City Council and Authorities Concurrent
February 8, 2022

City of Santa Clara
Meeting Agenda
Council Priority Setting Session
Virtual Meeting 2:30 PMTuesday, February 8, 2022
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54953(e) and City of Santa Clara Resolution 22-9042, the City Council meeting will be held by teleconference only. No physical location will be available for this meeting: however, the City of Santa Clara continues to have methods for the public to participate remotely:
• Via Zoom:
o https://santaclaraca.zoom.us/j/99706759306
Meeting ID: 997-0675-9306 or
o Phone: 1(669) 900-6833
• Via the City’s eComment (now available during the meeting) • Via email to [email protected]
As always, the public may view the meetings on SantaClaraCA.gov, Santa Clara City Television (Comcast cable channel 15 or AT&T U-verse channel 99), or the livestream on the City’s YouTube channel or Facebook page.
2:30 PM COUNCIL PRIORITY SETTING SESSION
[PUBLIC COMMENT will be
be allotted 2-minutes following EACH agenda item presented.] afforded to any member of the public wishing to speak on an AGENDA ITEM and will Call To Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call

CONSENT CALENDAR
[Items listed on the CONSENT CALENDAR are considered routine and will be adopted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of the items on the CONSENT CALENDAR unless discussion is requested by a member of the Council, staff, or public.
considered under CONSENT ITEMS PULLED FOR DISCUSSION.]
If so requested, that item will be removed from the CONSENT CALENDAR and

Council Priority Setting Session Meeting Agenda February 8, 2022 Action on a Resolution Extending AB 361 Implementation to Allow City Legislative Bodies to Hold Public Meetings Solely by Teleconference or Otherwise Electronically During the
Governor’s Proclaimed COVID State of Emergency
22-140
Adopt a Resolution finding the continued existence of
the need to extend AB 361 implementation to allow
the City’s legislative bodies to hold public meetings
solely by teleconference or otherwise electronically
pursuant to AB 361.

Recommendation:

Purpose of Priority Setting Session
 Check-in on Council meeting protocol and governance norms  Receive and discuss updates on budget staffing resources  Review workload and accomplishments
 Review and assess the Council Priorities in light of budget and staffing resources

1. WELCOME- Where We Are
A. 2022 City Council Priority Setting Session22-1665

2. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
[This item is reserved for persons to address the Council or authorities on any matter not on the agenda that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City or Authorities. The law does not permit action on, or extended discussion of, any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. The governing body, or staff, may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed, and appropriate body may request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting. Although not required, please submit to the City Clerk your name and subject matter on the speaker card available in the Council Chambers.]

3. BUDGET UPDATE & 10-YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST

PUBLIC COMMENT

4. ACCOMPLISHMENTS ON COUNCIL PRIORITIES & STATE OF THE ORGANIZATION

PUBLIC COMMENT

5. GOVERNANCE CHECK-IN WITH COUNCIL

PUBLIC COMMENT

6. 2022 COUNCIL PRIORITIES STRATEGY -- (030)
(A) 2022 Critical Priorities
(B) Additional Items Referred to Priority Session:

Council Priority Setting Session Meeting Agenda February 8, 2022

1. Sanitary Sewer Laterals (referred by 030, heard at 2/23/2021 Council)

2. Elected Police Chief & City Clerk Ballot Measure for November 2022

3. Election Reform/Campaign Contribution Cap

4. Internet Equity and Wifi

5. Ballot Measure for Infrastructure Bond or Tax (referred by 030)

6. Discussion of New City Hall in New Santa Clara Downtown Plan (referred by 030)

7. Proposal of New City Film Commission (referred by 030)

8. Construction of Lawn Bowl Facility for Consideration (referred by 030)

9. Installation of Rainbow Crosswalk(s) Painting in Santa Clara (referred by 030)

10. Installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Crosswalk at Kiely/Mauricia (referred by 030)

11. Establish Stadium Neighborhood Relations Committee (referred by 030)

12. Feasibility Study for Constructing a roadway undercrossing at the RR tracks separating Benton Street and Brokaw Road near the Santa Clara Caltrain Station and Future BART Station (Referred from 1/5/2022 Study Session)

13. Approve the review of the Senior Advisory Commission Transportation Interest Letter and refer the issue of a transportation needs analysis

14. Swim Club Presentation on the remedial condition of the facility

15. Consideration of current janitorial services contract renewal based on public comment experiences with the vendor
(C) New Written Council Request Submitted by Vice Mayor Jain dated February 1, 2022

1. Requesting a Discussion on Dissolving Parking Maintenance District No.122 - Franklin Square and Possibly Negotiating a New Agreement to be Agendized to a Future Meeting

PUBLIC COMMENT

7. RECOMMENDATIONS:
(A) Adopt a resolution for Procedural practices for the conduct of business at meetings of the City Council and its authorities to improve meeting efficiency (B) Note and File the Budget Update and 10-Year General Fund Forecast

Council Priority Setting Session Meeting Agenda February 8, 2022 (C) Adopt FY 2022-2023 Budget Principles
(D) Approve decisions to move forward with potential ballot measures (E) Validate 2022 Priorities and approve any amendments (F) Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Number 37 Submitted by Vice Mayor Jain)

8. WRAP UP & COUNCIL QUESTIONS/COMMENTS
22-236 Tentative Meeting Agenda Calendar (TMAC)

9. ADJOURNMENT
The next regular scheduled meeting is on Tuesday, February 22, 2022.

Council Priority Setting Session Meeting Agenda February 8, 2022 The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitation period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. If a person wishes to challenge the nature of the above section in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues they or someone else raised at the meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clara, at or prior to the meeting. In addition, judicial challenge may be limited or barred where the interested party has not sought and exhausted all available administrative remedies.

