was completed by

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 39 of 136 Sgt. Rick Parent of the Delta Police Department in British Columbia.  Parent's research of 843 police shootings determined that about 50% were victim‐precipitated homicide.  Police defined victim‐precipitated homicide as "an incident in which an individual bent on self‐destruction engages in life threatening and criminal behavior to force law enforcement officers to kill them."56 Again, further research is needed to determine the extent to which this type of suicide occurs in other locations.

Suicides by Police Officers.  Research has been limited; but there are some indications that there are approximately 450 law enforcement suicides per year nationally, versus 150 officers who die annually in the lines of duty.57
Suicides Labeled as Auto Accidents.  The real
percentage of suicides among car accidents is not
reliably known, Studies by suicide researchers
indicate that "vehicular fatalities that are suicides
vary from 1.6% to 5%."  Some suicides are
misclassified as accidents because suicide must be
proven.  "It is noteworthy that even when suicide is
strongly suspected but a suicide note is not found,
the case will be classified an accident.” 58 59
Some researchers believe that suicides disguised as
traffic accidents are far more prevalent than
previously thought.  One large‐scale community
survey (in Australia) among suicidal persons
provided the following numbers:  "Of those who
reported planning a suicide, 14.8% (19.1% of male
planners and 11.8% of female planners) had
conceived to have a motor vehicle “accident.”  Of all attempters, 8.3% (13.3% of male attempters) had previously attempted via a motor vehicle collision.”60 Other Misidentified Suicides.  It is unknown how many suicides are not classified as intentional deaths on their death records.  However, some means of suicide are believed to be more commonly unreported.  For example, it is believed that some portion of fatal poisonings coded as unintentional or undetermined are actually suicides.  Under‐reporting of suicide has been attributed to factors such as pressure from families and subjectivity among coroners and medical examiners.  As compared with firearms and suffocation, suicide by poisoning is considered to be particularly susceptible to underreporting.  The rapid rise in unintentional poisonings in recent years has led some to wonder whether part of this increase represents misdiagnosed suicides.61
Suicide Clusters and Suicide “Contagion.”  A suicide cluster is defined as multiple deaths by suicide that occur within a defined geographical area and fall within an accelerated time.  These clusters consist of more than three victims, typically ranging from 13 to 24 years old, and occur Providing Hope and Help: SACS Hotline
Darcy (a SACS volunteer) took a cell call from a
hysterical college graduate who was driving on the
freeway with a loaded gun at her side.  The caller said she was going to shoot herself because she did not
get into the medical school that she wanted.  The
caller’s husband was in Iraq and the caller had no
support system in this area and was under a lot of
stress.  Darcy was able to calm the caller down by
gaining her trust through offering care and concern.

The caller agreed to drive herself to the hospital while Darcy stayed with her on the phone.  Approximately
three years later, the caller called back to thank Darcy and to tell her that she had become a pediatrician.

Santa Clara County’s 24‐Hour Toll‐Free
Suicide And Crisis Services (SACS) Hotline:
1‐855‐278‐4204

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 40 of 136 within approximately a one‐to‐two‐year period.  Contagion is the process in which the death by suicide of an individual influences an increase in the suicides of others.  Exposure to another individual’s suicide can precipitate imitative
suicidal behavior.62
How impactful exposure to suicide is as a
risk factor for suicide is an active area of
research.  A 1996 study was unable to find a
relationship between suicides among
friends,63 however, a 1986 study found
clusters of suicide among teenagers
following the televising of news stories
regarding suicide.  These clusters are
thought to account for 5% of teenage
suicides.64
Between 1984 and 1987, journalists in
Vienna covered the deaths of individuals
who jumped in front of subway trains.  The coverage was extensive and dramatic.  In 1987, a campaign alerted reporters to the possible negative side effects of such reporting and suggested alternative strategies for coverage.  In the first six months after the campaign began, subway suicides and nonfatal attempts dropped by more than 80%.  The total number of suicides throughout Vienna dropped as well.65
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that suicide clusters account for 100‐200 deaths annually.  Suggestions for minimizing suicide contagion include understanding the “circles of vulnerability” in order to identify those most at risk after a suicide has occurred in the community.  “Circles of vulnerability include individuals who:
ƒ Had a negative interaction with the victim shortly before the suicide occurred and who perhaps even encouraged it
ƒ Were in a suicide pact but backed out at the last minute ƒ Realize now that they missed the obvious warning signs of suicide ƒ Were suicidal at another time, regardless of whether they had know the victim ƒ Have mental health problems.”66
Homicide‐Suicides.  Murder‐suicide perpetrators appear to be vastly different from perpetrators of homicide alone.  Whereas murder‐suicide perpetrators were found to be highly depressed and overwhelmingly men, other murderers were not generally depressed and were more likely to include women in their ranks.67
College years: Identification of a friend in crisis
I was 19 and in my first year of college.  I ran often
with a dorm‐mate who lived just across the hall.  His
name was “Billy.”  One Friday afternoon just before
Thanksgiving break, Billy asked to go on a run with
me.  He said “I really need to talk to someone.”  He
didn’t’ say about what.  I indicated that I was just
packing up to leave for the holidays but I’d take a
rain check.  He seemed more disappointed than
what I would have expected.  I left for the holiday.

Billy stabbed himself to death two days later.  I’ve
never forgotten the “window of opportunity” I so
blindly missed that Friday afternoon.  To this day I
feel a sense of responsibility for the outcome and a
great deal of shame for my inability to hear a cry for
help and my failure to be a friend.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 41 of 136 Factors that May Contribute to Suicidal
Behavior among Young Adults Transitioning to
Financial Independence
ƒ Major life transitions, such as leaving home for
the first time, may exacerbate existing
psychological difficulties or trigger new ones.
ƒ Real or perceived stress may contribute to the
development of stress disorders—including
suicidal behaviors.
ƒ Parental pressure to succeed academically or
professionally
ƒ Economic pressure to successfully complete a
course of education and training in a shorter
period of time may increase stress.
ƒ Mounting financial burdens, worries about time
away from careers and being out of the
workplace, and uncertainties about the future
job market (especially for those pursuing
research and academic careers) are additional
stressors for students in college, graduate
programs, vocational and technical schools.

Suicide Risk and Mental Illness
Of the 14.8 million Americans who live with
depression, the majority will not attempt suicide.68
However, research has shown a definite correlation
between depression and suicide, as well as a
significant association with all mood disorders and
suicide.  Varying studies have shown that between
60% and 90% of suicide victims had a psychiatric
illness at the time of their death.  Most common
are mood disorders (depression, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, etc.) and substance abuse.69 70 71 72 73  When both mood disorders and substance abuse are present, the risk for suicide is much greater, particularly for adolescents and young adults.74 Children and Youth.  Among Santa Clara County parents who participated in a 2006 survey commissioned by the Lucile Packard Foundation for
Children’s Health, 5.8% were “very concerned” about
their child’s level of depression and an additional 14.1% were “somewhat concerned.”75  At the same time, one‐
quarter to one‐third of seventh, ninth and eleventh
graders reported symptoms of depression (feeling so sad or hopeless for at least two weeks during the previous
year that they stopped doing some regular activities).76 Further, 16.3% of the seventh, ninth and eleventh
graders
reported
they seriously considered, and 8.2% reported
they actually attempted, suicide during the
previous year.77
Nationally, more teenagers die by suicide than
from cancer, heart disease, AIDS, birth defects,
stroke, pneumonia, influenza, and chronic lung
disease combined.78
Young Adults.  Some experts estimate that
about 25% of all young people suffer from
depression by the time they are 24, however,
very few seek help.  Depression affects one out
of six college students; and, as mentioned
previously, suicide is the second leading cause
of death among college students.79  Again,
same‐aged youth and young adults who are not
in college are actually at a higher risk for suicide

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 42 of 136 attempts than are college students. 80
Adults.  In 2005, California Health Interview Survey data showed that 18% of adults in Santa Clara County reported they needed
help for emotional or mental
problems; however, only 8% of adults
had seen a health professional for
these problems.

