Memorandum
Office of the City Attorney
City of Palo Alto
This memorandum responds to a request by the authors of the above Colleagues Memo for a description of the law regarding Council Member compensation and Council’s options for increasing that compensation.
Current Law. The Charter provides that Council may receive compensation in amounts not to exceed those provided in state law. (Charter, Art. III, Sec. 17.) The Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) sets compensation at $1,000/month. (PAMC 2.04.360). The last update to council compensation was effective January 1, 2017. (Ord. 5304.) State law authorizes a maximum base monthly council member salary based on city population and authorizes annual increases according to a defined methodology. (See Gov. Code §36516.) In 2023, the state legislature adopted SB 329, which increased maximum authorized salary levels and created a second optional methodology for local city councils to increase salaries over time. Under the updated statute, a city of Palo Alto’s size may provide council members a monthly salary of $1,600/month, effective January 1, 2024. Thereafter, annual increases may be made in amounts not to exceed the greater of: (a) 5% of the existing salary for each calendar year since the Council last set council member salaries (noncompounded, see (89 Ops. Cal. Atty Gen. 159 (2006)); or (b) an amount equal to inflation since January 1, 2024 (CPI) but not to exceed 10 percent annually. (Gov. Code §36516.) Each increase must be made by ordinance, with findings demonstrating the need for the increase. Automatic increases are not allowed.
Under state law, a salary increase may only come into effect at the beginning of at least one member’s new term. (Gov. Code section 36516.5) In Palo Alto, new Council terms begin on January 1st of every odd-numbered year. (See Charter, Art. III, Sec. 2.) Compensation can be (and typically is) adjusted for all members of a council serving staggered terms whenever at least one member begins a new term of office.
State law also provides that council members may receive benefits from the city. Benefits are not counted towards the maximum allowable salary, provided that the same benefits are paid for and available to city employees. (Gov. Code § 36516 (d).)
Options for Increasing Compensation. Council has two options to increase council member compensation. Option 2 is available to Palo Alto because Palo Alto is a charter city, and council compensation is a municipal affair.
Council could choose one or the other of these options, or, could use option 1 followed by option 2.
Attachment A -
Memorandum On Council
Member Salaries
Item 13
Attachment A - Policy and
Services February Report
Including the December
Colleagues’ Memo and
Legal Analysis Memo
Regarding Council
Member Compensation
above SB 329 Guidelines
Item 13: Staff Report
Pg.
10 Packet Pg. 315 of 333
November 14, 2023
Option 1: Amend PAMC 2.04.360 to increase council member salary, currently $1,000/month, to an amount up to $1,600/month plus inflation from January 1, 2024 to the date of adoption (capped at 10%), with an effective date of January 1, 2025 at the earliest.
Option 2: Place a Charter amendment on the November 2024 ballot to delete the existing language that limits council member salary to amounts provided in state law and replace it with a local provision. Upon voter approval, amend PAMC 2.04.360 to increase salary according to the terms of the newly-amended Charter.
Attachment A -
Memorandum On Council
Member Salaries
Item 13
Attachment A - Policy and
Services February Report
Including the December
Colleagues’ Memo and
Legal Analysis Memo
Regarding Council
Member Compensation
above SB 329 Guidelines
Item 13: Staff Report
Pg.
11 Packet Pg. 316 of 333
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Human Resources
Meeting Date: March 11, 2024
Report #:2402-2699
TITLE
Discussion of Interview Process for City Auditor Selection; CEQA - Not a project
RECOMMENDATION
This item is intended to provide an opportunity for the City Council to discuss the process for interviewing and selecting the next City Auditor, including any potential referral to the Council Appointed Officers (CAO) Committee.
BACKGROUND
The Palo Alto Charter provides that the City Council appoint an Auditor who serves at the Council’s will. The Charter describes the Auditor’s key duties. (See Charter, Art. IV, sections 1 and
12.)