AB23 ANNOUNCEMENT: Members of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Sports and Open Space Authority and Housing Authority are entitled to receive $30 for each attended meeting.

Note: The City Council and its associated Authorities meet as separate agencies but in a concurrent manner. Actions taken should be considered actions of only the identified policy body.

LEGEND: City Council (CC); Stadium Authority (SA); Sports and Open Space Authority (SOSA); Housing Authority (HA); Successor Agency
to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency (SARDA); Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority (BNPEA); Public Facilities Financing Corporation (PFFC) Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

If
a member of the public submits a speaker card for any agenda items, their name will appear in the Minutes. If no speaker card is submitted, the Minutes will reflect "Public Speaker." In accordance
with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), the City of Santa Clara will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability in its services, programs, or activities, and will ensure that all existing facilities will be made accessible to the maximum extent feasible. The City of Santa Clara will generally, upon request, provide appropriate aids and services leading to effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities including those with speech, hearing, or vision impairments so they can participate equally in the City’s programs, services, and activities. The City of Santa Clara will make all reasonable modifications to policies
and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities.

Agendas and other written materials distributed during a public meeting that are public record will be made available by the City in an appropriate alternative format. Contact the City Clerk’s Office at 1 408-615-2220 with your request for an alternative format copy of the agenda or other written materials.

Individuals who require an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or any other disability-related modification of policies or procedures, or other accommodation, in order to participate in a program, service, or activity of the City of Santa Clara, should contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at 408-615-3000 as soon as possible but no later than 48 hours before the scheduled event.

MEETING DISCLOSURES
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-140 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Resolution Extending AB 361 Implementation to Allow City Legislative Bodies to Hold Public Meetings Solely by Teleconference or Otherwise Electronically During the Governor’s Proclaimed COVID State of Emergency

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
On March 17, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 which suspended the Brown Act teleconferencing requirements so that legislative bodies could hold public meetings solely by teleconference, or otherwise electronically, without listing the teleconference locations and without any physical location, as long legislative bodies followed a set of requirements for noticing the meeting agenda and public participation, among other things. Subsequently on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which sunset the Brown Act provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 on September 30, 2021.

On September 16, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 into law which allows local agencies to use teleconferencing without complying with specific Brown Act restrictions in certain state emergencies until January 1, 2024, at which point they are to be repealed, and the standard Brown Act teleconference requirements become effective again. The bill was an urgency measure, and it went into effect immediately.

On October 19, 2021, November 16, 2021, December 14, 2021 and January 11, 2021 the City Council approved Resolutions Nos. 21-9013, 21-9023, 21-9038 and 22-9042, respectively, to allow City Legislative bodies to hold public meetings solely by teleconference or otherwise electronically pursuant to AB 361.

DISCUSSION
AB 361 amended Government Code Section 54943 to allow a local agency to use teleconferencing for public meetings without requiring the teleconference location to be accessible to the public or a quorum of the members of the legislative body of the agency to participate from locations within the boundaries of the agency’s jurisdiction during a Governor-proclaimed state of emergency in certain circumstances.

In order for a local agency to utilize AB 361’s exemption to the Brown Act, there must be certain emergency conditions present. These include:
· There being a state-proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 1 of 4
powered by Legistar™
22-140 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
· The Council is meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees; or
· The Council is meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, that in-person meetings would pose health and safety risks to attendees.

In order for the City’s legislative bodies to continue meeting remotely with the exemptions to the Brown Act provided for under AB 361, the Council is required to take certain actions, most of which the City is already implementing:
· The City must continue providing notice of meetings and continue to post agendas as the Brown Act requires to the agency’s website,
· The City must continue allowing for public access to the meeting, while allowing for a public comment period to directly address the legislative body pursuant to Brown Act’s other teleconferencing provisions,
· The City must continue giving notice for how the public can access the meeting and provide public comment, including a call-in or internet-based service option (no physical location required),
· The City must continue providing the public with the opportunity to comment in real time (with the option of additionally allowing comments to be submitted in advance, if the agency desires),
· The City must stop the meeting until public access is restored in the event of a service disruption, and
· No later than 30 days after the first teleconferencing meeting and every 30 days thereafter, the Council will have to reconsider the circumstances of the state of emergency to determine if remote meeting procedures need to remain in place.

