City of San Juan Bautista
The “City of History”
www.san-juan-bautista.ca.us
CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
MONDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2024, 5:00 P.M.
HYBRID MEETING
City Hall, Council Chambers
311 Second Street, San Juan Bautista, California
AGENDA
ZOOM WEBINAR PARTICIPATION
The meeting can also be accessed by the public in the following methods: Through Zoom (https://zoom.us/join) per the instruction stated below, and on Facebook.
Please note: If all Council Members are present in person, public participation by Zoom or viewing on Facebook is for convenience only and is not required by law. If the Zoom or Facebook feed is lost for any reason the meeting may be paused while a fix is attempted but the meeting may continue at the discretion of the presiding officer.
JOIN ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88373320235
To participate telephonically:
call 1 (669) 900-6833
Webinar ID: 883 7332 0235
PUBLIC COMMENT - ADVISEMENT
Public comments are limited to items on this special meeting agenda pursuant to California Government Code section § 54954.3(b). Public comments are generally limited to three (3) minutes per speaker; the Mayor may further limit the time for public comments depending on the agenda schedule.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
2. CLOSED SESSION – 5:00 P.M. – 6:00 P.M.
Receive public communications from the audience on Closed session items. The City Council will recess to closed session pursuant to:
a. Public Employee Employment – California Government Code §54957(b)(1)) - the City Manager.
Page | 2 City Council December 2, 2024
3. CONSENT
All matters listed under the San Juan Bautista City Council Consent Agenda may be enacted by one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests discussion or a separate vote.
A. Approve the Affidavit of Posting Agenda.
B. Waive Reading of Ordinances and Resolutions on the Agenda Beyond Title.
C. Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of November 19, 2024.
4. ACTION ITEMS
The Recommendation indicates the staff recommendation at the time the agenda was prepared. That recommendation does not limit the City Council alternative actions on any matter before it.
A. Memorandum of Understanding with San Benito County Regarding Development Within the City’s Planning Area
Recommendation: Approve a RESOLUTION accepting the draft San Benito County Urban Growth Boundary/Sphere of Influence (“UGB/SOI”) Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) and sending it to the County for consideration and approval.
B. Historic Preservation Services with Rincon Consulting, Inc.
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Rincon Consulting Services for historic preservation purposes.
C. City Treasurer Vacancy
Recommendation: Direct Staff to Open up a Recruitment to fill the City Treasurer position.
D. Historic Resources Board / Planning Commission Vacancy Recommendation: Direct Staff to open a recruitment.
5. DISCUSSION
A. Discussion of City Manager Transition
B. Discussion of City Economic Development Policies
6. ADJOURNMENT
AGENDA MATERIAL / ADDENDUM
Any addendums will be posted not later than 72 hours before regular meetings or 24 hours of special meetings unless otherwise allowed under the Brown Act. City Council reports may be viewed at the City of San Juan Bautista City Hall at 311 Second Street San Juan Bautista and are posted on the City website www.san-juan-bautista.ca.us subject to Staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting, or City Clerk Elizabeth Soto at [email protected] or calling (831) 623-4661 during normal business hours.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Govt. Code 54953(a), the city will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk, a minimum of 48 hours prior to the meeting at (831) 623-4661.
If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
Page | 3 City Council December 2, 2024
A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code §54956.9 (d)(2) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City.
PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES
If you wish to make a public comment and are attending in person, please fill out a speaker card. If you are attending via Zoom, join the Zoom Webinar, and use the "Raise Hand" or if joining by telephone, press *9 on your telephone keypad icon.
SUBMISSION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
Written comments may be submitted via mail to the City Clerk at City Hall (P.O. Box 1420, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045), or emailed to [email protected] no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Written comments will be read into the record provided that the reading does not exceed three (3) minutes.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
This agenda was posted on Wednesday, November 2/, 2024, on the bulletin board at City Hall, 311 Second Street, the bulletin board at the City Library, 801 Second Street, the bulletin board at the entrance to the United States Post Office, 301 The Alameda, and the City’s website.
Meetings are streamed live at https://www.facebook.com/cityofsanjuanbautista/.
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Elizabeth Soto, Do Now Declare, Under the Penalties of Perjury That I Am the City Clerk / Administrative Services Director in the City of San Juan Bautista and That I Posted Three (3) True Copies of the attached City Council Agenda. I Further Declare That I Posted Said Agenda on the 27th day of November 2024, and in the Following Locations in said City of San Juan Bautista, County of San Benito, California.
1. On The Bulletin Board at City Hall, 311 Second Street.
2. On The Bulletin Board at The City Library, 801 Second Street.
3. On The Bulletin Board at The Entrance to The United States Post Office, 301 The Alameda
Signed at San Juan Bautista, County of San Benito, California, on the 27th day of November 2024.
____________________________________________
Elizabeth Soto, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk / Administrative Services Director
WAIVER OF READING OF ORDINANCES
State law requires that an ordinance be read in its entirety prior to adoption unless the City Council waives reading beyond the title. Reading an entire ordinance at the meeting is extremely time-consuming; reading of the title alone usually gives the audience sufficient understanding of what the Council is considering.
To ensure that this waiver is consistently approved by the Council, Council should make the waiver at each meeting, thus, you should do it at this point on the Consent Agenda. The Council then does not have to worry about making this motion when each ordinance comes up on the agenda.
GC36934
Item: 4.A
City Council Meeting
Date: December 2, 2024
Page | 1
CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 2, 2024 (Continued from NOVEMBER 19, 2024) DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
FROM: DON REYNOLDS
BY: DON REYNOLDS
TITLE: MEMORNADUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH SAN BENITO
COUNTY REGARDING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY’S
PLANNING AREA
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Approve a Resolution accepting the draft San Benito County Urban Growth Boundary/Sphere of Influence (“UGB/SOI”) Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) and sending it to them for consideration and approval.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Since May 26, 2020, the City’s UGB/SOI Committee has been deliberating about changes to the City’s Urban Growth Boundary and Sphere of Influence, and in November 2023, adopted Resolution 2023-71 with a new Map of the UGB/SOI and Planning Area. The application to LAFCO that implements these changes, requires an agreement with the County. Attached is the Committee’s recommended MOU that if accepted by the Council, will be sent to the County for its consideration and approval.