A review of Santa Clara County
Mental Health Department Call
Center records show that less than
30% of the people who seek services
from the Department’s system
receive mental health treatment.

Coupled with this, a large‐scale
epidemiological study shows that less
than 30% of people with psychiatric
disorders seek treatment.81  Taken
together—less than 30% of those
who need services seek services—
and—less than 30% of those who
seek services receive services—it is
readily apparent that there is a
significant unmet need for mental
health treatment, including
depression and additional mood
disorders among others.

Older Adults. Depression, one of the
conditions most commonly
associated with suicide in older
adults,82 is a widely under‐recognized
and under‐treated medical illness.

Studies show that many older adults
who die by suicide—up to 75%—visited a physician within a month before death.83  These findings point to the urgency of improving detection and treatment of depression to reduce suicide risk among older adults.

In today’s society older adults are at risk for isolation, loneliness, and depression as their family members move away and they leave the workforce.  A recent study of Santa Clara County older adult participants in congregate nutrition programs found that the primary reason for participation in the program is socialization.84  In 2006, 16.2% of Santa Clara County adults age 65 and older reported having one or more days per week when their mental health was not good.85 Warning Signs ‐ National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
There are a few warning signs that clearly indicate that someone is struggling with the decision to injure themselves:
ƒ Threatening to hurt or kill oneself or talking about wanting to hurt or kill oneself.
ƒ Looking for ways to kill oneself by seeking access to firearms, available pills, or other means.
ƒ Talking or writing about death, dying, or suicide when these actions are out of the ordinary for the person.

However, many warning signs go unrecognized by others or are minimized by the people who sense that there is something wrong with the person exhibiting these signs:
ƒ Repeated expressions of hopelessness, helplessness, or desperation.
ƒ Seeing no reason for living or having no sense of purpose in life. ƒ Making threats.

If someone you know or love is exhibiting worrying behaviors, symptoms, or choices that are a change and these changes remain for more than a period of a few days, then you can help by asking them how they are feeling.  Often people recognize one or two “odd” things/ changes, but don’t ever consider suicide as a possibility.  Whatever the manner someone you know or love is showing worrying behaviors or thoughts, the best thing loved ones can do is ask “Are you thinking about suicide as an option?”  Many people fear that by asking that they might be “suggesting” suicide to the person.  On the contrary, it allows a person who is considering it an opportunity to ask share their feelings, find that someone else really cares, and seek help.  By asking you can help them consider other options, such as calling a crisis hotline, seek help from a doctor, faith leader, or mental health clinician.

National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
1‐800‐273‐TALK (8255) or
1‐800‐273‐TALK (8255) press 1 for Veterans

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 43 of 136 In addition, in Santa Clara County, one‐fourth of seniors are also caregivers.  Caregivers are at high risk for depression, with approximately 11% of full‐time professional caregivers reporting a major depressive episode in the past year compared to 7% for all occupations.86  Studies show that 16% of caregivers report a decline in their health after taking on the caregiver role, and about half of caregivers who care for someone with Alzheimer’s disease develop psychological distress.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Individuals.  Depression and suicide also appear to significantly affect members of the LGBT community.  A Santa Clara County 2005 Lesbian Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Needs Assessment and Report on Emotional Well‐Being and Mental Health was conducted and prepared by the Billy DeFrank LGBT Center.  Among respondents, 22% stated that within the past year they needed help for depression and 7% said they needed suicide prevention help.

Military Personnel—Active Duty, National Guard, Reservists, and Veterans.  Although local statistics on mental illness and co‐occurring disorders among veterans are scarce (i.e., the Mental Health Department does not capture data on veteran status), the high incidence of mental illness among veterans is well documented by other sources.  The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Veterans Resource Center reports that more than 100,000 combat veterans sought help for mental illness since the start of the war in Afghanistan in 2001, about one in seven of those who have left active duty since then, according to VA records.  Almost half were PTSD cases.87 The total of mental health cases among war veterans grew by 58% from 63,767 on June 30, 2006, to 100,580 on June 30, 2007, VA records show.  The mental health issues include PTSD, drug and alcohol dependency, and depression.88
Recent data from the Defense Medical Surveillance System from self‐assessments since 2005 of service members who served in Iraq show that 50% of US Army National Guardsmen and some 45% of US Army and Marine reservists have reported mental health concerns.89  Of all those using VA health care, 30% suffer from depressive symptoms, two to three times the rate of the general population.90
Again, it is critical to review statistics about depression with the knowledge that research has shown up to 90% of people who kill themselves have depression and/or another diagnosable mental or substance abuse disorder with a depressive component.91  With this in mind, it is particularly alarming to recognize that more American adults suffer from depression (14.8 million)92  than coronary heart disease (7 million), cancer (6 million) and AIDS (200,000) combined.93
Suicide Risk and Alcohol Consumption
In Santa Clara County, 17.6% of adults responding to the Public Health Department’s Behavioral Risk Factor Survey engaged in binge drinking within the previous 30 days, and 2.7% of the respondents’ answers classified them as heavy drinkers or at risk of heavy drinking patterns.94

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 44 of 136 Among the many other reasons this is worrisome (liver and heart disease, increased chances of certain cancers, etc.), alcohol dependence is an important risk factor for suicidal behavior.

Suicide completers have high rates of positive blood alcohol, and intoxicated people are more likely to attempt suicide using more lethal methods.  Further, alcohol may be a significant factor in suicides among individuals with no previous psychiatric history.95  It has been found that alcohol intoxication increases suicide risk up to 90 times, in comparison with abstinence.96 Alcohol is involved in an estimated 30% of suicides.97  Alcohol causes depressed mood, lowers inhibitions, and impairs judgment, any or all of which may make vulnerable people more likely to act on suicidal plans.  These same factors (lowered inhibition and impaired judgment) are also associated with domestic violence and abuse, other factors that are believed to increase the likelihood that suicide will occur.

Suicide Risk Factors and Warning Signs

Experts tell us that there are many circumstances
that can contribute to someone's decision to end
his/her life, but a person's feelings about those
circumstances are more important than the
circumstances themselves.  All people who consider
suicide feel that life is unbearable.  They have an
extreme sense of hopelessness, helplessness, and
desperation.  In addition, with some types of mental
illness, people may hear voices or have delusions
which prompt them to kill themselves.  If you or
someone you know experiences these, there are
services that can provide support and guidance:

National Suicide Prevention Lifeline‐ 1‐800‐273‐TALK
(8255) and Santa Clara County’s Suicide and Crisis
Services (SACS) 24‐Hour Crisis Hotline: Toll‐Free 1‐
855‐278‐4204.

The U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA) Suicide Prevention
Resource Center identifies three categories of risk
factors: biopsychosocial, environmental, and
sociocultural.  SAMHSA literature stresses the
importance of understanding these well‐documented
risk factors because the impact of some risk factors
can clearly be reduced by certain interventions (i.e.,
medication for depression).  Other risk factors cannot
be changed (i.e., a previous suicide attempt),
however, awareness by friends and family of the
heightened risk, particularly during periods of
SAMSHA* Categories of Risk
Biopsychosocial Risk Factors
ƒ Mental disorders, particularly mood disorders,
schizophrenia, anxiety disorders, and certain
personality disorders
ƒ Alcohol and other substance use disorders
ƒ Hopelessness
ƒ Impulsive and/or aggressive tendencies
ƒ History of trauma or abuse
ƒ Some major physical illnesses
ƒ Previous suicide attempt
ƒ Family history of suicide
Environmental Risk Factors
ƒ Job or financial loss
ƒ Relationship or social loss
ƒ Easy access to lethal means
ƒ Local clusters of suicide that have a
contagious influence
Socio­Cultural Risk Factors
ƒ Lack of social support and sense of isolation
ƒ Stigma associated with help‐seeking
behaviors
ƒ Barriers to accessing health care, especially
mental health and substance abuse treatment
ƒ Certain cultural and religious beliefs (for
instance, the belief that suicide is a noble
resolution of a personal dilemma, the family
can work this out alone)
ƒ Exposure to the influence of others who have
died by suicide, including through the media
*Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 45 of 136 recurrence of significant stressful life events, should lead to strengthened social support.