The legislative body must make certain findings by majority vote every 30 days to continue using the AB 361 Brown Act teleconferencing requirements. Because the City Council approved Resolution No. 9042 on January 11, 2022, the next Council meeting to extend the resolution is February 8, 2022.

Failure to approve this extension would result in City Council, boards, and commissions meeting being unable to meet fully virtual without exposing the locations of each member’s location on the posted agendas.

Beginning on March 11, 2020 and continuing every 60 days thereafter, the City Council has continued its proclamation of local emergency based on substantial evidence that the public interest and necessity require the continuance of the proclamation of local emergency related to COVID-19.

On September 21, 2021, the Santa Clara County Public Health Officer recommended that public bodies continue to meet remotely to the extent possible due to the continued threat of COVID-19 to the community, the unique characteristics of public governmental meetings, and the continued increased safety protection that social distancing provides as one means by which to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. On November 2, 2021, emergency use of the Pfizer COVID vaccine was authorized for children ages 5-11. On that same day, Santa Clara county moved back into the substantial (orange) COVID-19 transmission tier. On November 22, 2021, Santa Clara county moved to the moderate (yellow) COVID-19 transmission tier. On November 25, 2021, scientists identified the latest COVID-19 variant, Omicron, which has prompted concern among scientists and public health officials because of an unusually high number of mutations that have the potential to make the City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 2 of 4
powered by Legistar™
22-140 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
virus more transmissible and less susceptible to existing vaccines. On December 13, 2021, the California Department of Public Health reinstituted its statewide mask mandate, requiring all individuals, regardless of their vaccination status, to wear face coverings in indoor public settings from December 15, 2021 through January 15, 2022 due to a 47% increase in the statewide seven- day average case rate and 14% increase in hospitalizations since Thanksgiving. In light of the rapid surge in cases due to the Omicron variant, on December 28, 2021, the County of Santa Clara Health Officer issued a health order requiring up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination for workers in certain higher- risk settings. The new order builds on recent changes in the State Health Officer’s vaccination requirements by mandating up-to-date vaccination by workers in certain healthcare and long-term care settings. As of February 3, 2021, new daily Covid-19 cases are on the decline since the surge from the Omicron variant. However, California Covid-19 deaths continue to rise and hospitalizations remain elevated. These associated emergency conditions are on-going and there is a need to continue teleconferencing for public meetings without posting the teleconferencing locations on the agenda and without requiring the teleconference locations to be accessible to the public during the current Governor-proclaimed COVID-19 state of emergency. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the City’s legislative bodies to meet safely in person, and City officials continue to impose or recommend public health safety measures.

It is recommended that the Council adopt a resolution to make requisite findings to allow the City’s legislative bodies to continue to hold public meetings solely by teleconference or otherwise electronically so long as the state of emergency and social distancing measures continue. The Council will have to take action on a monthly basis to reassess and reaffirm such findings to continue meeting remotely.

The proposed Resolution is attached.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a governmental organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact other than administrative time and expense.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and City Clerk’s Office.

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution finding the continued existence of the need to extend AB 361 implementation to allow the City’s legislative bodies to hold public meetings solely by teleconference or otherwise City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 3 of 4
powered by Legistar™
22-140 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
electronically pursuant to AB 361.

Reviewed by: Nadine Nader, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution
City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 4 of 4
powered by Legistar™
Resolution/Allowing City Legislative Bodies to Hold Teleconference Public Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 Page 1 of 5 Rev: 11/22/17

RESOLUTION NO. _

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

FINDING THE CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF THE NEED TO
EXTEND AB 361 IMPLEMENTATION TO ALLOW CITY

LEGISLATIVE BODIES TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS SOLELY

BY TELECONFERENCE OR OTHERWISE ELECTRONICALLY
PURSUANT TO AB 361

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the City of Santa Clara is committed to preserving and nurturing public access and participation in meetings of the City’s City Council, Council Committees, City Decision-Making Bodies (including Santa Clara Stadium Authority Board, Sports and Open Space Authority, Housing Authority, Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency, Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority, and Public Facilities Financing Corporation), City Boards, Committees and Commissions, Taskforces, and Other City Advisory Entities; WHEREAS, all meetings of City of Santa Clara’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950, et seq., hereinafter referred to as the “Brown Act”), so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; WHEREAS, the Brown Act allows a local legislative body to hold public meetings by teleconference and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to attend and to address the local legislative body, as long as the following requirements are met: (1) each teleconference location from which a member is participating is noticed on the agenda; (2) each teleconference location is accessible to the public; (3) members of the public must be able to address the body at each teleconference location; (4) at least one member of the legislative body must be physically present at the location specified in the meeting agenda; and (5) during teleconference meetings, at least a quorum of the members of the local body must participate from locations within the local body’s territorial jurisdiction;
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 ----
Resolution/Allowing City Legislative Bodies to Hold Teleconference Public Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 Page 2 of 5 Rev: 11/22/17