BACKGROUND:
The City adopted its General Plan in 2016, but did not change its SOI, UGB or “Area of Concern.” After four years of deliberation, it has come to agreement to re-name the Area of Concern to “Planning Area, being the area outside of the UGB/SOI in the unincorporated areas surrounding the City Limits, and the City Limits become the new UGB/SOI. Final changes to the Memorandum of Understanding were considered at its last Committee meeting, a Special Meeting held Monday October 28, 2024. Testimony was received at this meeting from County planning staff. This final version of the MOU was shared with the Committee Friday November 1, 2024. No further changes were requested from the Committee, so it is attached in its final form to the proposed Resolution included in staff’s report.
Page | 2
DISCUSSION
After being accepted by the City Council, the MOU will be shared with County. Further revisions may be requested from the County and be necessary to consider before the MOU is executed.
With the new UGB/SOI Boundary and draft MOU language with the County approved by the City Council, there are two more steps to take. The November 2023 Resolution 2023-71 also serves as a “Notice of Intent” for the City to complete a “Targeted General Plan Amendment.” This GP Amendment is necessary because the SOI change modifies the assumptions for future growth in the 2016 General Plan by eliminating any properties currently outside the City limits for consideration of future annexation.
The last and final piece of the LAFCO Application will be a revision to the 172-page General Plan that edits and removes references to the future annexation, and describes the growth potential for infill development within the current City limits. This document is in a final draft form and will be ready for Planning Commission and City Council consideration in the next few months. It will require a CEQA evaluation, but because the proposed changes reduce the impacts of growth to the new UGB/SOI area, the CEQA study will be limited in its scope.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City budgeted for the cost of this work and related studies as one of three major initiatives in its CIP two years ago.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution with Drafted MOU with the County
Page | 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2024- XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA ENDING THE URBAN
GROWTH BOUNDARY/SPHERE OF INFLUENCE COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, at its Special Meeting May 26, 2020, the City Council agreed to establish the Urban Growth Boundary Committee (later to become Urban Growth/Sphere of Influence Committee, (“UGB/SOI Committee,” “Committee”); and
WHEREAS, on April 18, 2020, at its first meeting, the UGB/SOI Committee adopted its Mission Statement:
“The mission of the Urban Growth Boundary/Sphere of Influence Ad-Hoc Committee is to establish limits and boundaries for growth that will serve and protect the City of San Juan Bautista now and in the future.;” and
WHEREAS, the Committee met 6 times in 2020, and in 2021 began to explore potential boundaries for a new SOI, with a similar size UGB, and a larger Planning Area; and WHEREAS, in 2022, the City held several public meetings to discuss ideas and garner support for the new proposed UGB/SOI; and
WHEREAS, in the fall of 2022, staff was directed to meet with the property owners outside the City limits that may affected by the proposed UGB/SOI; and WHEREAS; The UGB/SOI Committee amended the boundaries, and on November 14, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-71 approving the” Notice of Intention to Amend the General Plan by Accepting Urban Growth Boundary Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary, and Planning Area” to include the following actions:
and
WHEREAS, tasks 1 and 2 have been completed, as staff is in receipt of a draft targeted General Plan Amendment focused on infill development without annexation that reflects the approved UGB/SOI and Planning Area; and
WHEREAS, at its June 18, 2024 City Council meeting, the UGB/SOI Committee recommended a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between the City and County with Page | 2
“defining three concentric circles within the Planning Area” to guide development in the unincorporated area that surrounds the City, but the City Council did not act on the item and it was not approved; and
WHEREAS, the draft MOU was shared with the County and LAFCO staff; and WHEREAS, at a Special Meeting July 16, 2024, the MOU was discussed in a joint UGB/SOI Committee City Council meeting on July 16, 2024, and after receiving feedback from the Committee, LAFCO and County Resource Management Agency staff, no action was taken on the MOU; and
WHEREAS, Section 56425(b) of the State Government Code regulating the SOI process, specifically requires cities and countries to work together and bring forward an agreement to LAFCO to consider as LAFCO evaluates a City’s request to change its SOI; and WHEREAS, at its August 20, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council directed the UGB/SOI Committee to “move the UGB/SOI Committee forward with producing some semblance of a MOU by November 2024,” so that the City can move its application for a new UGB/SOI and Planning Area to LAFCO as soon as possible; and WHEREAS, the Committee met three times since the August 20, 2024 Council meeting, and among other changes, removed reference to “lead agency,” “concentric circles,” and at its special meeting held October 28, 2024, acted to accept the newly drafted MOU as amended, and present it to the City Council for approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has now considered the attached UGB/SOI Committee amended MOU and agree that it is ready to be shared with the County, and then be submitted with the LAFCO Application to amend the UGB/SOI.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA NOW HEREBY FINDS:
1. That the recitals in this Resolution and accompanying staff report are true and correct and are hereby made a part of this Resolution.