The Council outsourced internal auditing services after an extensive procurement process and executed a contract with Baker Tilly, effective October 1, 2020 through June 30, 2022. On May 9, 2022, the CAO Committee recommended and the Council approved an amendment to the contract1 to extend the term to June 30, 2025 and revise the project scope. The City’s previous Auditor is no longer with Baker Tilly, rendering the office vacant.
ANALYSIS
The City’s contract with Baker Tilly addresses the potential for a vacancy in the City Auditor appointment in the Scope of Services exhibit:
1 Baker Tilly contract #C21179340 - https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=59458&repo=r- 704298fc&searchid=36906362-a845-4d48-8470-98b9af8ece34
Item 14
Item 14 Staff Report
Item 14: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 317 of 333
Baker Tilly has identified a number of qualified candidates for Council consideration. This item provides a forum for the Council to discuss and provide direction to staff and Baker Tilly on next steps in the selection of a new City Auditor.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact as the Baker Tilly contract is executed and budgeted in the FY2024 Adopted Budget.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Further discussion and engagement is expected as directed by Council in the process to appoint the next City Auditor.
ATTACHMENTS
None
APPROVED BY:
Sandra Blanch, Human Resources Director
Item 14
Item 14 Staff Report
Item 14: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 318 of 333
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Meeting Date: March 11, 2024
Report #:2401-2542
TITLE
Rental Residential Vacancy Rate Determination for Three Plus Dwelling Units for the 2nd Half of 2023
RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational report and City Council action is not required.
BACKGROUND
Planning and Development Services staff prepares the Residential Vacancy Rate Determination Report twice a year to meet the requirements of Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section
21.40.040, Determination of Vacancy Rate and Surplus. Section 21.40.0401 states the following:
”In April and November of each year, the director of planning and community environment shall determine from the city utility meter records the vacancy rate and the vacancy surplus, if any, within the city limits. New market-priced rental units available to the general public, for which a certificate of use and occupancy has been issued since the last vacancy survey, shall be added on a unit-for-unit basis either to reduce the vacancy deficiency or to increase the vacancy surplus.” All conversions involving a change in the type of ownership of three or more rental units are subject to the provisions of this chapter. Vacancy surplus in this section of the Municipal Code is defined as the number of rental units being offered for rent or lease more than the 3% vacancy rate. The City cannot accept tentative or preliminary parcel map applications for subdivisions created from conversions unless there is a vacancy surplus of 3% or more as of the most recent determination. This rule is established in PAMC Section 21.40.040.
The purpose of this report is to seek a reasonable balance of rental and ownership housing in the city in a variety of individual choices of tenure, type, price, and location of housing. It is also 1 Municipal Code Chapter 21.40: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-19994 Item 15
Item 15 Staff Report
Item 15: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 319 of 333
to protect the supply of multi-family rental housing stock in the city for low- and moderate- income families and to reduce and avoid displacement of tenants, particularly seniors and families.
ANALYSIS
For the second half of 2023, the multifamily rental vacancy number was 1.25% percent. This number represents a decrease from the first half of 2023, but higher compared to the 2021 and 2022 annual averages. Further details can be found in Table 1.
Table 1: Average Annual Rental Vacancy Rates
Year Estimated Housing
Units2
Utility Accounts
Deemed Vacant
Estimated Vacancy
Rate (Average)3
2015 7,901 92 1.22%
2016 7,912 118 1.45%
2017 7,928 131 1.58%
2018 7,928 132 1.52%
2019 7,931 141 1.83%
2020 8,057 226 2.80%
2021 8,057 55 1.13%
2022 8,057 56 1.16%
2023
(1st half) 8,057 56 1.39%
2023
(2nd half) 8,057 68 1.25%
Staff prepared this analysis per PAMC 21.40.040 by using the City of Palo Alto’s utility meter 2 The U.S. Census Bureau Decennial Census 2010 data is used as a baseline for the total rental stock data in Palo Alto and changes (addition or demolition) to the total rental dwelling unit stock are tracked by staff biannually using the City of Palo Alto’s land use management system (Accela) to generate the vacancy rate. Staff expected to update the baseline with the release of the 2020 Decennial Census; however, the U.S. Census Bureau decided to discontinue the rental data point and staff will continue to use the original methodology. 3 This percentage is the number of utility accounts deemed “vacant” divided by the utility accounts sample size.