which suspended the Brown Act teleconferencing requirements so that legislative bodies can hold public meetings solely by teleconference, or otherwise electronically, without listing the teleconference locations and without any physical location, as long as the agenda that is posted 72 hours in advance indicates that the members of the legislative body will be participating by teleconference, provides the teleconference or webinar access information by which the public may participate electronically, and lists the procedure for individuals with disabilities to request reasonable accommodations;
WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which sunsets the Brown Act provisions of Executive Order N-29-20 on September 30, 2021; WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed urgency ordinance AB 361 which allows a local agency to use teleconferencing for public meetings without posting the teleconferencing locations on the agenda and without requiring the teleconference locations to be accessible to the public during a Governor-proclaimed state of emergency pursuant to California Government Code Section 8625 et seq, if the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members of its legislative bodies to meet safely in person or state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; WHEREAS, in light of the continued state of emergency related to COVID-19, the Santa Clara County Public Health Officer continues to recommend that public bodies meet remotely to the extent possible, specifically including use of newly enacted AB 361 to maintain remote meetings under the Ralph M. Brown Act and similar laws, as outlined in their “Recommendation Regarding Continued Remote Public Meetings of Governmental Entities” issued on September 21, 2021;
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2021, November 16, 2021, December 14, 2021 and January 11, 2021 the City Council approved Resolutions Nos. 21-9013, 21-9023, 21-9038 and 22-9042, respectively, to allow City Legislative bodies to hold public meetings solely by teleconference or otherwise electronically pursuant to AB 361;
Resolution/Allowing City Legislative Bodies to Hold Teleconference Public Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 Page 3 of 5 Rev: 11/22/17

WHEREAS, on November 2, 2021, federal, state and local health officials authorized emergency use of the Pfizer COVID vaccine for children ages 5-11, and may consider emergency authorization of the COVID vaccine for children under age 5 within the next few months;
WHEREAS, on November 22, 2021, Santa Clara County moved into the moderate (orange) COVID-19 transmission tier;
WHEREAS, on November 25, 2021, scientists identified the latest COVID-19 variant, Omicron, which has prompted concern among scientists and public health officials because of an unusually high number of mutations that have the potential to make the virus more transmissible and less susceptible to existing vaccines; WHEREAS, on November 2, 2021, Santa Clara County moved back into the substantial (orange) COVID-19 transmission tier;
WHEREAS, on November 22, 2021, Santa Clara county moved to the moderate (yellow) COVID-19 transmission tier;
WHEREAS, on November 25, 2021, scientists identified the latest COVID-19 variant, Omicron, which has prompted concern among scientists and public health officials because of an unusually high number of mutations that have the potential to make the virus more transmissible and less susceptible to existing vaccines; WHEREAS, on December 13, 2021, the California Department of Public Health reinstituted its statewide mask mandate, requiring all individuals, regardless of their vaccination status, to wear face coverings in indoor public settings from December 15, 2021 through January 15, 2022 due to a 47% increase in the statewide seven-day average case rate and 14% increase in hospitalizations since Thanksgiving;
WHEREAS, in light of the rapid surge in cases due to the Omicron variant, on December 28, 2021, the County of Santa Clara Health Officer issued a health order requiring up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination for workers in certain higher-risk settings. The new order builds on Resolution/Allowing City Legislative Bodies to Hold Teleconference Public Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 Page 4 of 5 Rev: 11/22/17

recent changes in the State Health Officer’s vaccination requirements by mandating up-to-date vaccination by workers in certain healthcare and long-term care settings; WHEREAS, as of February 3, 2021, new daily Covid-19 cases are on the decline since the surge from the Omicron variant. However, California Covid-19 deaths continue to rise and hospitalizations remain elevated;
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 54953(e)(3) requires that the City Council review the need and make findings for continuing the teleconferencing without complying with the agenda posting and public comment requirements at least once every thirty (30) days until Governor terminates the state of emergency; and,
WHEREAS, the associated emergency conditions are on-going and there is a need to continue teleconferencing for public meetings without posting the teleconferencing locations on the agenda and without requiring the teleconference locations to be accessible to the public during the current Governor-proclaimed COVID-19 state of emergency and if approved, will be in effect for 30 days and will expire on March 10, 2022 unless staff returns to City Council on or before March 8, 2022 to request to continue the need for teleconferencing.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

1. That the City Council hereby finds that the state of emergency conditions related to COVID-19, as set forth in Resolution No. 22-9042 adopted on January 11, 2022 and incorporated herein by reference, are on-going.

2. That the City Council finds that there is a need to continue teleconferencing for public meetings without posting the teleconferencing locations on the agenda and without requiring the teleconference locations to be accessible to the public during the current Governor-proclaimed COVID-19 state of emergency.

3. That the City Council finds that the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of members of the City’s City Council, Council Committees, City Decision-Making Bodies Resolution/Allowing City Legislative Bodies to Hold Teleconference Public Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 Page 5 of 5 Rev: 11/22/17

(including Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Sports and Open Space Authority, Housing Authority, Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency, Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority, and Public Facilities Financing Corporation), City Boards, Committees and Commissions, Taskforces, and Other City Advisory Entities to meet safely in person.