2. That it hereby adopts this Resolution accepting the draft UGB/SOI MOU language, and directs staff to share it with the County for its consideration and approval.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of San Juan Bautista at a special meeting held on the 19th day of November 2024, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Page | 3
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
APPROVED:
______________________
Mayor Scott Freels
ATTEST:
___________________________
Elizabeth Soto, City Clerk
Attachment:
Proposed draft MOU with the County
Page | 1
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN BENITO AND THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA REGARDING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN CITY’S PLANNING AREA WHEREAS, the City of San Juan Bautista (“City”) and the County of San Benito (“County,” and together with the City, “Party” or “Parties”) have adopted: (i) General Plan policies and zoning regulations; (ii) the Guidelines for Orderly Development; and (iii) the Planning Area (as hereinafter defined), together with the county-administered Land Conservation Act (“LCA”) Program, which, demonstrate a long-term commitment to agricultural and open space land conservation; and
WHEREAS, the Parties intend for this Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) to establish and ensure that development processed by the County within the City’s Planning Area (as hereinafter set forth) is in conformance with these goals; and WHEREAS, the “Area of Concern,” as defined in Section 4.4.1 of the City’s General Plan, extends beyond the city limits and encompasses the Planning Area; and WHEREAS, Section 4.4.1 of the City’s General Plan provides that any project in the Area of Concern should notify the City and receive input from the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s General Plan encourages urban growth boundaries that: (i) successfully limit sprawl; (ii) promote new growth in desirable areas and protect prime agriculture, rangelands and viewsheds; and (iii) discourage subdivision of parcels in agricultural production; and
WHEREAS, the San Juan Bautista City Council adopted Resolution 2023-71 approving the” Notice of Intention to Amend the General Plan by Accepting Urban Growth Boundary Ad Hoc Committee Recommended Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary, and Planning Area” which created a new Sphere of Influence, Urban Growth Boundary and Planning Area attached as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, establishment of a “Planning Area” (previously referred to as the “Area of Concern”) wherein City maintains significant influence, is vital to the protection of the historical character and setting of the City, which underpins the City's cultural and economic well-being and community values; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Parties now to memorialize the influence to be maintained by the City with regard to development of properties within the County’s jurisdictional boundaries, but which are also within the City’s “Planning Area” as herein set forth and recognized; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNTY OF SAN BENITO BY AND THROUGH ITS
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND THE CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA BY AND THROUGH ITS CITY COUNCIL HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
Page | 2
1. Parties. This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is made and entered into by and between the County and City. The address of the County Board of Supervisors is 481 Fourth Street, 1st Floor, Hollister, CA 95023 and the address for the County Planning Department is 2301 Technology Parkway, Hollister, CA 95023. The address of the City is 311 Second Street, P.O. Box 14290, San Juan Bautista, CA 95045.
2. Purpose. The purpose of this MOU is to establish polices to guide Development (as hereinafter defined) in a certain portion of the unincorporated area of San Benito County that is adjacent to and surrounding the City (“Planning Area”), as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached to this MOU. Through execution of the MOU, the City and County intend to define shared expectations for future policies concerning Development within the Planning Area.
This MOU is intended to evolve into future ordinances and/or agreements between the Parties that may explicitly replace and supersede this MOU.
3. Term of MOU. The MOU is effective upon the date last signed and executed by the duly authorized representative of the governing bodies of the County and City and shall remain in full force and effect until the date that any future ordinances and/or other agreements are executed by the Parties with respect to the Planning Area that, by their terms, explicitly replace and supersede the MOU.
4. Definition of Development and Structure. For the purposes of this MOU, “Development” and “Structure” shall have the same meanings attributed to those terms in California Government Code § 65927.
5. Policies for Processing Development Applications Within City’s Planning Area.
A. Ongoing Dialogue and County Presentations. The planning staff of City and County shall meet to discuss proposals, inquiries and development interests at least quarterly or as they arise. Note that for purposes of this paragraph, “proposals, inquiries and development interests” shall include, without limitation, those inquiries made to the County on an informal basis, e.g., prior to any formal application. Although it is the intention of the Parties to always maintain a dialogue between them, County commits to make a presentation to the City’s Planning Commission on at least a quarterly basis regarding all development inquiries it is aware of within the Planning Area.
B. Process for Applications Within City’s Planning Area. The City and County will collaborate and process development proposals and applications as they are submitted to the County Resource Management Agency (“RMA”) (Planning Department) for consideration as follows:
a. Transmitting Applications Within Planning Area: When a formal application for Development has been actually submitted to the County Page | 3
for a “project” within the City’s Planning Area, that application shall be transmitted to the City when it is received by County.
b. Informal Presentation to City: Upon receipt of an application from County, City staff shall take all steps necessary to schedule the matter for an informal presentation by the project applicant, or their designee, to the City’s Planning Commission on the soonest-available agenda as an “Agenda Item,” but in no event longer than 30 days from the date of receipt by City.
c. City Feedback from Informal Presentation: After hearing the informal presentation, the City Planning Commission shall accept public comment, deliberate and provide formal feedback to the applicant and County staff in the form of a letter signed by the City’s Planning Commission Chair. County shall include this letter from the City in their file for the application, and otherwise take City’s comments into consideration as they process the application.
d. County Shall Respond to City’s Comments: As to any comments, feedback and/or suggestions made by City throughout this process, County shall provide responses prior to the final vote by the City’s Council as set forth immediately below.
e. Include City in Preparation of Conditions: As the County processes the application, and upon completion of any draft or proposed “conditions of approval,” and/or “mitigation measures” for an environmental document, County shall forward the proposed conditions and mitigation measures to City for its review and consideration which may include review by the City’s Planning Commission. If City has any feedback, proposed modifications or additions, City shall communicate these suggestions to County planning staff.
f. Opportunity for City to Support or Oppose Project: Upon completion of the County’s processing of the application, including any proposed conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures, County shall forward its “Staff Report” and any supporting documents to City for review and consideration by City’s staff, Planning Commission, and City Council. The application will then be placed on the agenda for the City Council as an action item resulting in a vote to either support or oppose the project.
g. City’s Resolution Communicated to County: The vote of the City’s Council to either support or oppose the project, and the basis of the City’s position, shall be in the form of a Resolution and forwarded to the County. The Resolution shall then be included in the materials prepared by County staff for its County Planning Commissioners, and shall also Page | 4
be described in County staff’s report for the County Planning Commission hearing on the application.
h. City’s Resolution Given Great Weight: County, its staff and Planning Commission, will consider City’s feedback, including the City’s Resolution to either support or oppose the application and shall give the City’s resolution during County’s deliberations. If approved, the final County action, staff report, resolutions, etc., including any conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures, shall be transmitted to City Planning staff.
C. County Shall Require Completion of This Process: County shall not deem an application “complete” pursuant to Government Code §65943 unless and until the project applicant has completed the “Informal Presentation to the City” as set forth in paragraph 5(B)b, above.
D. Compliance with the Permit Streamlining Act: Nothing in this MOU is intended by the Parties to create any unreasonable delays, in keeping with the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code §65943), and the Parties shall work together to that end.
6. General Provisions.
A. Amendments. Either Party may request changes to the MOU. Any changes, modifications, revisions, or amendments to this MOU which are mutually agreed upon by and between the Parties to this MOU shall be incorporated by written instrument and effective when executed and signed by all Parties to the MOU. Any changes, modifications or amendments, shall thereafter be attached to this MOU and incorporated herein as though fully set forth.