In addition to risk factors, a number of organizations devoted to suicide prevention publish lists of warning signs, with the objective of helping people recognize common indicators in order that they can offer support and assistance that will cause the person to reconsider their suicidal plans.  Among the many such organizations that have developed warning sign lists are Suicide.org, American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, SAVE (Suicide Awareness Voices of Education), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Injury Center, American Association of Suicidology, and the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline.

Factors That May Protect Against Suicide
Protective factors buffer individuals from suicidal thoughts and behavior.  To date, protective factors have not been studied as extensively or rigorously as risk factors.  Identification and understanding of protective factors are, however, equally as important as research concerning risk factors.  Identified protective factors against suicide are:
ƒ Effective clinical care for mental, physical, and substance use disorders ƒ Easy access for a variety of clinical interventions and support for help‐seeking ƒ Restricted access to highly lethal means of suicide
ƒ Strong connections to
family and community
support
ƒ Support through ongoing
medical and mental health
care relationships
ƒ Skills in problem solving,
conflict resolution, and
nonviolent handling of
disputes
ƒ Cultural and religious
beliefs that discourage
suicide and support self‐
preservation.98
Young at Heart
I am 65 years old and I have been severely depressed for at least 60 of them. My parents have been positive I carried some "family genetic defect that goes back for over 120 years."  They said as much to me and calling me a “nasty little son of a bitch”.  They abused me emotionally and sexually and made me feel responsible for it and eventually made me available to a homosexual man.  I never was able to overcome the personal stigma and emotional breakage I suffered then or the power my mother held over me until I was almost 60 when I finally gave up and tried to kill myself.  I suffered in every way possible during those years—not being able to finish college, and being unable to hold a decent job for many years.  I had to rely on my parents for support, which only helped me in one way. My mother kept me in virtual servitude, even when I finally did get a job.

The gist of this is that the emotional breakdown I suffered so many years ago lasted until I was past 60 when, to get away my horrific memories and the constant badgering of my mother, I made two nearly completed suicide attempts, which finally got me into the Barbara Aarons Wing at Valley Med Center and into quality psychiatric care.  I even "graduated" from Catholic Charities' FSP Older Adult program almost a year ago.  I finally learned that I was not responsible for the things that happened to me and that I might just have been sane in an insane world or family.  I am well, with my medication and occasional adjustments to it.  Now, I am a 65 year old adolescent looking forward to life.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 46 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 47 of 136 IV. Review and Summary of Local Needs

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 48 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 49 of 136 IV. Review and Summary of Local Needs
The committee and staff members’ research on suicide risk factors, populations at high risk, available resources, and effective programs is consistent with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention’s Best Practices Registry recommendation for a data‐driven planning process that “typically will involve multiple stakeholders in a process of assessing local needs, assets, and readiness, and choosing interventions that match local problems and circumstances.” Local Needs across the Lifespan
The SPAC members agreed to utilize age groupings that worked well in the Mental Health Department’s Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) planning processes.  These groups are:

1. Children and Youth Ages 0 through 15

2. Youth and Young Adults Ages 16 through 25

3. Adults Ages 26 through 59

4. Older Adults Ages 60 and over

5. Strategies Applicable Across Age Groups.

The charge of the SPAC was to examine the risk factors most prevalent within each of the age groups that may contribute to the consideration or decision to take one’s own life; second, to match each of these age groups with targeted high risk sub‐groups or “priority populations” among those age groups based on the data review; and third to recommend strategies most appropriate to diminish risk among that population group/s in the context of Santa Clara County’s demographics.  A simple “logic model” was utilized for the work:

The SPAC members devoted a portion of each meeting to discussions in break‐out groups by these age categories.  For each age category, the Identified Needs and Concerns were derived from discussion of known suicide risk factors and identification by committee members of the highest priority needs and concerns to be addressed in Santa Clara County.  Likewise, the Recommended Priority Populations reflect examination of data and decisions about which groups within each population category are at highest risk or highest need for focused prevention and intervention efforts.

Finally, the Recommended Strategies were developed to respond to the Recommended Priority Populations and were selected based upon reviews of effective and promising programs and the insights and expertise of the SPAC members.  While priority populations were the focus, it was with the understanding that prevention strategies that reduce the suicide risk for high‐risk groups also will provide the benefit to the general population.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 50 of 136 Children and Youth Ages 0 through 15

1.     Identified Needs and Concerns
ƒ Inadequate sense of control in a life phase when youth have limited control over their lives ƒ Difficulty accessing available mental health services, education and support to prevent substance abuse ƒ Lack of strong resiliency skills to cope with failure and disappointment, bullying, and breakups ƒ Inadequate defined support, connections to community, unconditional acceptance, and sense of communal responsibility for safety
ƒ Low feelings are perceived as abnormal
ƒ Lack of self‐esteem, sense of accomplishment, and sense of hope ƒ Lack of respect for peers, adults, and themselves

2.     Recommended Priority Populations
Children and youth experiencing:
ƒ Academic difficulties; changing schools; life milestones ƒ Immigration concerns; refugee experience; acculturation stress; linguistic and/or cultural differences ƒ Trauma (sexual, physical, emotional, exposure to violence) ƒ Suicide of friends; suicide attempts; mental illness; substance abuse ƒ Separation from family; homelessness
ƒ Juvenile justice/foster care system involvement
ƒ Gender identity issues—lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning ƒ Neglect and/or without nurturing adult

3.      Recommended Strategies
ƒ Accessible mental health counselors in schools
ƒ Screenings of youth for risk of suicide and other mental health concerns ƒ Targeted counseling for youth who have lost a loved one to suicide ƒ Enhanced mental health resources, school curriculum, and parent initiatives ƒ Identify coping mechanisms, access points, and connectors for youth to address life challenges ƒ Programs to protect youth from social and geographic isolation and barriers to peer interaction ƒ Programs that teach resiliency
ƒ Programs and services that enable children and youth to cope with failure and disappointment, bullying, and breakups
ƒ Training for those who interact with at risk youth (community leaders, clinicians, physicians, family members, police, teachers, peers, and others)
ƒ Accessible, youth‐centered crisis line; and single, countywide access point/telephone number for youth at‐risk
ƒ Provide teens with support groups for youth dealing with teen suicide ƒ Provide prevention opportunities: Youth to become engaged in public service; school staff to be dynamic and caring; youth centers; develop students’ own skills to deal with emotional challenges. ƒ Educate parents and foster parents to recognize a child’s emotional needs and know the resources available to assist when child is in crisis.
ƒ Publicly recognize individuals who connect people at risk of suicide to resources ƒ Ensure post‐incident care for individual and family after a 5150 episode (forced admission for psychiatric observation)

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 51 of 136 Youth and Young Adults Ages 16 through 25

1.     Identified Needs and Concerns
ƒ Sense of physical and emotional isolation from family, social network and/or peers ƒ Stigma associated with mental health and substance abuse services and suicide prevention ƒ Inadequate identification of mental health issues by self and others (caregivers, medical providers, etc.) ƒ Paucity of service resources and difficulty accessing age‐appropriate and linguistically available services (inadequate referrals, poor connections, barriers to qualify, difficult to afford, language barriers) ƒ Transitioning between being dependent on others to being financially independent without an adequate support network