4. That City officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing in City facilities.

5. That members of the City Council, Council Committees, City Decision-Making Bodies, City Boards (including Santa Clara Stadium Authority Board, Sports and Open Space Authority, Housing Authority, Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency, Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority, and Public Facilities Financing Corporation), Committees and Commissions, Taskforces, and Other City Advisory Entities are authorized to use teleconferencing, or other electronic means, to hold its public meetings without noticing the teleconferenced locations on the agenda, without making teleconferenced or physical locations accessible to the public, without posting agendas at teleconferenced locations, without requiring members of the legislative bodies to be physically present at the meeting, and without requiring a quorum of the members of the legislative body to participate from locations with the City’s jurisdiction, as long as the agenda that is posted at least 72 hours in advance indicates that members of the legislative body may be participating electronically, provides the teleconference or webinar access information by which the public may participate electronically, and lists the procedure for individuals with disabilities to request reasonable accommodations, in compliance with AB 361, Government Code Section 54953(e).

6. That the Assistant City Clerk is hereby directed to report to the City Council within thirty

(30) days on the need to further continue teleconferencing for public meetings without posting the teleconferencing locations on the agenda and without requiring the teleconference locations to be accessible to the public during the current Governor-proclaimed COVID-19 state of emergency.

Resolution/Allowing City Legislative Bodies to Hold Teleconference Public Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 Page 6 of 5 Rev: 11/22/17

7. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF A RESOLUTION PASSED

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE __ DAY OF _________ , 2022, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST:

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments incorporated by reference: None
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
2022 City Council Priority Setting Session

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
In 2021, the City Council held its annual Priority Setting Session (Session) on February 1 and 2, 2021 and a Priority Check-in on August 17, 2021. On February 8, 2022 the City Council will meet for the annual 2022 Priority Setting Session, this Session builds on the Council’s past efforts. Specifically, the 2022 Priority Setting Session will include the following sections:

1. Welcome - Where We Are

2. Budget Update and 10-Year Financial Forecast

3. Accomplishments on Council Priorities and State of the Organization

4. Governance Check-In with Council

5. 2022 Council Priorities Strategy--Unfunded Council Initiatives (030) & 2022 Critical Priorities Attached to this report is a matrix (Attachment 1) that summarizes various referrals and policy priorities and their status. It is important to note that there will be several opportunities for public comment and to receive input from the community. Following the review of the City’s fiscal position and organizational capacity and a governance check-in, the City Manager and session facilitator will lead the Council in a discussion of critical priorities and how to balance future priorities against the City’s current resources and condition.

It is important to note early on that this is not a “business as usual” Session. The City is entering its:
· Third year of working through COVID uncertainty and its impacts to the City’s General Fund fiscal health, City services, and workforce,
· Six-months without a permanent City Attorney and the significant impact to the entire City organization for lack of adequate legal support needs, and · Window of opportunity to course correct by reaching agreement on a critical path and critical priorities.

Our organization is not the same organization that it was in February 2021, when this Council first met in this format with the hope of the recently developed vaccines that allowed for us to plan to “reopen” the economy and restore our pre-COVID strategies. Unfortunately, two COVID-19 variants further impacted our strategic plans and, as a result, we are a very different organization with significantly less capacity, less General Fund revenue and a larger workload that continues to grow.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 1 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
If we look at the next nine months (February - November 2022), there is an opportunity to collectively lead toward favorable ballot measure and budget balancing outcomes that stabilize the organization and maximize preserving services. If we miss this opportunity and continue a “business as usual” approach, we guarantee that the organization will continue down a path of more service and fiscal uncertainty. Indeed, we are on a critical path to address a critical priority with nine months to change the trajectory. In short:
· We need successful revenue ballot measures that stabilize the General Fund, both by measures that maintain the status quo and invest in operational revenue to preserve current services levels and invest in infrastructure (current measures will not bring new revenue for new services, at best they preserve service levels and may allow for some investment in recently reduced service resulting from COVID,
· By November 2022, the following five months (November 2022 to May 1, 2023) we will either be:

A) Reducing/eliminating more staff/services to balance the estimated $19.6+ million deficit (See Budget Update and 10-Year Financial Forecast) and any other adverse impacts that come from failed voter approved ballot measures (with potential loss of $25-30 million eliminated from the General Fund)
OR,
B) Evaluating revenue from voter-approved ballot measures that allow for us to preserve current service levels and potentially unfreeze positions. · This critical path requires us to think strategically and critically about how we spend the next nine months and use our extremely limited staff capacity to prevent further destabilization of our organization
· COVID impacts and Fiscal and Operations Sustainability require our full attention · If we stabilize our fiscal foundation, from a stable fiscal condition and healthy community and workforce, all things are possible!
It is not all bad news. Allow for me to end this section of this report with some good news: We have been here before and we can do this again!
We know what we need to do and how to get this work done. If you will recall, in 2017 the City had a projected $116 million deficit and, by 2020, we were able to get the projected deficit down to as low as $3.3 million and build up the City’s General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve’s to unprecedented levels never experienced by the City. It is this work that has allowed for the City to prevent further service loss from COVID induced impacts.