B. Applicable Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern the construction, interpretation, and enforcement of the MOU. The courts of the State of California shall have jurisdiction over any action arising out of the MOU and over the Parties, and the venue shall be the County of San Benito Superior Court.
C. Entirety of Agreement. This MOU, consisting of five (5) pages, represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and agreements, whether written or oral.
D. Severability. Should any portion of the MOU be judicially determined to be illegal or unenforceable, the remainder of the MOU shall continue in full force and effect, and either Party may renegotiate the terms affected by the severance.
E. Sovereign Immunity. The City and the County and their respective governing bodies do not waive their sovereign immunity by entering into the MOU, and each Page | 5
fully retains all immunities and defenses provided by law concerning any action based on or occurring as a result of the MOU.
7. Signatures. In witness of which, the Parties to the MOU through their duly authorized representatives have executed the MOU on the days and dates set out below and certify that they have read, understood, and discussed with their respective governing bodies this MOU and its contents who agreed to the terms and conditions of the MOU as set forth herein. The effective date of the MOU is the date of the signature affixed to this page.
COUNTY OF SAN BENITO:
San Benito County Board of Supervisors
By: ______________________________ Date: ________________________ Its: Chair__________________________
CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA:
San Juan Bautista City Council
By: ______________________________ Date: ________________________ Its: Mayor__________________________
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
San Benito County Counsel
By: ______________________________ Date: ________________________ Its: _______________________________
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
City of San Juan Bautista City Attorney
By: _________________________________ Date: ________________________ Its: _______________________________
Item: 4.B
City Council Meeting
Date: December 2, 2024
Page | 1
CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 2, 2024 (Continued from NOVEMBER 19, 2024) DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
FROM: DON REYNOLDS
BY: DON REYNOLDS
TITLE: HISTORIC PRESERVATION SERVICES WITH RINCON
CONSULTANTS, INC.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Rincon Consulting Services for historic preservation purposes.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In October 2022, the City entered into a professional services agreement for historic preservation services with historian Meg Clovis from Pacific Grove, with a retainer of $50,000. Since then, every property listed in the 2006 Historical Inventory was updated when an owner wanted to change or otherwise improve the property. When appropriate Ms. Clovis would bring properties forward to the HRB for consideration describing the property’s relevance to the City’s “Historical Context.” Ms. Clovis also advised on the status of the City’s Historic Ordinance provided in Chapter 11-06 of the Municipal Code. But during the week of October 28, 2024, she announced her retirement, and at the end of November plans to end her work with the City. Staff researched various other historical preservation consulting firms including those listed on the State’s Historic Preservation Office list of historical experts, and settled on Rincon Consultants, Inc. as two of the four professional recommended to serve the City are on this list. To avoid a gap in services and to help on-board the new preservation team, staff is seeking Council approval to contract with Rincon Consultant, Inc. before Ms. Clovis retires.
DISCUSSION
The City requires a full-service consulting team to adequately address its historic preservation needs. While Ms. Clovis was here, the City identified the need to update its historical context statement, and its Preservation Ordinance. This work still needs to be done. An outreach program to property owners is also badly needed. Many new owners don’t seem to realize that heave invested in historically sensitive properties. This firm also provides training for staff and Page | 2
Historic Resources Board members. A retainer would provide on-call services that will help the City support current planning applications.
Here is the comprehensive list of services that will be made available to the City if needed. • Literature Reviews/Records Searches/Archival Research • Native American Consultation
• Cultural Resource Surveys
• California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Eligibility Evaluations
• Archaeological Site Testing
• Historic Built Environment Resource Evaluation
• Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) Evaluation
• Archaeological Data Recovery Programs
• Native American Monitor Training Programs
• Section 106 Consultation
• Memoranda of Agreement (MOA)
• Findings of Effects
• State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) Consultation • Historic Preservation Plans
• Cultural Resources Management Plans
• Third Party Peer Review
• Construction Monitoring
• Paleontological Resources Analysis
• Maritime Archaeology
• Preservation Planning
The new Associate Planner will help manage this contract.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City budgeted $50,000 this year for historical preservation purposes in its community development department budget.
ATTACHMENTS:
Rincon Consultants Inc. Proposal
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
4825 J Street, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95819
www.rinconconsultants.com
November 5, 2024
Don Reynolds, City Manager
San Juan Bautista
P.O. Box 1420
311 Second Street
San Juan Bautista CA 95045
Subject: Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support Dear Mr. Reynolds:
Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) has assembled a team of preservation planning professionals who are ready to dive in and support the City of San Juan Bautista’s (City) preservation needs. This proposal includes an overview of Rincon and our cultural resources team, our key personnel, scope of work, and cost proposal with billing rates.
Rincon’s Team Offers the City the Following Benefits
Technical Assistance
Our key staff include 9 historic preservation professionals who meet or exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Professional Qualifications Standards (PQS) in history and architectural history and who are ready to step in and help guide the City’s preservation planning needs. In addition to the key staff identified, Rincon provides access to an additional 40+ archaeologists and 300+ experts in a range of environmental and planning disciplines statewide.
Full-Service Planning Firm
Our cultural team, working within a multidisciplinary firm, brings a deep understanding of the planning process which puts the City at a unique advantage. If desired, Rincon can provide the full suite of planning professionals including general/long-range planners, environmental planners, biologists, air quality/noise specialists, soil and environmental scientists, geographic information system staff, technical editors, and document publication specialists. We have supported many individual local agencies throughout the state to provide environmental and planning services.
Passionate Professionals
Our key team members are leaders and actively involved in various historic resources organizations including the California Preservation Foundation, Society of Architectural Historians, Society of Preservation Technology, Society for American Archaeology, Society for California Archaeology, Association of Environmental Professionals, and many more. They are active proponents of our shared cultural history and enjoy thoughtfully balancing this with preservation policy and planning.
Thank you for considering Rincon for this assignment. We are eager to support the City’s preservation planning program.
