Council Policy Prioritization: Early Consideration Response Form DKƉƉƌŽǀĂů͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺĂƚĞͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ
Department Rules Date Item Department Rep. Name/Ext. Council Member Sponsorship Policy/Ordinance Subject Staff Recommendation܆ GREEN Adopt based on tradeoffs outlined on next page
܆ YELLOW ZĞĨĞƌ to Priority^ĞƚƚŝŶŐ
ŽƌƚŽƵĚŐĞƚ Process
܆ RED Recommend Council not
adopt nominated idea
܆ NEEDS CLARIFICATION OR
MORE TIME TO EVALUATE
Staff Evaluation
/ƐƚŚŝƐĂligned with City Roadmap?
܆ Yes ܆ No
/ƐƚŚŝƐĂlready underway inĂ
DepĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ work plan?
܆ Yes ܆ No
/ƐƚŚŝƐƚime Đritical orĂŶ Ğmergency?
܆ Yes ܆ No
tŝůůƚŚŝƐƌequire substantialƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ͕
staffing͕ budget͕ŽƌƐƚƌĂƚĞŐŝĐƐƵƉƉŽƌƚ?
܆ Yes ܆ No
Criterion to Determine Scale of Project ComplexityProject complexity is determined by scoring the project in each of the 3 criterions below and then summing the score. a. Low Complexity is a sum of 6 or less.
b. Medium Complexity is a sum of 7 – 9.
c. High Complexity is a sum of 10 or greater.
Total Score =
Scoring Criterion
Low Complexity Medium Complexity High Complexity
Estimated Duration 6 – 9 months ܆ =1 9 - 18 months ܆ =2 More than 18 months ܆ =3 Organizational Complexity(Internal)
Can Easily be Absorbed into Existing Work Plan
܆ =1 Planned Work (Future) ܆ =2 Work Not Currently Proposed ܆ =3 Have staff with required skillset/knowledge
܆ =1 Have staff with required skillset/
requires moderate research
܆ =2 Do not have staff with required
skillsetͬrequires significant
research
3 =܆
Less than or equal 2 staff required
܆ =1 3 - 4 staff required ܆ =2 More than 5 staff required ܆ =3 (External) 1 Additional
Department
܆ =1 2 Other DepartmentƐ Involved ܆ =2 3 or more DepĂƌƚŵĞŶƚs Involved ܆ =3 DEPT.
Required ܆ Airport ܆ Auditor ܆ CMO ܆ OED/CA ܆ ESD ܆ Fire ܆ HR ܆ IT ܆ PRNS ܆ Police ܆ Retirement ܆ Attorney ܆ Clerk ܆ CMO – Budget ܆ Community Energy ܆ Finance ܆ Housing ܆ IPA ܆ Library ܆ PBCE ܆ PW ܆ DOT ܆CMOʹ ŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ ܆ DKʹ City Manager's Office Rules Date 8/3/22 C.1
Omar PassonsCommunity Outreach for Quick BuildInterim Housing Mayor Liccardo, Councilmember Foley,Councilmember Jimenez ✔
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔✔✔
12 /s/ Kip Harkness 7/29/22
AnalysisExplain the rationale for staff recommendation, including any mitigating factors that need to be considered (recent legislative action, significant work plan changes, etc.). Please address the following as well. GREEN LIGHT: The Administration can implement this Nominated Idea under its current work plan. Item should be sent to Council to add to Department work plan. ;ϭͿ,ŽǁǁŝůůƚŚĞ/ĚĞĂďĞĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚĞĚ͍;ϮͿ If adopted͕ what isŝƚƐ impactĂŶĚͬŽƌtradeoff toƚŚĞ City Roadmap or ƚŽĂDepĂƌtŵĞŶƚ work plan͕ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƐƚƌĂƚĞŐŝĐƐƵƉƉŽƌƚ? ;ϯͿWhat is the minimum viable scope to moveƚŚĞ/ĚĞĂ forward and reduceŝƚƐ complexity? YELLOW LIGHT: The Administration recommends Council send this Nominated Idea to the Priority Setting Process due to (describe cost implications, workload impacts, or other factors). RED LIGHT: The Administration recommends Council not adopt this Nominated Idea due to (describe reason implementation would be difficult if not impossible – conflict with other laws, etc.).