2.     Priority Populations
Young people experiencing:
ƒ Suicide of friends; previous attempts; thoughts of suicide ƒ Academic difficulties; immigration concerns; refugee experience; acculturation stress; linguistic and/or cultural differences
ƒ Transition from dependence to financial and personal independence, regardless of  educational level or pursuits
ƒ Trauma (sexual, physical, emotional, exposure to violence) ƒ Mental illness; substance abuse; co‐occurring conditions ƒ Homelessness; alienation from family
ƒ Juvenile/adult criminal justice involvement; transitioning from incarceration to reintegrating with society ƒ Foster care system involvement
ƒ Gender identity issues—lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning

3.     Recommended Strategies
ƒ Screening and timely intervention of those at risk of suicide ƒ School‐based, culturally relevant intervention services, including consultation for educators and parents, and peer to peer support
ƒ Peer stipend program for youth to promote intervention and treatment services ƒ Training, support and educational materials for parents, partners, and family members and educators regarding safe handling of young adult life challenges and crises (Example: educational suicide help hotline)
ƒ Accessible and comfortable spaces for adults at‐risk of suicide, such as a mobile crisis unit, satellite self‐ help centers, and/or a community lounge space
ƒ Age‐appropriate crisis hotline
ƒ Support groups for youth dealing with teen suicide
ƒ Prevention opportunities, such as youth becoming engaged in public service; school staff to be dynamic and caring; youth centers; other ways for students to develop skills to deal with emotional challenges ƒ Previous attempters to share their stories to encourage others to seek help and have hope for improved life satisfaction
ƒ Public recognition of  individuals who connect people at risk of suicide to resources ƒ Post‐incident care for individuals and families after a 5150 episode (forced admission for psychiatric observation)

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 52 of 136 Adults Ages 26 through 59

1.     Identified Needs and Concerns
ƒ Inadequate identification of mental health issues by self and others (peers, medical providers, etc.) ƒ Paucity of service resources and peer support strategy assistance as well as difficulty accessing available services
ƒ Stress associated with life transitions, life events and trauma ƒ Stigma associated with mental health and substance abuse services and suicide prevention ƒ Cultural perspectives on mental health challenges and suicide ƒ Lack of safe welcoming places and opportunities to ask for assistance and services

2.     Priority Populations
Adults experiencing:
ƒ Decreased functioning, isolation, disabilities or poor health ƒ Trauma (sexual, physical, emotional, exposure to violence) ƒ Suicide of friends; suicide attempts
ƒ Mental illness; substance abuse; and co‐occurring conditions ƒ Loss of income and/or a loved one
ƒ Criminal justice system involvement
ƒ Homelessness
ƒ Gender identity issues: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning ƒ Veterans

3.     Recommended Strategies
ƒ Screening and assessments for risk of suicide
ƒ Support for adults at risk of suicide
ƒ Tools to safely handle life challenges and manage crises, such as cognitive‐behavioral theory and thought stopping.
ƒ Accessible counseling and crisis services
ƒ Mobile crisis unit
ƒ Self‐help centers in communities
ƒ Training, support and educational materials for friends, family members and employers regarding safe handling of personal challenges and crises, (Example: educational suicide help hotline) ƒ Previous attempters sharing their stories to encourage others to seek help and have hope for improved life satisfaction.
ƒ Collaboration between military personnel, veterans organizations and the Veterans Administration to make sure all veterans receive services and to design, implement and coordinate the most effective possible services
ƒ Work with business leaders and organizations to promote mental health awareness and education ƒ Public recognition of individuals who connect people at risk of suicide to resources ƒ Post‐incident care for individuals and families after a 5150 episode (forced admission for psychiatric observation)

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 53 of 136 Older Adults Ages 60 and Above

1.  Identified Needs and Concerns
ƒ Inadequate identification of mental health issues by self and others (caregivers, medical providers, etc.) ƒ Paucity of service resources and difficulty accessing available services (inadequate referrals, poor connections, barriers to qualify, difficult to afford, lack of transportation) ƒ Loss or diminishment of independence, role, and physical health; loss of loved ones; physical difficulty in getting to services
ƒ Stigma associated with mental health and substance abuse services and suicide prevention ƒ Cultural perspectives on death and dying; differing definitions of a life of value; and cultural taboos against discussing end of life
ƒ Psycho‐social stressors can lead to increased risk not only of suicide but of homicide‐suicides

2.   Priority Populations
Older Adults who are:
ƒ Caucasian males
ƒ Over 75
ƒ Isolated or grieving (widows/widowers), experiencing a loss in relationships or other significant change ƒ Experiencing a loss of sustainable income and/or personal resources ƒ Functioning poorly, have disabilities or poor health
ƒ Experiencing immigration concerns; refugee experience; acculturation stress; linguistic and/or cultural differences
ƒ Coping with trauma (sexual, physical, emotional, exposure to violence, veteran) ƒ Mentally ill; abusing medication, drugs, or alcohol

3.   Recommended Strategies
ƒ Education, informing materials, and consultation support to primary care providers ƒ Depression screening, referral, linkage and follow‐up services through primary care providers ƒ Accessible, age‐appropriate counseling and treatment services ƒ Accessible senior‐focused crisis line; and single, countywide access point/telephone number ƒ Home visitation follow‐up services and linkage of homebound seniors to services ƒ Senior‐focused intervention for depression, death and dying issues ƒ Public recognition of individuals who connect people at risk of suicide to resources ƒ Post‐incident care for individuals and families after a 5150 episode (forced admission for psychiatric observation)

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 54 of 136 Cross‐Cutting All Ages

1.     Identified Needs and Concerns
ƒ Paucity of service resources and difficulty accessing available services ƒ Difficulty accessing available mental health services, education and support to prevent substance abuse ƒ Stigma associated with mental health and substance abuse services and suicide prevention ƒ Cultural perspectives on mental health challenges and suicide ƒ Lack of safe of welcoming places and opportunities to ask for assistance and services

2.     Priority Populations
Individuals experiencing:
ƒ Trauma (sexual, physical, emotional, exposure to violence) ƒ Suicide of friends; suicide attempts
ƒ Mental illness; substance abuse; and co‐occurring conditions ƒ Juvenile/criminal justice system involvement
ƒ Immigration concerns; refugee experience; acculturation stress; linguistic and/or cultural differences ƒ Homelessness; significant loss of social and/or economic support ƒ Gender identity issues: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning ƒ Transitions

3.     Recommended Strategies
ƒ Screening and referral resources in primary care and other caregiving settings ƒ Training for professionals, service providers and community members on identification and response to individuals at risk
ƒ Crisis hotline and single, countywide access point/telephone number ƒ Accessible, affordable and appropriate crisis counseling and support services ƒ Mobile crisis unit
ƒ Self‐help centers in communities
ƒ Consultation phone services
ƒ Ensure post‐incident care for individuals and families after a 5150 episode (forced admission for psychiatric observation)
ƒ Public recognition of individuals who connect people at risk of suicide to resources

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 55 of 136 Additional Strategies:  Community Education and Information The committee recognized the importance of broadly increasing knowledge of the risk factors and warning signs for suicide while promoting help‐seeking.  By enhancing awareness of sources of help and reducing stigma associated with seeking help, these activities should prevent deaths by suicides as well as self‐injury while trying to die by suicide.  Increased knowledge has been shown to create substantial change.  Mothers Against Drunk Driver’s (MAAD) success in changing drunk driving from a person or family’s secret shame into a community responsibility with their “Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk” campaign is the recommended model for Santa Clara County’s suicide prevention public education campaign.

This strategy will include one universal message for the entire community.  In addition, other targeted measures will be developed to engage smaller groups targeting youth, older adults, different language speakers, etc.

An educational campaign targeting improved physician assessment for suicidal risk and management of that risk also is recommended for implementation.  Suicide data highlighted many areas of special concern.  One example is data showing that a large portion of elderly persons who die by suicide had seen a health care professional within a relatively short period of time prior to their death.