Sincerely,
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Margo Nayyar | Principal
[email protected]
Table of Contents
Rincon Consultants, Inc. i
Table of Contents
1 Company Information .........................................................................................................................................1 About Rincon .......................................................................................................................................................1 About Our Cultural Resources Team..................................................................................................................1 About Our Clients ................................................................................................................................................3 2 Key Personnel .....................................................................................................................................................4 Margo Nayyar | Principal-In-Charge...................................................................................................................4 Shannon Carmack | Principal Architectural Historian......................................................................................4 Steven Treffers | Principal Architectural Historian ...........................................................................................4 JulieAnn Murphy | Senior Architectural Historian .............................................................................................5 Rachel Perzel | Senior Architectural Historian..................................................................................................5 James Williams| Architectural Historian ...........................................................................................................5 Michelle Anderson | Architectural Historian .....................................................................................................6 Ashley Losco | Architectural Historian...............................................................................................................6 Josh Bevan, AICP | Architectural Historian........................................................................................................6 3 Scope of Work .....................................................................................................................................................7 4 Cost Proposal and Billing Rates .........................................................................................................................8 City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 1 1 Company Information
About Rincon
Rincon Consulting, Inc. (Rincon) is a multidisciplinary environmental science, planning, and engineering consulting firm that provides quality professional services to government and industry. Our principle service is to provide environmental support and scientific research to create and sustain innovative solutions to natural resource, sustainability, and environmental impacts. Rincon prides itself on the considerable depth of its staff, which includes cultural and historical resource specialists, certified land use and environmental planners, environmental scientists and engineers, accredited LEED professionals, noise and air quality experts, geologists, biologists, and paleontologists.
Rincon’s corporate culture focuses on providing consulting services in a manner that is beneficial to both the environment and our client’s needs. We perceive ourselves as an extension of our client’s team and function with their best interests in mind. By managing each project with a focus on three primary objectives—economic efficiency, technical excellence, and sustainable approach — we can provide superior service that efficiently and effectively meets the needs of our clients.
Rincon provides high quality cultural resources services to the private and public sector. Supporting preservation planning projects is a core service area of Rincon’s. Further information on our team is highlighted below.
About Our Cultural Resources Team
Our team includes historians, architectural historians, and archaeologists who meet or exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards (SOI PQS) and have worked in contract planning roles. Our team of experts continuously refine their skills, stay current on legislative updates, and coordinate to apply best practices. We pride ourselves on our strong writing and analytical skills, as well as on our ability to communicate complex issues to the public and decision-makers. Our
experts understand legal issues, best practices, and
special considerations to develop innovative, appropriate, and defensible solutions.
Historians/Architectural Historians
Our historians and architectural historians are skilled at identification and evaluation studies in which we survey, research, and evaluate/nominate a range of resourcestypes including buildings, railroads, roadways, bridges, parks, cemeteries, water conveyance features, water
treatment plants, historic districts, cultural landscapes, sites, and objects for inclusion in the California Register and National Register. We complete design review to
determine if projects comply with the SOI Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and provide guidance on revising plans for compliance to limit impacts. We analyze impacts to historical resources and develop mitigation
measures including interpretive signage, pamphlets,
vibratory monitoring, architectural monitoring, and
HABS/HAER/HALS documentation, to name a few.
Furthermore, we commonly engage with the community to
identify historical resources.
Legal Name:
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Legal Form:
California “S” Corporation
Professional Staff: 350+
California Offices: 13
Contract Manager:
Margo Nayyar
(916) 282-3694
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 2 We have a strong relationship with California State Historic Preservation Office staff, maintained through coordination on projects with complex resource issues, where we can work together to move projects forward.
In addition to our strong environmental compliance acumen, we commonly provide preservation planning services as outlined below.
Preservation Planning Services
• Mills Act program administrative assistance
• SOIS design review/Certificates of
Appropriateness
• Peer review
• Local register evaluations
• Local landmark designations
• Agency staffing
• Historic context/evaluation methodology
development
• Training
• Grant writing services
• Historic resources surveys
• Public outreach/engagement, public workshops,
and outreach materials
• Ordinance development and updates
• Historic tax credit applications
• Environmental document sections
• CEQA and Section 106 compliance reports
• Agency consultation
• Agreement documents
• Maintenance plans
• MMRP development and implementation
• Monitoring
• Oral history interviews
• Interpretive products
• General, specific, and area plans
• Design guidelines
Archaeologists
Should the need arise, our archaeology team is available to support the City. Our archaeologists are skilled at all phases of archaeological investigations including Phase I
identification surveys, Extended Phase I presence/absence excavations, Phase II testing and evaluation studies, Phase III data recovery, and construction monitoring. Our team includes archaeologists specializing in both prehistoric and historic-period archaeology, with specialties in material cultural analysis, lithics, osteology, ethnography,
anthropology, historical ecology, marine archaeology, tribal consultation, and advanced technologies such as ground
penetrating radar, drone mapping, and photography.
Rincon provides peer review, sensitivity training, and has managed minor and complex resource issues across
California. Our staff is highly skilled in tribal consultation with professional relationships with tribes throughout
California, and we can help the City through the Section 106, Assembly Bill 52, and Senate Bill 18 consultation processes, if needed during the course of this contract.
Value Added: Tribal Liaison Program
Rincon’s Tribal Liaison Program was
developed to enhance relationships with
California tribal governments, individuals, and
Tribal Historic Preservation Officers. We have
found that by prioritizing these relationships,
we have increased successful outcomes for
our client’s projects. Rincon strives to be an
industry leader for our clients, and we have
invested in our staff by providing access to
Environmental Collaboration and Conflict
Resolution Training provided by the Udall
Foundation.
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 3 About Our Clients
Rincon has numerous satisfied public agency clients who rely on us for our expertise. A partial list of such clients with whom we are contracted for on-call historic preservation, environmental, and contract planning services is located below.
San Mateo County Parks
Department
Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District
County of Santa Clara
Department of Parks and
Recreation
East Bay Regional Parks
City of Antioch
City of Elk Grove
City of Gilroy
City of Berkeley
City of Palo Alto
City of Redwood City
Community Development
Department
City of San José
City of Gilroy
City of Hercules
City of Cupertino
City of San Mateo
Santa Clara County – Roads
and Airports Department
Santa Clara County – Housing
Authority
Napa County Public Works
Department
Sonoma County
Contra Costa County
City of Concord
City of Monterey
City of San Francisco
Planning Department
San Francisco Mayor’s
Office of Housing and
Community Development
City of Vallejo
City of San Leandro
City of Oakland
City of Hayward
City of Santa Cruz
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 4 2 Key Personnel
Rincon’s team is led by Principal-in-Charge Margo Nayyar, who has led preservation planning contracts that have included site visits, local register evaluations, Historic Resources Commission support, CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA environmental review; Secretary of the Interior’s Treatment of Historic Properties design review, public outreach, preservation ordinance updates, general preservation planning support, and more. She will serve as contract manager, and is supported by 8 professionals available to the City. Below are brief biographical sketches for personnel along with availability.