Item 15
Item 15 Staff Report
Item 15: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 320 of 333
records. These records indicated the total number of “active” multi-family apartments and allow staff to determine the percentage of “vacant” multi-family apartments. Utility accounts associated with 3+ rental units were identified using these records. Gaps in the utility meter data exist due to the inconsistency of relationships between utility meters to owners and tenants; however, it is the best available data and follows the methodology outlined in the PAMC. Once the City’s rental registry is implemented, staff will evaluate whether a municipal code update is warranted to include that information as a new or supplemental resource to improve report accuracy.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
This is an informational report for the City Council and does not require any stakeholder engagement.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is exempt from environmental review under Section 15061 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
ATTACHMENTS
None
APPROVED BY:
Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director Item 15
Item 15 Staff Report
Item 15: Staff Report
Pg.
3 Packet Pg. 321 of 333
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: Fire
Meeting Date: March 11, 2024
Report #:2401-2493
TITLE
Santa Clara Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Countywide Fire Service Review Report: Highlights and Recommendations for Palo Alto Fire Department
RECOMMENDATION
This report is informational and does not require action by the City Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LAFCO Countywide Fire Service Review Report assessed the risks and service demands for the County and reviewed the performance and resources of the nine Fire and Emergency Service Providers.
The report identifies some notable findings and challenges in the performance of the Palo Alto Fire Department. Among the findings is the mention of PAFD being the only fire agency in the county that is the primary ambulance provider in its community. On the other hand, the challenges include the recommendation to increase resources, improve facilities and equipment, and explore partnerships and other areas that require continued attention to enhance services.
The city has responded to LAFCO (attached).
The full report can be found online here:
https://santaclaralafco.org/sites/default/files/FireSRReview-FinalReport-2023.pdf
BACKGROUND
LAFCO is responsible for regulating the boundaries of cities and special districts in the county.
LAFCO enlisted the services of AP Triton to conduct a comprehensive Countywide Fire Service Review for Santa Clara County. This review focuses on fire and emergency services provided to the 1.9 million residents of Santa Clara County (SCC).
Item 16
Item 16 Staff Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 322 of 333
The county has nine fire and emergency service providers. American Medical Response (AMR) provides emergency medical transport services for most of the county, while the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) serves Palo Alto and Stanford University.
The Countywide Fire Service Review provides valuable information for LAFCO, cities, special districts, and the public to understand and improve fire and emergency services. It highlights the need to address resource needs for current and growing demands, seismic protection and capacity issues for facilities, interoperability challenges, and coordination among agencies to enhance service delivery and response capabilities.
This memo reflects highlights, challenges, and recommendations for Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Fire Department, summarizing the final report.
ANALYSIS
Highlights
•PAFD provides its residents a full range of services, including being the only fire agency in Santa Clara County to be the primary ambulance provider. •PAFD is the busiest fire department in Santa Clara County, running 107 calls per 1,000 residents.
•PAFD has a 90 th percentile performance time standard for emergency responses adopted by City officials of 8:00 minutes or less.
•The City of Palo Alto meets State laws for transparency and accountability, including making information easily accessible to the public, maintaining a compliant website, providing ethics training and economic interest reporting, following financial reporting requirements, and adhering to open meeting requirements. In addition, the city goes beyond these requirements through several efficient web-based tools with accessible platforms to access various city documents and information, and a forum for online civic engagement.
•PAFD leads a program as the official Agency for Hazmat Business Plans and above- ground storage tanks for the entire County.
•Palo Alto and Stanford are noted as the top two of all 14 designated communities at the highest risk of wildfire in the County.
•PAFD shares a reserve Ladder Truck with the Mountain Fire Department (MVFD).
However, MVFD has a new truck on order and plans to terminate the agreement once the new truck is in service.
•The City of Palo Alto‘s financing levels are sufficient to provide an adequate and sustained level of fire and EMS services but are not yet able to fund pre-pandemic service levels (this data is as of 2022).