A key concern that was raised by the committee is that in implementing an AdCouncil type public awareness campaign, these activities should be linguistically and culturally appropriate for our diverse community.  It also should be broad in the means used to communicate.  Youth and young adults are more receptive to internet technologies and social networking.  For seniors, radio or television may be the media of choice.  Some immigrant groups get their information primarily from foreign language radio, television and press.  Others look to daily newspapers or listen to radio.  Whatever approach is used, consideration for preferences, including social media, will be considered to most effectively reach the widest possible audience.

Additional Strategies: Communication Practices
In addition to reviewing needs of populations from a lifespan perspective, the committee members explored other critical areas that must be addressed in order to implement an effective suicide prevention effort in Santa Clara County.  The Committee benefitted from several members who had been addressing the youth suicides in Palo Alto.  Lessons learned include that for any comprehensive suicide prevention campaign to work, two essential elements should be included in the communication practices:  1) a coordinated communication strategy, and 2) educating all forms of media—television, radio, print, social network, internet, and other forms of media concerning the importance of adherence to the guidelines for reporting deaths by suicide, using the recommendations from the Suicide Prevention Resource Center’s Safe Reporting Guidelines.

While the community education and awareness campaign is its own strategy with the dual

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 56 of 136 objectives of 1) increasing community awareness of suicide, and 2) encouraging people to seek help for themselves or loved ones, in is important that it include the establishment of a body that will have oversight and coordinating responsibility of the Communication Practices Work Group.  The group’s role will be to 1) ensure the development of defined, clear, concise, paradigm‐shifting message for all efforts; 2) ensure adherence to the guidelines for responsible communication on issues pertaining to suicide and that messaging is consistent across all media campaigns and efforts; 3) coordinate education on reporting suicide; and 4) establish and maintain a permanent website that is available for all to visit at www.sccgov.org/spac .

Media Education and Engagement
By and large, the bulk of the work will relate to
educating the media and formal public
communication.

Research has shown that graphic,
sensationalized or romanticized descriptions of
suicide deaths in the news and social media and
the internet can contribute to suicide contagion,
sometimes referred to as “copycat” suicides,
“media‐related suicide contagion,” or “cluster
suicides,” and other similar terms.  In addition to
the danger of this phenomenon, media reports
on suicide can also be a source of
misinformation, for example, when suicide is
attributed to a single event, such as the loss of a
job or a relationship with no mention of
underlying factors such as the individual’s
depression, substance abuse, or lack of access to
treatment for these conditions.

In contrast, responsible coverage of suicide can
educate wide audiences about the likely causes
of suicide, its warning signs, trends in suicide
rates, recent treatment advances and other ways
suicide can be prevented.  Stories about well‐known figures who have successfully sought treatment for depression, alcoholism and other conditions that convey suicide risk can also be a powerful impetus for readers to address such issues in their own lives.

Additional Strategies: Policy and Governance Advocacy
There is considerable infrastructure to be created for a prevention campaign to function effectively and for effective monitoring and evaluation activities to proceed.  However, the development of this countywide infrastructure depends upon advocacy for supportive, enabling policies and legislation.

Safe Media Reporting on Suicide
Guidelines:  What to Do
Always include a referral phone number
and information about local crisis
intervention services.

Emphasize recent treatment advances for
depression and other mental illness.

Include stories of people whose treatment
was life­saving or who overcame despair
without attempting suicide.

Interview a mental health professional
who is knowledgeable about suicide and
the role of treatment or screening for
mental disorders as a preventive
strategy.

Emphasize actions that communities can
take to prevent suicides.

Report on activities coordinated by your
local or state suicide prevention coalition.

Guidelines provided by the
Suicide Prevention Resource Center
www.sprc.org
1‐877‐GET SPRC (1‐877‐438‐7772)

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 57 of 136 Individuals function within a larger system beyond their families.  For example, children spend their days in schools, child care centers, youth centers, juvenile justice system, or alone.  Adults spend the majority of their days at work, in higher education or vocational training schools, in the criminal justice system or alone.  Without the support and active participation of these larger systems in adopting simple measures, any prevention campaign would be seriously hampered.  Simple measures such as creating, adopting, and implementing policies regarding the awareness and identification of individuals in emotional crisis or dealing with a mental illness is a simple, effective step.

Again, the planning committee recognized that this will be an ongoing activity and will require additional investments of time and resources for successful implementation.

Additional Strategies: Data Monitoring and Evaluation
As the SPAC reviewed national information about suicide and suicide risk, it became clear that nowhere in our nation is detailed information available at the local level in a way that provides policy makers and stakeholders with the amount of information needed to accurately describe the profile of who is at risk of suicide.  Further, there is no clear way in which those suicide prevention efforts that
currently are in place, or may
be implemented with
approval of this plan, can be
evaluated for their
effectiveness without a
clearly defined, measureable
monitoring and evaluation
process in place.

The data monitoring strategy
will include overseeing the
coordination, collection, and
reporting of useful data in
close partnership with the
Medical Examiner and Coroner’s Office.  With the large, dissimilar number of agencies that are mandated to report self injury and “proven” suicides, there is much work to be done to agree on basic data needed; establish or adapt existing processes for reporting, collecting, and analyzing that data in a timely manner; and monitor data to evaluate the success of these efforts.

Local Suicide Resources: A Range of Services
As a part of the process of determining local priorities, the SPAC assessed available local resources.  Several Santa Clara County Mental Health Department programs were identified as contributing to the reduction of suicides.  Moreover, these programs already are consistent with the recommendations of the California Strategic Plan on Suicide Prevention.  A full listing I don’t want to die: The good work of SACS
Bob (a SACS volunteer) took a call from a teenage girl who wanted to be called Zee (not the caller’s actual name).  Zee was extremely distraught because she was having problems with her mother who was mentally ill.

Zee called because she had just consumed an entire bottle of medications.

Zee was hysterical because she decided that she didn’t want to die after all, but she was too afraid to go downstairs and tell her father that she had taken all of her medications.  After gaining Zee’s trust and calming her down, Bob was able to convince Zee to go downstairs with the empty bottle and to turn it upside down in front of her father so he could see that all of the medications were gone.  Bob told her that she didn’t need to say anything to him.  Then Bob asked Zee to call him back after she had done this. Zee called back about 10 minutes later and told Bob that she and her parents were in the car on their way to the hospital’s emergency room.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 58 of 136 of agencies, programs and services that interact with individuals who die by suicide are listed in Attachment 2 in the Appendix.  Some of the programs are specific to suicide prevention, such as the County‐operated Suicide and Crisis Services (SACS), a 24‐hour hotline staffed by a combination of paid and unpaid volunteers that respond to 35,000 calls per year from the community.  As is common with many crisis hotlines, a small percentage of the calls are for immediate suicide interventions.  The bulk of calls are for non‐suicidal crisis help and information, which helps to prevent individuals from reaching the point of considering suicide.

SACS also provides support groups and other support programs in collaboration with community‐based programs operated by Kara and the Bill Wilson Center’s Centre for Living with Dying.  The EMQ Crisis Team provides in the field crisis intervention services to children and adolescents; and the County’s Emergency Psychiatric Services (EPS) provides 24‐hour emergency intervention to individuals who require immediate psychiatric treatment, often meeting involuntary treatment criteria as “danger to self.” Pending and Future Additional Prevention Resources
In addition to these existing programs, the County's efforts to reduce suicides will be further enhanced when the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC) facilitates the implementation of the Statewide Suicide Prevention Program.  The County will benefit though previously approved assignment of local MHSA funds to this statewide effort.  Approximately $13.7 million in local MHSA funds have been assigned for several statewide projects, including Suicide Prevention, Stigma and Discrimination Reduction, and School Mental Health Initiatives.

In addition, the Mental Health Department is currently implementing several projects approved by the MHSOAC in our local Prevention and Early Intervention Plan.  Those projects include:
ƒ “Early Onset of Mental Illness” – a prevention and early intervention program focusing on the needs of transition‐age youth who may be experiencing at risk mental states (ARMS) or the onset of serious psychiatric illness with psychosis (e.g., schizophrenia).