Margo Nayyar | Principal-In-Charge
Margo is a principal architectural historian with experience thoughout California. Her experience includes built environment surveys, evaluation of historic-era resources using guidelines outlined in the National Register, California Register, and various local registers, and preparation of cultural resources technical studies pursuant to the CEQA and Section 106 including identification studies, finding of effect documents, memorandum of agreements, programmatic agreements, and Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record/Historic American Landscape Survey (HABS/HAER/HALS) mitigation documentation. She prepares cultural resources environmental document sections for CEQA environmental documents including infill checklists, initial studies, and environmental impact reports, as well as NEPA environmental documents including environmental impact statements and environmental assessments. She also specializes in municipal preservation planning, historic preservation ordinance updates, Native American consultation, and provision of Certified Local Government training. She develops Survey 123 and Esri Collector applications for large-scale historic resources surveys, and authors National Register nomination packets. Margo meets the SOI PQS for History and Architectural History and has provided historic preservation support to agencies across California.
Shannon Carmack | Principal Architectural Historian
Shannon has more than 24 years of professional experience providing cultural resources management and historic preservation planning for large-scale and highprofile projects. She has worked throughout California in numerous sectors including local planning, development/construction, public utilities, Department of Defense, transportation, recreation, and education. Shannon prepares documentation to satisfy CEQA/NEPA, Section 106, and Local Historic Preservation Ordinances. She also provides reports and studies that are in compliance with the SOI Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the California Historic Building Code. She has developed and implemented successful mitigation for countless projects that included HABS documentation, oral histories, and interpretive programs.
Steven Treffers | Principal Architectural Historian
Steven is a Director and principal architectural historian with 14 years of experience.
He has a wide range of experience with projects requiring historic resources compliance with Section 106, CEQA, and local ordinances. He has worked on behalf of both project applicants and local agencies and understands the important role thorough and independent determinations play in the decision-making process.
Steven also understands the importance of placing a property within its appropriate historic context as part of the evaluation process. This ensures all potential significant historical and architectural considerations are considered when making a determination on a property’s eligibility. In addition, Steven works closely with design teams on projects involving alterations to historic resources to ensure City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 5 compliance with SOI Standards and applicable design guidelines. As a result, he has extensive experience identifying character-defining features, reviewing architectural drawings, and collaborating with local governments, interested parties, architects, and engineers to meet project objectives, while retaining those elements that convey the reason for a historic resource’s significance. Steven maintains close relationships with California Office of Historic Preservation staff to help move projects forward.
JulieAnn Murphy | Senior Architectural Historian
JulieAnn is an architectural historian with 10 years of professional experience who has experience conducting historic resource surveys, performing archival research, and reviewing projects for conformance with SOI standards. Her professional experience includes the preparation of National Register nominations, historic structures reports, and impacts assessments in support of NEPA, Section 106, CEQA, and local ordinances. JulieAnn has conducted historic assessments of character-defining features and standards compliance for dozens of projects, including historic districts and large multi-parcel properties. JulieAnn also has demonstrated experience researching, assessing, and evaluating the integrity of historic resources. She is well versed with the National Register Bulletin technical series, which covers various aspects of historic preservation. She currently provides part-time historic preservation staffing support to the City of Berkeley.
Rachel Perzel | Senior Architectural Historian
Rachel is an architectural historian with 10 years of experience working in the field of historic preservation. She specializes in conducting historic resource surveys and performing evaluations for National Register, California Register, and local register eligibility. Her professional experience includes the preparation of National Register, Section 106 and California Point of Historical Interest nominations, making her intimately familiar with the eligibility criteria associated with these registers. In support of NEPA, Section 106, CEQA, and local ordinances, Rachel has evaluated dozens of buildings throughout the state. In doing so, she has demonstrated experience researching, assessing, and evaluating the significance and integrity of historic resources and identifying their character-defining features.
James Williams| Architectural Historian
James has 7 years of professional experience and meets the SOI PQS for Architectural History and History. His professional experience includes the preparation of historic resource assessments in support of NEPA, Section 106, CEQA, and local historic preservation regulations. He has conducted historic surveys and archival research, carried out Native American and local interested party consultation, and recorded and evaluated historic properties on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms. He has also assisted in the preparation of several HAER-like documentation packages as part of mitigation measures on behalf of various municipal agencies. He currently provides part-time historic preservation staffing support to the City of Santa Ana.
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 6 Michelle Anderson | Architectural Historian
With a professional background in the public and private sectors, Michelle possesses a diverse skill set for historic preservation, planning, and cultural resources management. Through her academics and work experience, Michelle meets and exceeds the SOI PQS in History and Architectural History. She has authored and contributed to historic resource studies, regulatory compliance reports, planning documents, and training materials for municipal, state, and federal clients in California, Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, and New York.
Her technical expertise is well suited for project and task management, archival research, field recordation, historic context preparation, built environment evaluations, and public outreach. She currently provides part-time historic preservation staffing support to the City of Elk Grove.
Ashley Losco | Architectural Historian
Ashley is an architectural historian with over four years of experience working in the field of historic preservation. She has experience in areas such as Federal Tax Credit projects, evaluating historic properties for local, state, and national significance; field surveys, HABS documentation, Mills Act Applications, and local designations.
She received her master’s degree in Historic Preservation from the University of Pennsylvania in 2019 and has worked in consulting since graduation. Ashley meets and exceeds the requirements in the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in Architectural History and History.
Josh Bevan, AICP | Architectural Historian
Josh Bevan is an architectural historian with over 7 years of experience throughout California, including extensive consultation for clients in communities across the San Francisco Bay Area and North Bay regions. Josh’s professional experience includes contribution to multiple on-call services contracts for cultural resources and historic preservation consultation as an architectural historian and project manager, as well as completion of historical resource evaluations, including criteria of the National Register, California Register, and local or regional registers. Josh has additional experience in the application of SOI Standards to project analyses for properties throughout California. Additionally, Josh has led the development of mitigation documentation efforts related to parks projects for multiple parks agencies. Josh holds a master’s degree in Historic Preservation from the University of Pennsylvania and exceeds the requirements in the SOI PQS for Architectural History and History. He is also a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners.