•The city benefits from a shared Computer Automated Dispatch system and automatic aid agreements between Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Los Altos.
Item 16
Item 16 Staff Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 323 of 333
Challenges
Measuring Performance
Two primary measures are used in Fire and Emergency Response for performance.
Response Time: Response time is the time from receipt of a 9-1-1 call to the time the first unit arrives on scene. The standard in the field is to measure the 90th percentile response time i.e. 90% of the responses are at or below the set time standard. The adopted standard for PAFD is a 90th percentile response time of 8:00 minutes or less.
Unit Hour Utilization (UHU): Unit Hour Utilization measures workload for each response unit.
This is the percentage of time during the day the unit actively responds to a call. This measure shows how busy the system is and if units are available enough to respond to the service demand of an area. UHU measurements also capture if there is enough time in the day for the firefighters on the unit to complete necessary daily tasks, such as report writing, training, and required breaks. The maximum UHU recommended is 10% which allows a system to be primarily self-sufficient and optimizes staff injury prevention.
Once UHU reaches 10% for a primary responding unit, a Fire Department will see increased challenges to meet the standard 90th percentile response time due to the unavailability of resources for immediate response. An agency would need to add resources or experience reduced call volume to meet response time standards.
•Performance
oPalo Alto’s adopted standard is 8:00 minutes or less 90% of the time. The study period shows Palo Alto’s 90th percentile response time is 9:41 minutes. Other cities adopted time standards can be found in Figure 6 of the LAFCO report; none of the agencies are meeting their adopted emergency response standard. oPalo Alto has a high percentage of on-duty units that exceed a 10% UHU and significantly exceeds the average incidents per 1000 people in Santa Clara County. The study notes that PAFD is “excessively busy” and recommends that PAFD should add additional resources to manage the call volume and improve response time performance effectively.
oPAFD has one engine at 10.7% and three ambulances significantly exceeding 10% of UHU. The three remaining engine companies are over or close to 9% UHU. The report specifically notes a concern for Fire Station 4, “Two of the medic units are stationed with another response unit. However, Medic 64 operates with a 19.1% UHU and is the only resource assigned to station 4.” oGiven the growth projected for the city and the existing unit utilization level, there are challenges meeting the current and projected demand for service for both ambulances and three of the four fire engine companies. LAFCO recommends that an additional engine company be assigned to Fire Station 4 to improve performance, and an additional ambulance to improve the sustainability and performance of the EMS transport response system citywide.
Item 16
Item 16 Staff Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
3 Packet Pg. 324 of 333
•Facilities
oFive fire stations are over 50 years old, and 4 have either unknown seismic protection or no protection. Generally, Palo Alto’s stations are older and do not meet the requirements of modern firefighting. A facility improvement and replacement plan is needed.
•Apparatus
oFifty-five percent (55%) of Palo Alto’s fleet are in good or better condition; 31% are fair, and 13% are in poor condition. The Squad unit, engine, and a utility vehicle all need replacement, as of the 2022 report data. Subsequent to this, the air-light unit (Squad) is currently being built, and staff are evaluating electric vehicle options to inform the purchase of new vehicles.
Agency Comparison
The Cities of Mountain View (MVFD) and Santa Clara (SCFD) are the most comparable to Palo Alto in the County. Mountain View and Santa Clara are comparative cities in Santa Clara County because they are the most similar to Palo Alto regarding population, call volume, geography, and land use. All three are relatively small cities with a mix of residential homes and businesses, and the unique demands of the west side of the Bay Area are near Interstates 101, 280, and Cal Train. Mountain View is Palo Alto's direct neighbor with a similar population size and land use mix of residential, commercial, and industrial. Santa Clara is most comparable when considering call volume. Santa Clara's population is larger but similar to Palo Alto's daily population, which includes workers and visitors. Another critical criterion is that they operate a fire department with a traditional service delivery model. It should also be noted that no comparison is exact, for example, Palo Alto provides full emergency medical services, including transport of patients neither of these agencies is the primary responsible organization for this service, which lies with the County of Santa Clara for emergency medical transport care.