One study found that 15% of participants in an early psychosis program attempted suicide before beginning treatment.
ƒ Primary Care Behavioral Health Integration ‐ A project to integrate early intervention behavioral health services within primary care clinics to meet the emerging needs of adults and older adults.  The project will use the Improving Mood—Promoting Access in Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) model.
ƒ Outreach and Engagement – a grassroots "gatekeeper" and mental health literacy program that trains key community members to be more aware of and responsive to early signs and symptoms of emotional distress.
ƒ Community Investment Initiative ‐ Programs that enable underserved communities to develop and implement campaigns to reduce stigma and discrimination concerning mental illnesses within their communities so that individuals are more willing to promptly seek help.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 59 of 136 Moreover, these are only a few of the programs that will be included in the County's overall Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) Plan.  Through the PEI Plan, the Mental Health Department intends to bring mental health awareness into the lives of all members of the community and move the mental health system toward a "help‐first" approach.  The County's plan also will be coordinated with several state‐administered, statewide PEI projects, including Suicide Prevention, Student Mental Health Initiative, Stigma and Discrimination Reduction, and Ethnically Specific Interventions.  Together, statewide projects and local county PEI plans will create a system of prevention and early intervention services throughout the state.

What Experts Recommend
“Prevention efforts should ultimately reduce risk factors and promote protective factors.  In addition, prevention should address all levels that influence suicide: individual, relationship, community, and society.  Effective prevention strategies are necessary to promote awareness about suicide and to foster a commitment to social change.”99  Santa Clara County’s Suicide Prevention Plan, when taken as a coordinated and interwoven set of strategies and efforts, will act in concert to prevent suicide.  Individuals as well as organizations will have a role to play to contribute to the success of this effort.  Our entire community as a whole has an active choice—to value each life and recognize that even one life lost to suicide was a preventable death.

Best Practices—Evolving Knowledge
The Suicide Prevention Resource Center (SPRC), in collaboration with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP), maintains a Best Practices Registry (BPR).  This project is funded by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).  The purpose of the BPR is to identify, review, and disseminate information about best practices that address specific objectives of the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention.  The BPR has three sections:

Section I: Evidence‐Based Programs (including 1a: SAMHSA’s National Registry of Evidence‐ Based Programs and Practices; and 1b: SPRC/AFSP Evidence‐Based Practices); Section II: Expert and Consensus Statements; and Section III: Adherence to Standards.

Attachment 3 in the Appendix outlines ten prevention programs that address suicide and are currently listed on the NREPP registry:  National Strategy for Suicide Prevention Ten Prevention Programs.  In addition to the ten listed programs, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention: Suicide Prevention Resource Center’s Evidence‐Based Practices list contains an additional two.

As we make gains in breaking the taboo of suicide, we have an opportunity to learn more and contribute to the nascent and ever changing field of suicide prevention best practices.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 60 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 61 of 136 V. What We Recommend:

Five Overarching and Interconnected Prevention Strategies

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 62 of 136

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 63 of 136 V. What We Recommend:

Five Overarching and Interconnected Prevention Strategies The SPAC has identified five overarching recommendations, referred to as strategies that comprise the core of the Suicide Prevention Plan.  These recommendations are born out of the values of the committee, the data and information reviewed and presented in this report, the personal experiences shared, and the feedback from the public forum.  They are consistent with the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention Best Practices Registry suggestion, “In general, practitioners will achieve greater results by creating comprehensive approaches involving multiple layers of coordinated components.”
Strategy One ‐   Implement and coordinate suicide prevention and intervention programs and services for targeted high risk populations
Strategy Two ‐   Implement a community education and information campaign to increase public awareness of suicide and suicide prevention
Strategy Three ‐ Develop local communication “best practices” to improve media coverage and public dialogue related to suicide
Strategy Four ‐   Implement policy and governance advocacy to promote systems change in suicide awareness and prevention
Strategy Five ‐ Establish a robust data collection and monitoring system to increase the scope and availability of suicide‐related data and to evaluate suicide prevention efforts
While the basis for each strategy is summarized in the previous assessment section of this report, specific preliminary objectives for each strategy are outlined below.  It is expected that once the broad strategies recommended in this plan are approved, an implementation plan will be written for each strategy.  The implementation plan will further refine the objectives of each strategy as well as the steps to implementation and the budget requirements.

To ensure the successful project coordination and management, the Mental Health Department intends to hire a full‐time Suicide Prevention Coordinator and Liaison to State Office of Suicide Prevention.  That selection process has begun, and it is expected that someone will be hired for that role by August or September 2010.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 64 of 136 Strategy One – Implement Suicide Intervention Programs and Services for Targeted High Risk Populations
Desired Outcomes

1. Decrease in the number of completed suicide acts.

2. Decrease in the number of attempted suicides.

3. Increase in the availability of culturally and linguistically appropriate and affordable intervention services in a variety of venues.

4. Improved and earlier identification and engagement of people dealing with mental illness.

5. Improvement in referral relationships to access appropriate care.

6. Increase in help‐seeking behavior from individuals with mental illness and from those who are connected to individuals with mental illness.

7. Increase in support services to the family members and social network of individuals with mental health issues.

8. Improvement in quality of life for individuals and their loved ones who are dealing with mental illness.

9. Increase in diversity of services and programs that are tailored to high risk populations—youth, elders, internet, face‐to‐face.

Target Populations

1. Populations with highest risk of engaging in suicidal behavior (identified in section V.

Review and Summary of Local Needs)

2. Individuals supporting persons at risk of suicide, such as significant others, family members, caregivers, professionals, clergy/faith leaders

3. Key service providers, such as mental health clinicians and primary care physicians, clergy, faith leaders, law enforcement

4. Community members
Current Activities and Recent Gains
Independent of this committee’s activities, other agencies are working to reduce and eliminate suicide.  Discussed in more detail in Appendix 2, the following are summaries of ongoing intervention activities occurring in our county and possible next steps:
ƒ Suicide and Crisis Services (SACS).  This County program provides residents with access to a 24‐hour telephone hotline.  Operated primarily by 100 volunteers and with less than $90,000 in annual funding, the program fields over 35,000 calls annually from suicidal clients, concerned family members and other residents in crisis.  Approximately ten percent of calls are from individuals with suicide ideation.  Recommendation:

Evaluate if the community would be better served if SACS attained national Lifeline accreditation or whether to simply unify the three distinct phone numbers into one and expand the current program. [SACS consolidated its numbers to 1‐855‐278‐4204. Feb. 2011]

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 65 of 136 Strategy One ‐ Continued
ƒ Survivors of Suicide Group and grief /loss support programs operated by Kara and the Bill Wilson Center's Centre for Living with Dying.  Recommendation:  Identify how more groups can be established throughout the county and increase efforts to recruit moderators to provide this service.
ƒ SACS staff members provide training to various community organizations on suicide assessments and crisis intervention.  Due to repeated budgetary restrictions, available staff to provide such valuable training is very limited.  Recommendation:  Seek alternative means and additional funding sources to be able to double or triple current trainings.
ƒ County Mental Health Services.  This County program provides an array of mental health services to primarily Medi‐Cal beneficiaries and those who are uninsured.  Approximately 22,000 children, adolescents, young adults, adults and seniors receive services annually through a network of County‐operated and contracted programs.100  Services range from outreach, peer advocacy, and case management to clinical care and support in a variety of community, outpatient, residential and day programs.
ƒ Community‐based organizations (CBOs).  CBOs account for approximately half of the public mental health system’s capacity, and they are a key component of the entire public safety net.  These CBOs address county residents’ behavioral health needs, including mental health concerns that involve the risk of suicide.  The CBOs also leverage other funding sources and operate a variety of programs that address behavioral health needs that are not funded by the County Mental Health Department, such as the Status Offender Services network.
ƒ EMQ's Families First Child and Adolescent Mobile Crisis Program.  This program responds to the serious emotional trauma of minors, offering services in the home, at school and in the community.  The EMQ Team responds 24/7 and often facilitates hospitalization and/or crisis intervention services to suicidal children and youth with other community agencies for long‐ term care and assistance.  There is only one team that covers the entire county.

