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 Send to Priority
Setting 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 10/26/22 C-1
Omar Passons
Actions Related to RVs and safe parking
Jones, Foley, Jimenez, Mahan
✔
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
10 /s/ Lee Wilcox 10/25/2022
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.).
Recommendation 1 [GREEN] The first recommendation to explore cost and strategy required to conduct a comprehensive count and inquiry of RVs in San Jose was greenlit at the 9/28 Rules Meeting (please see the ECF dated 9/28/22 for Item C.1 ) with a request from staff for three to four weeks to explore all recommendations. As it relates to the RV count, staff will return to Council in late November with an approach and cost estimate for completing this work. As it relates to understanding underlying factors that could drive tailored services for this population, staff would require a contractor to execute both the instrument design and sample method and to complete this detailed survey work. Staff propose to do a Request for Information to inform the design of a Request for Proposals that will be released early 2023. Staff will fund the RFP contract using a portion of the newly allocated $3 million for Urgent Fiscal/Program Needs related to Homelessness Management Services approved by City Council as part of the 2021-2022 Annual Report. (continued below)
Analysis (Continued)
Recommendation 2 [GREEN] Recommendation two requires application of the data obtained from Recommendation 1. Findings from both the RV count and survey will be communicated to the City Council through a Manager's Budget Addenda during the 2023-2024 Budget Process. This will provide Council members with service level options and costs. Recommendation 3 [GREEN] Recommendation three involves further analyses of sites already identified and substantially evaluated, requiring minimal further departmental staff time. The administration has been evaluating city-owned sites for the past year and has not identified a viable option. Current funding exists and a provider has been identified for one additional car parking site if one is identified. Recommendation 4 [GREEN] If the author's intent is for Council-supported sites to be elevated in prioritization for funding, this recommendation four can be completed with existing resources. However, if this recommendation is intended to limit the ability of the Councilmember to approve locations or otherwise enable single offices to inhibit new sites, this would not be possible with existing resources and would require further Council direction. Recommendation 5 [GREEN] Recommendation five is part of the same ongoing outreach process already underway for Emergency Interim Housing In addition to the above, Councilmember Cohen brought forward a memorandum (please see the ECF dated 9/28/22 for Item C.1) including two further recommendations, numbered 1a and 1b. Recommendation 1a [GREEN] to explore ordinance options that standardize acceptable parking rules to ensure safety where RVs remain parked on the street is aligned with existing work and staff will return to Council in late November with further detail about this exploration. Recommendation 1b [GREEN] to explore RV program options such as vehicle repair and buyout programs for non-operational vehicles including recommendations for staffing and budget necessary will be incorporated in the staff return to Council in late November for further detail. The ability of staff to include recommendations about staffing and budget necessary for this item is directly reliant on the RV census described in Recommendation 1, above, to have a clear understanding of the scope of staffing and funding necessary. It is anticipated that this census, once completed, will provide the basis for a comprehensive recommendation.