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 7 3 Scope of Work
Rincon will provide historic preservation planning staff augmentation services on a time and materials basis. The preservation planner(s) will primarily support remotely with the ability to conduct in-person visits if required. The intent of the support is to help identify, guide, and communicate preservation policy and efforts for the City and community. Duties of the contract planner may include:
• Review of preservation policies to develop a list of priority projects • Grant writing services
• Applying the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards analysis to historic properties and conduct design review • Peer review
• Local register evaluations and preparing Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms • Training provision
• Providing Historic Resources Board support including preparation of staff reports, resolutions and exhibits • Answering phone/email inquiries regarding the City’s preservation program • Regular coordination with City staff, as needed
Special projects requiring a separate scope of work and purchase order include, but are not limited to:
• Preservation ordinance updates
• Historic Context Statement and Inventory updates
• Providing California Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the NHPA environmental review The above scope of work is fully negotiable to meet the City’s needs.
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 8 4 Cost Proposal and Billing Rates
Rincon will provide historic preservation planning staff augmentation services on a time and materials basis for a do-not-exceed amount of $50,000. Hours would be billed only as work is performed based on specific requests, and a summary of tasks performed each month would be provided with monthly invoices or as requested.
Additional resources can be requested by the City at any time and special projects will require a separate scope of work and purchase order. Rincon’s rate sheet covering the next three years is provided on the next page.
City of San Juan Bautista
Proposal to Provide Historic Preservation On-Call Support 9 Item: 5.A
City Council Meeting
December 2, 2024
Page | 1
CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 2, 2024 (Continued from NOVEMBER 19, 2024) DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
FROM: DON REYNOLDS
BY: DON REYNOLDS
TITLE: CITY MANAGER TRANSITION PLAN
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Discuss the role of the City Manager after the contract expires January 1, 2025 (see the attached task list), the need for an Interim City Manager, the need for a City Council Ad-Hoc Committee appointment, and the need to schedule a workshop with the community.
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss retaining on a limited basis the current City Manager to continue to work on water and wastewater projects, the timing for hiring a new City Manager, the need for an Interim inbetween, the need for Council Ad-Hoc Committee to help recruit, and the need for community feedback to frame the recruitment strategy.
BACKGROUND:
At its October 15, 2024 Council meeting the City Council received a report from the City Manager outlining a process for recruiting his replacement. RGS was retained to conduct the recruitment. Appointing an Ad Hoc Committee was suggested but not acted upon. The staff report from that meeting is attached for reference.
DISCUSSION
Staff has been struggling to set a special meeting date for workshop to begin the community engagement needed to describe a recruitment strategy for a new City Manager. The recruitment process may be stretched into February or even March 2025. Can a date can be recommended at this meeting to help initiate the recruitment as soon as possible? It is also important for the Mayor to appoint an Ad-Hoc Committee to work with RGS. The sooner this can happen, the smoother the transition will be. This Committee may be helpful interviewing candidates for an Interim Assignment as well. Does the City Council agree that it Page | 2
would be good to have an Interim City Manager starting in December 2024 – through March 2025?
Until then, attached is a list of tasks that need to be followed-through on the City’s Water and Wastewater projects. These heavily regulated projects are required to be completed as part of the City’s Settlement Agreement with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and Administrative Order on Consent with the Environmental Protection Agency. It is critical that they continue as planned in this attachment through a new temporary 6-9-month agreement, preferably with the current City Manager through the firm that retains his consulting services. As proposed, that agreement would be executed in Jaunary.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No action is sought, simply feedback from the City Council on the process.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Water and Wastewater Projects to be continued by the existing City Manager 2) Staff report on Recruiting a new City Manager form October 15, 2024 Don Reynolds 11/7/24
DON REYNOLDS
San Juan Bautista Contract Project Proposal
After the end of the current City Manager contract December 31, 2024, Don Reynolds will continue to work towards full implementation of the Water and Wastewater Capital improvement projects. The following is a narrative and estimated hours needed to complete the tasks.
Continue to Work with Regulators
The City’s wastewater utility is operating under the scrutiny of both EPA and State Regional Water Quality Control Board regulatory orders. The City has been violating its discharge limits for salts (sodium, chloride, TDS) since 2007. This is in part due to the fact that its source of ground water is high in salts (higher than the discharge limit).
To correct the situation, the City has to meet the compliance metrics within the EPA’S August 18, 2020, Administrative Order on Consent (“AOC”) and July 20, 2022, Settlement Agreement with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Work includes quarterly reporting, fiscal accounting to show how fines have been applied to the cost of addressing the violations, and any new issues that arise. Replies above and beyond the settlement agreement require coordination with the City Engineering team and City Plant Operator.
1) 4-6 hours per month through July 2025
Wastewater Compliance Project
The first order in the AOC was to select two compliance projects: one for wastewater and a second for water. The City Council, by Resolution 2020-51, agreed to close its wastewater plant and send its wastewater Don Reynolds 11/7/24
to the Hollister treatment plant. A 40-year agreement with Hollister was executed last July.
The Wastewater CIP is under construction. The Stantec Engineering team is working with MNS Construction Management services holding weekly construction meetings that keep the city up to date on progress.
Data from these meetings become the status reports for the Regulators.
They approve expenditures for the processing with the USDA (of the $25 million in grant and loan funds, the USDA controls a $10 million loan and $6 million grant).
2) Monitoring Construction and payment approvals
8 hours a month through July 2025
Initiate and complete negotiations with Taylor Farms, Church Brothers and Harvey’s Produce (leasing Coke Farms property). These are the City’s largest wastewater consumers. Their wastewater originates from ground water that contributes to the permit limit violations for chloride and sodium. They need to pay for their share of the compliance efforts.
They need to re-connect new laterals outside of the City limits as well.
This is a LAFCO process whereby the city is connecting (reconnecting) its services outside and beyond its political boundaries. These conversations need to start in earnest at the 1st of the year. 3) Negotiate and execute new service agreements for the 3- industrials users
10-hours per month each; 30-hours per month through July 2025.