Attachment 1 to this report provides an infographic with some key data points of comparison from the report.
•PAFD is servicing a larger geographic area with a call demand profile of a higher population due to the increase in activity during the day. •PAFD geographic area includes significantly more open space with a higher fire danger but has fewer fire-suppression units than MVFD and SCFD. •PAFD is 1:41 over the 8:00 minute 90 th percentile adopted standard, while MVFD is 0:55 over their 7:20 minute standard, and SCFD is 1:03 seconds over their respective 7:00 minute standard.
•PAFD’s busiest engine has a UHU of 11%, compared to MVFD at 8% and SCFD at 7% Ambulance UHUs are much higher at 22% or 19%, while Engine 61 has a UHU of 11%, and the remaining three engines are at 9% UHU.
•PAFD has older facilities with the average Fire Station age at 46, compared to MVFD at 35 and SCFD at 36.
•Countywide Fire Services Review Report Recommendations and Potential Implementors Item 16
Item 16 Staff Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
4 Packet Pg. 325 of 333
The specific recommendations outlined by LAFCO were responded to in the attached letter.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts in receiving and reviewing the report. The Fire Department is reviewing investment needs to maintain, improve, and anticipate future service needs and risks and expects to review these as part of the Fiscal Year 2025 budget process.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The Fire Department plans to conduct an extensive Strategic Planning process beginning in Fiscal Year 2025 that will convene residents, businesses, and other relevant stakeholders in determining the goals and focus areas for the Fire Department.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
No environmental review is required since no Council action is requested.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: City of Palo Alto Response to Santa Clara Local Agency Formation Commission Countywide Fire Service Review Final Report
Attachment B: Infographic Comparison of Palo Alto, Mountain View and Santa Clara data from the LAFCO Report
APPROVED BY:
Geo Blackshire, Fire Chief
Item 16
Item 16 Staff Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
5 Packet Pg. 326 of 333
Neelima Palacherla
Executive Officer
Santa Clara LAFCO
777 North First Street, Suite 410
San Jose, CA 95112
Dear Neelima Palacherla,
The City of Palo Alto has received and reviewed the Santa Clara Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Countywide Fire Service Review Report. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the City’s consideration of all recommendations listed for the Palo Alto Fire Department Table A and B, recommendations 2, 2B, 8, 8E, 31, 24, and 25.
Table A #2 & #2B Unit Utilization Hours (Pages xiii, 24, 25, 276 finding 5-5) Recommendation San Jose, Palo Alto, Gilroy and CCFD all have units with UHUs over 10%. These agencies should add additional resources to effectively manage the call volume and improve response time performance
Palo Alto Units (Pages 261)
E61 (10.7%), M61 (22.3%), M62 (18.5%), and M64 (19.1%)
The City would need to add resources or reduce call volume to meet response time standards.
Palo Alto Response Palo Alto Fire Department staff will evaluate resource needs to support a reduction in UHU and work with the City’s Budget Office to develop a feasible financial and implementation strategy as part of the Fiscal Year 2025 budget planning process. The ability to advance such a strategy will depend on funding available.
Table A. #8 & #8E Facility Replacement & Maintenance Planning (Pages 270, 277) Recommendation Five of the seven stations are over 50 years in age and/or were identified as not meeting the needs of a modern fire station: (Station 1: 57 years), (Station 2: 27 years), (Station 4: 69 years), (Station 5: 55 years), (Station 6: 50 years), and Station 8. The city’s current five-year Capital Improvement Plan only identifies Station 4 for replacement.
It was not apparent if an additional plan was in place for the other older stations.
Station 6 is owned and maintained by Stanford University. Palo Alto has worked to update its facilities, including seismic protection, however, Item 16
Attachment A - City of
Palo Alto Response to
Santa Clara Local Agency
Formation Commission
Countywide Fire Service
Review Final Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
6 Packet Pg. 327 of 333
Stations 1, 2, 5, and 8 are nearing “end of life” and should be included in a plan for replacement.
Establish a comprehensive facility replacement plan and a maintenance plan for fire stations.