Recommendation: 1) Investigate how this model could be expanded or replicated by other agencies.  2) Identify how this model could be expanded to provide similar services to adults.
ƒ Emergency Psychiatric Services (EPS).  Operated at Valley Medical Center, EPS is the single psychiatric emergency receiving center in the county.  The program is key in responding to acute mental health crises that often involve risk of suicide.  The 24/7 EPS program provides intervention services to individuals experiencing acute psychiatric episodes and who may be a danger to themselves or others.  Annually, approximately 7,500 individuals arrive at EPS on “5150 holds,” brought by law enforcement officers and others.  The large majority of involuntary holds specify the “danger to self” criteria.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 66 of 136 Strategy One ‐ Continued
Mental Health Urgent Care (MHUC).  This voluntary, unlocked, County‐run program also provides residents with crisis intervention services.  Services at MHUC, which are available to walk‐ins, are provided daily from 8 am to 10 pm.  Clients, family members, law‐ enforcement agencies and other first responders are encouraged to use MHUC to meet the needs of individuals experiencing severe emotional or psychological distress, including thoughts of self‐harm.  Recommendation: Promote this service more broadly to increase utilization.
ƒ Police Crisis Intervention Training (CIT).  In partnership with law enforcement agencies, the MHD is continuing to enhance law enforcement officers’ abilities to manage crises involving mentally ill residents.  In addition to reducing the need for using deadly force, this program can save lives by giving officers tools they can use when encountering individuals who intend to lose their lives by intentionally threatening police officers (i.e., suicide by police).

Recommendation: 1) provide CIT training for cadets, and 2) collaborate with law enforcement to ensure that more officers receive Crisis Intervention Training (CIT). ƒ Golden Gateway.  In addition to providing intensive case management and therapy to severely mentally ill older adults, this program conducts extensive outreach to and mobile assessments of homebound or shut‐in seniors who would benefit from mental health services.  Golden Gateway’s services are important for preventing suicides in California.  Adults aged 75 and over have the highest rates of suicide (California Strategic Plan on Suicide Prevention, June 2008).
ƒ Self‐Help Centers.  These County programs offer drop‐in, self‐help and peer support for mental health consumers.  Three programs provided in North, Central and South County locations offer the opportunity for consumers to find support and compassion within a supportive peer‐run setting.
ƒ Ethnic and Cultural Community Advisory Committees (ECCACs).  Based on a similar philosophy to the self‐help centers, the ECCACs are family and consumer support teams from eight ethnic and cultural communities.
ƒ Gatekeeper Training.  This will provide training to individuals in the community to increase the community’s ability to refer friends and loved ones to appropriate resources at an earlier point in an individual’s emotional crisis.
ƒ Integrating Behavioral Health Services in Primary Care.  The Mental Health Department will announce a Request for Proposal to support integrating behavioral health services in community‐based, primary care settings by January 2011.  Service delivery should begin by July 2012 and is intended to impact 4,200 individuals a year.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 67 of 136 Strategy One ‐ Continued
ƒ Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) Project 3‐ Prevention and Early Intervention for Early Onset Psychosis (in Youth and Young Adults 16‐ 25).  This Request for Proposal was announced June 7, 2010.  Service delivery of early identification and treatment services should begin in October 2010.  It is intended to provide countywide intervention and treatment services to 30 new clients a year.

Recommended Actions
Convene an implementation committee to accomplish the following:
ƒ Conduct further research on specific practices for possible implementation and their costs ƒ Provide detailed analysis of available resources and service gaps ƒ Convene and implement a subcommittee for each age group ƒ Finalize recommended strategies
ƒ Develop process and performance metrics for recommended/adopted strategies ƒ Prioritize specific strategies in regard to available funding and leveraging opportunities ƒ Identify strategies to procure and implement funding for selected strategies ƒ Prepare strategic implementation plan to be informed by public process

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 68 of 136 Strategy Two – Implement a Community Education and Information Campaign to Increase Public Awareness of Suicide and Suicide Prevention
Desired Outcomes
The Community Education and Information Campaign will focus on achieving the following outcomes:

1. Increased awareness of mental health issues, including depression and suicide

2. Increased public awareness of suicide

3. Improved identification of people who are feeling suicidal

4. Improved public knowledge of how to respond to a person who is feeling suicidal

5. Increased awareness of how to engage in and access support services, grief counseling services, and postvention services

6. Decreased judgment or blame associated with suicidal thoughts and feelings Target Populations
This strategy involves a community‐wide suicide prevention and awareness campaign to reach:

1. General public of all ages

2. Medical providers and support staff

3. Mental health clinicians and support staff

4. Clergy and faith leaders

5. Caregivers

6. In‐home support workers and others who work with seniors and the disabled

7. Family members
Current Activities and Recent Gains
ƒ Assigned a temporary suicide prevention project coordinator and liaison to California Office of Suicide Prevention.  Recommendation: Mental Health Department hires a suicide prevention project coordinator/liaison to the California Office of Suicide Prevention. ƒ Improved communications with the Santa Clara County Medical Examiner‐Coroner’s Office with the Survivor’s of Suicide Program operated by the County, to ensure surviving families are better informed of available grief support services. ƒ Instituted a dedicated website to suicide prevention on the Mental Health Department’s website: www.sccgov.org/spac with a focus on informing the public of this effort and improving awareness.  Recommendation: Evaluate and determine the audience for the website, the main objectives for the website going forward, and the best manner to promote this website throughout the county.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 69 of 136 Strategy Two ‐ Continued
ƒ Promoted an existing youth‐focused (16‐24 years) suicide prevention website www.reachout.com.  Following the success of its Australian website, which proved instrumental in reducing the rate of youth suicide in Australia by more than half,101 the Inspire USA Foundation launched its American website from its San Francisco‐based offices in March 2010.  Reachout.com is an interactive website for young people that deals with coping with mental health problems; dealing with suicide and self‐harm; drugs, alcohol and tobacco; family relationships; friend and peer relationships; becoming independent; loss and grief; maintaining good health; romance, sexuality and pregnancy; school pressures; and violence.  The Executive Director was a guest speaker at one of the SPAC’s meetings and is eager to partner more in our county’s suicide prevention efforts. Recommendation:

Promote this website broadly.
ƒ Caltrain, an active partner in this effort, has agreed to make available advertising space on their trains, stations and buses for the specific use of this public education and awareness campaign. Recommendation: Work in close partnership with local transportation agencies, including VTA, to identify available means for communicating outreach message to ridership.  Also, forge a tri‐county or more partnership to share the cost of the outreach campaign, beginning with San Mateo and San Francisco Counties. ƒ Our county’s school districts and County Office of Education have been actively involved in the effort to reduce youth suicide and raise awareness among their staff on how to recognize students in emotional distress or crisis and how to intervene and provide support.

Recommendation: 1) Support schools in engaging their communities in dialogues about mental health and suicide prevention. 2) Track which school districts are adopting suicide prevention policies.
ƒ Enlisted clergy, other faith leaders and lay leaders in the faith community to join in this effort.  One of the committee’s members, Bernie (Deacon) Nojadera represented Interfaith Connections and related the committee’s goals, learning and activities to members of that group.  More concentrated work can be done.  Recommendation: Collaborate with the faith community to promote mental health awareness and suicide prevention in their ministry and outreach.
ƒ Conducted a well attended Suicide Prevention Public Forum to obtain public comments and suggestions about suicide prevention and how to develop greater community awareness.