Water Compliance Project
The second project is to import surface water with less chloride and sodium and blend it with the ground water. Complete negotiations with Don Reynolds 11/7/24
the Water District on two agreements: the pipeline CIP imports drinking water to blend with the City ground water, and a long-term purchase agreement (shared between 4 agencies) for the imported drinking water. Much of this work started in 2023 and is making progress now. I need to complete and execute the two agreements in early 2025. 4) 20-hours a month through March 30, 2025
Execute an amendment to MNS Engineering Agreement to design the pipeline from the West Hills Treatment Plant to the City’s Well 6. Award agreement for CEQA related work. Bid and Award Contract for construction. RFP and award of a contract for CM Services. 5) 15-hours a month through August 30, 2025
CITY OF HOLLISTER
The City of Hollister relies on KH for its City Engineering services. Its Public Works Director is focused on street repairs. In several conversations with the City Manager, I have been offered to help build facilities for Hollister that are funded but the CIPs sit idle. These include refurbishing the Veterans Hall, park improvements, and wastewater treatment plant improvements.
Item: 8.A
City Council Meeting
October 15, 2024
Page | 1
CITY OF SAN JUAN BAUTISTA
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2024
DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
FROM: DON REYNOLDS
BY: DON REYNOLDS
TITLE: CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Authorize the retiring City Manager to initiate recruitment for his replacement as soon as possible, hiring a recruiter for an amount not to exceed $25,000.
RECOMMENDATION:
After consideration of the proposed recruitment process described in this report, provide the City Manager with direction to retain professional recruitment services to solicit interest from those interested in being the City’s next City Manager.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Manager announced his retirement to the City Council 90-days prior to the termination of the current contract, December 31, 2024. The 90-day period is intended to allow the City to recruit for a new City Manager in time to assure a smooth transition. Regional Government Services, (“RGS”) has been acting as the City’s Human Resources consultant for the past 4-years, and has ample experience conducting executive recruitments. The attached proposal provides the detailed experience and a cost estimate of $22,000. Within 10-days of signing the Agreement, RGS will initiate an assessment of needs now, draft a job description, and open recruitment immediately following the election in November. This report recommends approving the proposed process for recruitment, and retaining the services of RGS.
BACKGROUND:
San Juan Bautista’s last City Manager recruitment was conducted by the Interim City Manager starting in March, 2019. Interviews occurred in May, and the contract for the current City Manager was approved June 19, 2019, with a starting date of July 2, 2019.
Page | 2
Most cities rely on professional recruitment service providers for this process. This will allow regular business to move forward while the recruitment occurs. “Regular Business” includes the completion of the City’s audit, on-going water, wastewater and capital improvement projects, the November 5, 2024 Election, and seating two new City Council members in December.
The City has a contract already in place for Human Resource services with Regional Government Services (“RGS”). They have been drafting job descriptions, and conducting successful recruitments for the City for the past several years. These include the Public Safety Coordinator, and Code Enforcement Officer, Deputy City Clerk, and Associate Planner. All of these recruitments have been successful, bringing forward outstanding candidates to select from. They have recently completed two local executive recruitments, including a Castroville District Manager, and Del Rey Oaks City Manager positions. They know the City well, and understand its funding restraints. Their proposal is a very reasonable $22,000 proposed to be paid from salary savings.
DISCUSSION
The City subscribes to the services of both the California City Management Foundation, and the International City Manager’s Association. Attached is a four-page article from the CCMF: “How to Successfully Recruit a City Manager in the 21st Century” 2004,” that describes the importance of the City Manager recruitment. Also attached the table of contents from the ICMA’s “Recruitment Guidelines for Selecting a Local Government Administrator” 2012. The whole 52- page document is available at this link:
https://icma.org/documents/recruitment-guidelines
Only one City employee answers to the City Council: the City Manager. This recruitment is the next City Council’s most important decision. It is critical that the best candidate be selected from the most diverse pool of candidates possible. The process is complicated by potential changes to the governance structure, rate of compensation to be negotiated, and Brown Act processes that allow full participation by the City Council and possibly participation by stakeholders and/or City staff.
It takes a little time to gather data about the City’s expectations and needs, and confirm the that the draft Job Flyer puts the City’s best foot forward to attract the best qualified candidates. It also helps if this rigorous process is completed by a third party to avoid any perception of favoritism.
Due to the election occurring in the midst of the recruitment, it is best to conduct final interviews with the fully seated City Council (January 2025) (as noted on Page 3 of the ICMA guidelines).
Due to this delay, it is anticipated that the City Council will need an interim City Manager to act between December and March 2025. The Interim assignment could be filled by the current City Manager, or a favored retired City Manager that lives locally.
Both of the attached publications express the need to begin filling the vacancy of City Manager immediately. The quickest most efficient process includes the assignment of a City Council recruitment sub-committee to work regularly with the Consultant. Five years ago, the City Item: 8.A
City Council Meeting
October 15, 2024
Page | 3
appointed a subcommittee for this purpose. Appointing that Committee now for this recruitment is a good start to a successful process.
The Consultant is paid to work with the Committee and full Council to conduct an assessment that define the desired qualifications, (as described eh first page of the CCMF Article). Does the City desire a City Manager for specific purpose or with a strong background in one area or another? This assessment then leads to job flyers, compensation considerations, and further details concerning the process. In this discussion, the timing and need for Interim City Manager will be considered.
Both the CCMF article and ICMA recommend hiring a consultant. CCMF estimates this would cost between $18,000 and $30,000. The $22,000 proposal from RGS is reasonable for the City’s needs and size. They know our City culture and needs as well as any new firm would have to learn.
Retaining RGS avoids paying twice to a new firm for that learning curve. They will report their progress to the City Council as the process moves forward and at especially at the November and December City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City expects to spend between $19,000 and $25,000 for the City Manager recruitment. Staff is seeking approval of $25,000 so to not interrupt the process if the need for additional funding should occur (slow response, additional advertising, extending deadline, etc.). These funds will be paid from salary savings.
ATTACHMENTS:
RGS Proposal
CCMF City Manager Recruitment Article
ICMA Recruitment Guidelines Table of Contents