The Administration responded to previous City Council and Rules Committee direction on Emergency Interim Housing (EIH) by bringing forth a comprehensive proposal on June 21, 2022. On that date, the City Council approved much of staff recommendation, and added additional work requirements. On June 28, 2022, the Mayor and CMs Foley and Jimenez submitted a Rules Committee memo for August 3, 2022 recommending direction to the Administration to initiate notification to residents within 1000' of planned EIH sites and substantive outreach to inform and engage the public, to receive feedback from the public about the current sites approved by Council, to explore the feasibility/viability of alternate sites in D4 & D10 (that meet certain requirements), whether staff's recommendations have changed on sites, initial recommendations for targeting any specific unhoused populations at any sites, and to explore and describe the Administration's proposed approach on a service strategy and/or a no encampment zone around sites, and to report back within 120 days to City Council.
Analysis (Continued)
Given the urgency of sheltering the unhoused community members in the City, and the alignment to the City's 2022-23 Roadmap, the Administration is attempting to green light as much of the direction as possible, and will work to describe the new/redeployed resources being applied, the potential schedule adjustments to projects, and the tight scoping of the work. The Administration recognizes the need for robust notification and outreach, yet also had Rules Committee directed report back requirements to Council in June 2022, with resource constraints that limited any meaningful notification, outreach and engagement prior to June 2022. With the on-boarding of DCM Omar Passons, the Administration has developed a robust notification, outreach and engagement effort that has already resulted in the notification of residents and businesses within 1000' of new EIH sites approved by Council in Districts 4 and 10 for the next phase of planning and development. The outreach and engagement process included a new website page on EIH that includes relevant information on the shelter/housing need, the Community Plan to End Homelessness, the history of the City effort, relevant City reports and documents, including current siting guidelines, an email for contact and inquiry purposes ([email protected]), and a simple e-form that the public can use to submit suggested alternative sites for EIH for evaluation by staff. The website page includes an initial schedule of eight community meetings both In-person and on Zoom. It will be possible with existing resources to complete further notice and engagement as to the other sites identified in June 2022 within the 120-day requirement. In terms of staffing resources and workload management, the critical areas of assessment include the receipt and evaluation of suggested alternate sites, and the assessment of conditions and the development of support service strategies around EIH sites (existing and new), including evaluation of potential no encampment zones. To date, most of the suggested potential alternate sites are in D4. Two conditions in D4 complicate the speed and simplicity of evaluating suggested alternatives: (1) the low lying elevations of sites in the northern part of City result in many/most sites being in some type of flood zone and (2) numerous sites are privately owned and as such work is required to determine if the owners would like to work with the City on EIH, and whether the site can be quickly controlled and at nominal cost by the City (as the Mayor, CM Foley and Jimenez Rules memo directs to keep on the planned schedules to the currently approved sites, similar to what City Council approved on June 21, 2022). Currently staff in the CMO and DPW are assessing/organizing the resources to complete the initial flood analysis, and the corresponding feasibility/viability review, for the alternate sites already submitted (and in anticipation of those that will be submitted through the community outreach process by August 15). The challenge that is being triaged is that only one small CMO/DPW team exists to do all site feasibility/viability review, and to manage planning and delivery of the Guadalupe EIH site under construction, the directed expansions of the Guadalupe and Rue Ferrari sites, and the planning and design of the new Noble and 85/Great Oaks sites. Depending upon the number and complexity of alternate suggestions, keeping the pipeline projects fully on schedule may not be possible. Some level of schedule adjustment and slippage is likely to result, and/or DPW staff/consultant resources will need to be redeployed or augmented. Staff will be prepared to discuss this in more detail at the Rules Committee on August 3rd if the Committee so desires. On the private site issue, the D4 Office has taken the initial lead and step of outreaching to property owners of five privately owned sites to determine their level of interest in working with the City on EIH site development on a schedule and cost basis that could match the current planned sites. On the surrounding site service strategy, the CMO is coordinating with numerous departments on current conditions, future/planned service strategies to maintain quality of life, and to explore the practicality and approach to a potential no encampment zone. The scope of that assessment entails organizing current conditions and data, current service levels and needed service levels and resources to maintain current and/or acceptable levels of service, and the scope of various no encampments zones, including the benefits, impacts and potential unintended consequences of such an approach. Overall, the Administration is green lighting the proposed work in the June 28, 2022 Rules memo, with the caveats that trade-offs like schedule adjustments, modest resource re-allocations or augmentations, and tight control over the how the expanded work approach is scoped and completed.