How did we do it? It took Council and staff discipline to stay focused on what we need, (not what would be nice to have), create workforce capacity for City staff to complete this priority work by removing non-urgent/non-priority work from our workload, and by minimizing distractions that pulled City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 2 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
us away from our critical path and critical priority. That is what we need again, this is not hard to do but requires focus.

If we anchor to an aligned goal, we can do this!

SESSION FACILITATOR
This Session will be facilitated by Dr. Shawn Spano, who has led the City over the past years through this annual process and is familiar with the City’s and Council’s work. Dr. Spano has over 25 years of experience working with city government and public organizations. He is a specialist in designing and facilitating public forums, meetings, training workshops and off-site retreats with elected officials, executive staff, middle managers, commissions and boards, and residents. He also facilitated the Council’s Session in February and August 2021 and is familiar with their previous discussions.

BUDGET UPDATE AND 10-YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST
As one of the City’s major fiscal management and strategic planning tools, staff revised the 10-Year General Fund Forecast (Forecast) that will serve as a foundation for evaluating the long-term financial condition of the City. The Forecast provides a starting point for evaluating priorities, identifying risk factors and vulnerabilities, understanding trade-offs moving forward, and developing potential mitigation actions. In the short-term, the 10-Year Forecast also provides a revised value for projected deficit or surplus: in this case, the Forecast indicates the efforts needed now to address the deficit with actual, known risk.

At the Session, staff will present the updated Forecast and discuss the implications to the City’s strategic planning and action. The proposed FY 2022/23 Budget Principles will also be presented for approval (Attachment 2). The Budget Principles provide a general framework and approach for developing the City’s budget in a fiscally prudent manner. The proposed Principles have been revised to acknowledge the drop of the Budget Stabilization Reserve to 15% of expenditures in FY 2022/23.

The Forecast reflects the latest information on the City’s projected revenues and costs. It will show a substantial General Fund ongoing shortfall of $19.6 million in FY 2023/24 to be addressed in the next biennial operating budget. This is a largely a result of COVID-19 induced impacts on City revenues, with improvement in the remaining years of the Forecast.

As has been noted in the past two years, the City’s General Fund has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 global pandemic, with declines starting at the end of FY 2019/20. As an example of our response, staff immediately implemented cost control measures in FY 2019/20, such as a hiring freeze and limiting as-needed staffing and non-personnel expenditures, to help offset the loss in revenue. These efforts have assisted by not adding to the deficit. Budget balancing actions were also necessary in FY 2020/21, as well as in the FY 2021/22 and FY 2022/23 Biennial Operating Budget that was approved in June 2021. The City used federal stimulus funding and other one-time reserves as a major budget balancing component to help bridge the gap and allow more time for economic recovery. While the use of these one-time funds has enabled the City to preserve many services through the FY 2021/22 and FY 2022/23 Biennial Budget period, an ongoing shortfall is projected to remain after that point, and those reserves or federal allocations no longer exist to extend services.

Staff will also present a potential budget balancing strategy that relies on a combination of increased and stabilized revenues, expenditure reductions and the use of our limited remaining reserves.

Actions that increase revenues include improving the cost recovery of fees, tax measures, and City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 3 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
ensuring other funds are paying their fair share of costs.

The Session will also include discussion on potential ballot measures for the June and November 2022 elections (See 2022 Ballot Measure Strategy Development section). Staff will also bring forward a fee study in April 2022. Other balancing actions include reducing expenditures and the use of limited reserves, such as depleting the Land Sale Reserve. The Session will also include an overview of the significant unfunded capital infrastructure needs as the City staff is developing the FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 Capital Budget. A funding strategy, beyond the current pay as you go long practice, is also needed to address the City’s increasingly aging infrastructure.

Timing is a critical factor in the budget balancing process. With the planned draw down of reserves already factored into the budget balancing strategy, along with already implemented expenditures reductions, there are fewer options available to address this deficit. The revenue strategies that require voter approval, which are a key component to addressing the General Fund deficit as well as the significant unmet infrastructure needs, have a short timeline for voter consideration along with the City’s ability to provide education and information for voters to be informed about the measures. The outcome of these ballot measure efforts will impact the level of cost reductions necessary to balance the budget. The development of cost reduction proposals will begin later this calendar year (e.g., November/December 2022) for the FY 2023/24 and FY 2024/25 Biennial Operating Budget process, after the results of any June 2022 and November 2022 ballot measures are known. This will be extremely challenging for the organization that has already been impacted by reductions and has many service and infrastructure needs, with considerably less reserves than we had pre-COVID.