Palo Alto Response Palo Alto’s Public Works Department is in the process of finalizing a new City- wide facilities condition assessment report for all City facilities, including all fire stations. Following its completion, the City will use the report to evaluate the needs for individual fire stations and will develop recommendations for a plan for capital improvements and/or replacements as appropriate.
Table A #31 Mountain View, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, and CCFD (Pages 75, 279 finding 5-19) Recommendation Exploring options for alternative structures such as joint powers authorities combining two or more neighboring agencies (Mountain View, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, and CCFD), could potentially bring efficiencies and value- added services to Mountain View and other smaller fire service providers in Santa Clara County. Creating a larger entity with a unified structure can offer benefits such as increased accountability, improved efficiency, and enhanced effectiveness in delivering fire services to the community. While Mountain View’s
services are satisfactory and appear to be sustainable, there can be opportunities to pool resources, share expertise, and optimize operations, leading to improved service delivery.
Explore Joint Powers Authority or sharing resources in collaboration with Mountain View.
Palo Alto Response The decision to combine with a neighboring fire agency would have to come from the direction of the governing bodies over the identified agencies. The City is satisfied with the proven effectiveness of the current auto-aid and mutual-aid agreements with neighboring fire departments. Efficiencies have been utilized with Mountain View with a shared computer automated dispatch system.
Table B. #24  D. Land Use Consideration (Pages 88-89, 279 finding 5-20) Recommendation Lucille M. Nixon Elementary School and Escondido Elementary School are located outside of the City of Palo Alto city limits but inside its SOI and USA.
Lucille M. Nixon Elementary School is entirely surrounded by the Stanford University property, and Escondido Elementary School is surrounded on three sides by the university property. Palo Alto FD provides contract services to Stanford University’s property; however, the two schools are excluded from the contract service area, meaning the schools lack a formally identified fire and emergency medical provider. Given the nature of the use of the property with structures and students, there is a need to ensure adequate fire and emergency services are provided to the two properties.
It is recommended that the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Unified School District form an agreement for fire and emergency medical services at two elementary schools that lie outside of local fire service provider and are excluded from the City’s contract service area with Stanford University.
Item 16
Attachment A - City of
Palo Alto Response to
Santa Clara Local Agency
Formation Commission
Countywide Fire Service
Review Final Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
7 Packet Pg. 328 of 333
Palo Alto Response Palo Alto does not recognize a service gap with Lucille M. Nixon and Escondido Elementary Schools as both schools are within the City of Palo Alto service area.
PAFD responds to all emergency incidents and provides fire inspections at all Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) schools.
The City of Palo Alto appreciates the in-depth assessment of Countywide Fire and Emergency Services and is will continue to consider the recommendations to improve the services we provide to protect the life, safety, and property of the City and Stanford University.
Sincerely,
Ed Shikada
City Manager
City of Palo Alto
Item 16
Attachment A - City of
Palo Alto Response to
Santa Clara Local Agency
Formation Commission
Countywide Fire Service
Review Final Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
8 Packet Pg. 329 of 333
Palo Alto
84,772*
32 sq. miles
8,149
6 87
7 3
Mtn View
84,038
Santa Clara
127,151
12 Sq. miles 20 Sq. miles
4,695 9,259
5 68
8 0
9 132
13 0
In Square Miles
Land Use Profile
18.8 1.9
1.2 7.8
5.0 8.4
2.7 3.0
7.8 2.7
1.9 2.2
0.1 0.4
Parks & Open Space Residential Commericial & Industrial Public Facility Other Palo Alto
Mountain View
Santa Clara
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5
2023 LAFCO Countywide Fire Service Review
Data Comparison
*Palo Alto population includes contracted service area for Stanford Univeristy Item 16
Attachment B -
Infographic Comparison
of Palo Alto, Mountain
View and Santa Clara data
from the LAFCO Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
9 Packet Pg. 330 of 333
Daily Staffing
18 21
36 6 8
14 17
13.5 4.5
18.5 Fire Units Ambulance Units Fire Prevention Administration & Communications Palo Alto
Mountain View
Santa Clara
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Workload Measures
Average Time
per Incident
Incidents per
1,000 population
Busiest Unit
in Unit Hr Utilization
90th Percentile
Response Time
Palo Alto
Fire: 11%
EMS: 22%
Fire: 22-36mins
EMS: 48-53mins107
9:41 mins
Mtn View
8%15-27mins64
8:15 mins
Santa Clara
7%24-37mins69
8:03 mins
Item 16
Attachment B -
Infographic Comparison
of Palo Alto, Mountain
View and Santa Clara data
from the LAFCO Report
Item 16: Staff Report
Pg.