Recommended Actions
ƒ Utilize multi‐media tools in health care settings to promote awareness of mental health issues and suicide.  Target Implementation Date: FY 2012 with award and implementation of Prevention and Early Intervention projects.
ƒ Support efforts such as Onyourmind.net, a youth‐oriented website that provides a safe and anonymous place for teens to get information and support from other teens.  Youth are able to talk about anything on their minds, including relationships, school, depression,

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 70 of 136 Strategy Two ‐ Continued
stress, suicide, friends, parents, cutting, identity, and health.  They also can submit a question to be answered on the Q&A page or connect to resources for additional information and support.
ƒ Enlist clergy, other faith leaders and lay leaders in the faith community to join in this community education and awareness effort. The elderly often have more regular contact with clergy and church members than with any other individuals or organizations.  Seniors have the highest church attendance rates across all age groups, and clergy often are the first professional groups to which people turn when they have personal problems.102 Moreover, clergy and other faith leaders are among the few whose responsibilities regularly take them into homes and care facilities.  Target Implementation Date: September 2009, after the Board of Supervisors has approved the Plan.
ƒ Build on current, successful MHSA‐supported efforts to coalesce the clergy and other faith leaders around efforts to better recognize and respond to emerging mental health needs and to recognize and combat signs of elder abuse, either caused by self‐neglect or perpetuated by others.  All of these endeavors recognize that Santa Clara County is one of eleven counties in California predicted to experience the greatest population growth among its seniors.103  Target Implementation Date: September 2009, after the Board of Supervisors has approved plan.
ƒ Enlist suicide attempt survivors, suicide survivors (individuals who have lost a loved one to suicide), and suicide prevention collaborative members to conduct a “Listening Campaign” at multiple locations throughout the county.  This follows the model implemented by the U.S. Army to solicit feedback on the emotional pulse of their communities.  Additionally, this activity encourages awareness and discussion of mental health issues, suicide prevention and available resources.  Recommendation: Kick off this effort after the Suicide Prevention Coordinator has been hired by the Mental Health Department. ƒ Gatekeeper Training.  There are many models available.  Recommendation:  Identify and adopt the version or versions that would be most effective for our county to serve dual functions: 1) increase awareness and identification of individuals in need or emotional duress; and 2) improve community involvement in seeking support for individuals in emotional crisis or need.
ƒ Recommendation: Create a Communications Plan Work Group, discussed in Strategy 3, to play an advisory role in the following Community Education and Information activities:
• Create, replicate and implement a variety of tools and techniques to better inform people about suicide, suicide prevention, and mental health awareness. • Explore feasibility of creating a new PSA campaign or utilize and promote existing PSAs.  For example, the AdCouncil has a current teen suicide prevention

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 71 of 136 Strategy Two ‐ Continued
campaign sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. • Ensure the Community Education and Information Campaign will include multi‐ media outlets as well as evaluating if new spots should be created or if we should promote and utilize existing campaigns.  For example, “We’ve Been There” is an existing television spot with a partner “We’ve Been There” radio spot.  “Angry Hurt Helped” and “Hopeless Lost Inspired” are some campaigns developed for print media.  Social networking sites, as well as outdoor and interactive elements will need additional messaging created or existing messaging identified to be considered for possible use. • Ensure leveraging of existing and available media productions that promote awareness.  For example: More Than Sad Films, produced by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) in partnership with the New York State Office of Mental Health.  This 25‐minute film and manual is part of an educational program to help teachers and other school personnel learn more about teen suicide and how they can play a role in its prevention. • Enlist a collaborative effort with our neighboring counties, San Mateo and San Francisco, to participate and perhaps leverage resources for a Silicon Valley‐wide multi‐media campaign.
ƒ Develop concise, clear messaging vehicles to quickly convey information. ƒ Give a voice to suicide attempt survivors and individuals who have lost a loved one to suicide (suicide survivors) so they can become a positive force in the community and prevent future suicides.
ƒ Educate systems that involve large populations on suicide prevention and response. ƒ Encourage and coordinate opportunities for groups to share cultural and familial perspectives on death and dying.

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 72 of 136 Strategy Three ‐ Develop Local Communication “Best Practices” to Improve Media Coverage and Public Dialogue Related to Suicide Desired Outcomes

1. Creation of a coordinated communication strategy that • Ensures the development of a clear, concise, paradigm‐shifting message for all outreach efforts;
• Ensures that the guidelines for responsible communication on issues pertaining to suicide are adhered to by media and agencies; and • Ensures consistency in public messaging.

2. Educate various sectors of our economy: for‐profit, government, non‐profit.

3. Increase knowledge in local media on the importance of responsible reporting about suicide as measured by adherence to Safe Reporting on Suicide guidelines (see page 56).

4. Obtain agreement and follow‐through among key media outlets (traditional and non‐traditional) to coordinate public news releases strategically to address periods when suicide risk is higher and to respond appropriately to suicide deaths, clusters, and suicide‐homicide deaths.

5. Obtain agreement and follow‐through among key media outlets (traditional and non‐traditional) to ensure the utilization of resource directories on local suicide prevention and crisis services in multiple languages.

6. Obtain agreement and follow‐through among key media outlets to ensure all materials are linguistically and culturally appropriate for Santa Clara County’s residents.

7. Maintain a dedicated suicide prevention website and clarification of its target audience and purpose.

Target Populations

1. Local media outlets—traditional and non‐traditional

2. Public Information Officers (PIOs) in government and business

3. Human resources departments, employee assistance services, unemployment offices, and Social Security Offices
Current Activities and Recent Gains
Fortunately, there are abundant, credible sources of information about concrete ways to improve the media coverage of suicides and reduce the rate of reporting activities precipitating additional suicides or attempts.  The result of a collaborative effort was the development and

Santa Clara County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan „ June 2010 Revised March 2011 Page 73 of 136 Strategy Three ‐ Continued
release of a consensus document, Reporting on Suicide: Recommendations for the Media104. ƒ National advocate for suicide prevention and member of the SPAC, Mary Ojakian, along with SPAC member Mark Simon, participated in Project Safety Net and helped to organize a round table discussion among several local publishers on the importance of adopting the guidelines on safe reporting on suicide.
ƒ A website dedicated to suicide prevention was established on the Mental Health Department’s website, www.sccgov.org/spac, listing resources and describing activities of the Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee.  Recommendation: A Suicide Prevention Project Coordinator should ensure that the website is in alignment with messaging defined by the Work Group and in alignment with best practices to the fullest extent possible. ƒ Assigned project coordination responsibilities to the liaison to the California Department of Mental Health’s Office of Suicide Prevention.

Recommended Actions
The Suicide Prevention Advisory Committee (SPAC) recommends the following activities to ensure an effective Communications Plan:

1. Convene a Communications Plan Committee, chartered to:
ƒ Develop a Communications Plan appropriate for the diverse residents of Santa Clara County.
ƒ Define one to three clear, concise, paradigm‐shifting priority messages (e.g., MADD’s “Friends don’t let friends drive drunk”).
ƒ Using local community input, tailor the above paradigm‐shifting messages for different targeted populations, i.e., language, age, etc. ƒ Educate media and local reporters about safer protocols on reporting suicide attempts and deaths.  The SPAC recommends the utilization of the “Safe Reporting on Suicide Guidelines,” prepared by the Suicide Prevention Resource Center.

These guidelines are recommended for promotion and utilization in Santa Clara County.  Dissemination of these guidelines should be one aspect of this strategy.

Engaging in discussions with each of the media outlets should be the emphasis. ƒ Consider and review the potential of existing efforts to raise awareness for possible inclusion in this strategy.  Some examples for consideration include a training workshop targeting reporters and media personnel offered by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP) and the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) “Picture This: Depression and Suicide Prevention,” a publication targeting media personnel. ƒ Consider fostering a broad coalition including neighboring counties that all share the Silicon Valley’s media communications, to include San Mateo and San Francisco Counties, to leverage funding and resources.