It is important to note that often the first step an organization takes to reduce a projected deficit is eliminate vacant positions before it eliminates filled positions. The existing General Funded vacant positions do not even make up in value half of the projected $19.6 million deficit. This demonstrates the magnitude of additional service/position eliminations that would be required to balance the FY 2023/24 Operating budget. This also demonstrates that any new or stabilized revenue sources are needed to maintain current services, which are already understaffed, and the likeness that there will not be available new resources to invest in new services.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS ON COUNCIL PRIORITIES AND STATE OF THE ORGANIZATION In 2021, the City provided a 2021 Mid-Year Summary of Accomplishments and Year-End Summary of Accomplishments on Council Priorities (Attachment 3). These Citywide accomplishments provide transparency for the community of all of the efforts underway and advancement of Council policy priorities: they also demonstrate the high-performing teamwork that is award-winning and how we have pivoted to respond to our community’s needs during COVID while concurrently advancing Council priorities. At the 2021 Priority sessions, the Council categorized priorities using the following levels:
· Urgent/Top Priority
· Important
· Already in Progress/Ongoing
· To Be Considered for 2022
During this section of the Session, an update on the ongoing and 2021 City Council Priorities will be presented. A full detailed list of the 2021 Council Priority Items is attached to this report (Attachment City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 4 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
1), but you can see this process working by having advanced the Council’s “Urgent/Top Priority and Important” priorities, amongst other accomplishments, over the past year.

At the August 2021 Check-in, the Council unanimously agreed that COVID-19 Relief/Recovery remains an “Urgent/Top Priority” category and continues to be the primary focus. The Council also identified three items as “Important,” which included the items below already underway:
þ Levi’s Stadium Curfew and Violation Fee- Revisiting the Stadium curfew and fee which is going to be schedule for the Board in October.

Status: Completed, staff presented a report in November 2020 and the Council took action on this matter.
þ Modernization of Business Employee Tax - Pursuing a business employee tax which is already before the Council. Council approved agreement with consultant to provide voter research, strategic consulting, and community outreach services.

Status: Underway, staff has presented twice on the development of a business employee tax and will be presented with more information following community engagement work completed in January 2022. Staff is prepared to proceed with the appropriate work that must be completed to successfully place a measure on the November ballot and provide information/educational information, but capacity must be made available to successfully complete the wide range of work effort.
þ Affordable Housing Opportunities - Affordable and, particularly, low-income housing, which has also been inclusive of homeless housing opportunities remain a priority.

Status: Completed, staff supported two policy discussions on affordable housing, including temporary services and transitional housing for the homeless. Council continues to approve affordable housing developments, approved a Home Key transitional housing for homeless, along with the development of short-term personal/hygiene services and a Task Force for any further work deemed needed.

The City continues to focus on COVID-19 recovery and continued service delivery to the community:
however, with the Omicron variant, City services have been impacted demonstrating how shallow some of our service delivery resources are by the need to suspend services until healthy staff could return to work. In fact, at the time of writing this report, the entire region is still experiencing the Omicron variant surge of COVID-19 cases, which results in some element of uncertainty for fiscal and workplace changes. For 2022, COVID-19 Relief/Recovery, and all fiscal and workplace impacts, remains our major priority.

Coincidently, MissionSquare Research Institute, a public sector leading research institute that produces studies on national public sector trends, recently released a report on the public sector workforce in the context of the nation’s Great Resignation trend (Attachment 4). The national study supports many of the local observations that our organization has seen in recent workforce trends: it also underscores that we are not unique and that our problems are shared by other public agencies that we compete with for attracting staff. In short, the study found that the public sector is experiencing a workforce fatigued by COVID, 52% of public sector staff are considering leaving their City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 5 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
jobs, and that the public sector is challenged with retaining/recruiting employees. More information will be shared during this section of the Session.

The State of the Organization Section presents the current organizational capacity, including assessment of workload and ongoing external and internal factors impacting resources. It is important to first consider the current state of the workforce, e.g. multi-year pressures of “essential” work during COVID while concurrently sustaining day-to-day operations, concern for their own COVID safety while working and altered methods of delivering service, significant staff reductions and vacancies (some that are hard to fill or that have been frozen), no comparable reduction in services causing for staff to have to absorb more work, stressor of trying to complete work with considerable delays due to lack of permanent City Attorney, inability to take time off or work a regular work week because of work demands/reduced staffing vacancies, some bargaining units taking two years of zero COLAs and zero merit increases, and the pressures of absorbing more workload within the context of budget deficits. It should not be surprising to hear that staff feels burned-out, overwhelmed, and anxious over how to sustain day-to-day operations, while keeping themselves safe, and offer COVID support while absorbing unprecedented numbers of new Council referrals with a City Attorney’s Office that is woefully under-resourced and leaderless. This is what I hear from staff and it is important for the Council to know how staff are feeling. Our staff are very concerned about the trend of more Council Policy 030s, without consideration of the conditions below.