10 Packet Pg. 331 of 333
4 1
6 3
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: Community Services
Meeting Date: March 11, 2024
Report #:2402-2694
TITLE
Update on Operations of a Pilot Overnight Warming Location for Unhoused Individuals During Times of Inclement Weather
RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational report and no City Council action is required.
ANALYSIS
This report offers a status update on the City’s efforts piloting an Overnight Warming Location (OWL) program. This is a life saving measure to bring unhoused individuals inside during times that the County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing declares an Inclement Weather Alert when certain adverse cold/rainy weather conditions are predicted. This temporary program has funding for this winter season (January- May 2024).
Once the County issues an Inclement Weather Alert, the Downtown Library Overnight Warming Location is opened for a 12-hour overnight session. The County Inclement Weather Alert can be for single or multiple days. When activated, the City hosts up to 10 individuals (adults only) each session and space is on a first come, first served basis. All guests are required to register and are screened for health concerns before entering following the County of Santa Clara’s Health Department’s COVID/Contagious Disease safety guidelines. A code of conduct is enforced. Guests receive a cot, warm snacks/breakfast.
This winter weather season, the City designated the Downtown Library as the sole location and to date the OWL has activated 10 times. A high percent of guests to date have been women. It is not an ongoing shelter program such as We Hope in East Palo Alto or rotating shelter such as those provided by Heart & Home Collaborative or LifeMoves (Hotel de Zink).
The Overnight Warming Location is staffed by an experienced homeless services worker and a security guard, under contracts managed by the City’s Office of Human Services. All OWL guests leave the library by 7:00 a.m. and all supplies (cots, etc.) are removed from the space and the library is cleaned by a custodian before it opens back up to the public. The program does not Item 17
Item 17 Staff Report
Item 17: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 332 of 333
4 1
6 3
impact library operations and staff has shared that library patrons have responded positively with their appreciation of the City’s efforts.
Feedback from OWL guests has been very positive. OWL participants have told staff that they appreciate having a safe, warm, dry place to be during periods of bad weather. Guests particularly appreciate the calm atmosphere; from the first night the OWL has been open, guests have expressed a desired to stay at the OWL when it is next open as they like staying in a place that’s accessible and where they feel safe. One guest even shared that his night at the OWL was the first time in a long time that he had slept through the night.
The City will evaluate the effectiveness of the program before making recommendations to the City Council as part of their upcoming budget discussions.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
At the December 18, 2023, City Council meeting,1 Council approved the use of grant funding to support unhoused outreach worker contracts which freed up funding from the general fund to support the Overnight Warming Location as a pilot for the upcoming winter season. This change in funding allocation noted the use of funds, the temporary nature of the program, and possible locations under consideration including the Downtown Library. As noted, staff will evaluate the pilot program following the conclusion of the winter season and make recommendations as part of the City’s upcoming budget process for FY 2024-2025.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Before storm events, the City shares important weather event information with the community, and in January shared the initial OWL activation, via website, and City communications channels. As noted above, last December the Council approved funding for the pilot program for the upcoming winter season (January – May). The City did not notify adjacent properties given the temporary use and will consider this moving forward.
ATTACHMENTS
None
APPROVED BY:
Kristen O'Kane, Community Services Director
1 December 18, 2023, City Council Meeting, Staff Report https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/viewer?id=0&type=7&uid=aeed86d9-14cb-42e9-9838-50f9649c661f Item 17
Item 17 Staff Report
Item 17: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 333 of 333