Below are some bulleted points that inform decision-making on how to consider additional workload in the context of our critical path, critical priority work:
1) COVID impairs full-functionality and has impacted the City’s fiscal and capacity conditions (e.g., workplace, staffing, and services).
2) COVID has revealed how shallow our work “bench” is staffed for sustaining services; 3) Prolonged City Attorney vacancy has altered and shifted the increased workload of existing City Attorney’s Office staff AND significantly consumed much capacity of non-CAO staff- important work is delayed, adds workplace stress, and routine work requires longer time to get completed;
4) Over 2021, City reduced staff capacity significantly and has not reduced proportionately City services--26% reduced capacity did not mean 26% reduced services, with non-public safety departments sharing larger reductions;
5) Capacity has also decreased with as-needed staff (by about 50%), leaving less flexibility with scheduling services;
6) Citywide vacancy rate is 17% (post-COVID) vs. 11-14% in early 2020 (pre-COVID) and, acknowledging that General Funded positions would likely be proposed for elimination in November 2022 to balance the $19.6+ million projected deficit, will remain vacant until the outcome of revenue generating opportunities is better known in November; 7) Public Records Act requests impact all City departments and have increased 42% year-to-year (in addition to a record high year in 2020-- with 16,373 total PRA sub-requests in 2020 to 23,240 total PRA sub-requests for 2021) with significant vacancies causing for work to be reprioritized to existing staff to maintain compliance with State laws; 8) Recruitment and Retention Challenges: Staff departures and reduced ability to recruit because of known comparable higher workload, lesser staff impacts to working conditions/demands, and Council dynamics/treatment of staff (some recruitments have to be conducted more than once to get to being able to hire, which consumes limited recruiting resources): exit interviews support a trend of the purpose of departures are: workload, lack of work/life balance because City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 6 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
of workload, and Council dynamics/Council’s treatment toward staff; 9) Multiple external initiatives continue to require assigned capacity in the best interest of the City (e.g., statewide climate related impacts, regional initiatives (BART, affordable housing, COVID programs, etc.), constituent demand for services, etc.); and, 10)Over 200 new bills were signed into law taking effect in 2022, with a number of key legislation that City staff must review and provide legal support for implementation of these new laws in Santa Clara (e.g. SB9 Housing development Approvals, AB 215, Planning and Zoning Law.

Housing Element. Violations, SB 278 Public Employee Retirement System, SB 619 Organic Waste and Reduction Regulations, SB2 Peace Officers. Certification. Civil Rights, SB16 Peace Officers. Release of Records).

Last, it is common for organizations to reserve funds and workforce capacity for unanticipated events/initiatives: this is because in a dynamic environment like Santa Clara/Silicon Valley, naturally issues come up that must be addressed with resources. Our organization does not have such reserve either in our operational budget or workforce capacity. New priorities come with the assumption that a funding appropriation is required and/or that current staff will need to work beyond their regular heavy workload to absorb the work. This year, investment in the new initiatives would require reducing reserves that are generally programmed for balancing the budget as reflected in the potential budget balancing proposal. To be clearer, for example, decisions need to be made in the context of any dollars invested in initiatives is the equivalent lesser dollars available to preserve staffing levels for day-to-day services.

GOVERNANCE
The facilitator will conduct a governance check-in during the 2022 City Council Priority Setting session, dividing the segment into procedures to improve meeting efficiency and norms to enhance civility and collegiality.

During this section of the Session, the facilitator will assess the current meeting protocol with the Council that was developed at the August 2021 session, and review any changes or revisions. Next, the facilitator will introduce a segment on governance norms. He will review governance norms to address civility and collegiality and selected excerpts from the City’s Code of Ethics and Values and Behavioral Standards (Attachment 5) and his reflections on observing recent Council meetings, as well as some areas for improvement. These standards were developed and approved by Council in 2008 as part of the City’s Ethics and Values program. The facilitator will invite the Council to discuss the following:
· How is Council doing in adhering and following these norms and behavioral standards? The facilitator will conclude the section on meeting efficiency by asking Council to affirm the meeting protocol by vote to adopt a Resolution (Attachment 6) reflecting the procedures adopted in August and recommending any additional procedures to improve meeting efficiency. The facilitator will conclude the civility and collegiality norms segment by asking Council if there any norms and behavioral standards they want to single out to adopt and affirm. As a reference, included in this packet is an article titled “Breaking the Cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings from Western City, the news Institute for Local Government (Attachment 7). 2022 COUNCIL PRIORITIES STRATEGY - UNFUNDED COUNCIL INITIATIVES (030) & RECAP City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 7 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
ON 2022 CRITICAL PRIORITIES
During this section of the Session, the facilitator and City staff will discuss the critical path and critical priorities facing the organization against the context of various new referrals. The Facilitator and City staff will review the progress of the 2021 City Council Priorities, as approved by the Council in February 2021. These priorities were included as part of the FY 2021/22 and FY 2022/23 Biennial Operating Budget.

Following the discussion of the unfunded and un-resourced initiatives, Dr. Spano will lead the Council in a discussion of critical priorities and how to balance any additional future priorities against the City’s current organizational resources and capacity.

In addition to the 2021 City Council Priorities, the following 15 items were referred to this session:

To Be Considered / Continued from August 2021 Priority Check-in

1. Elected Police Chief & City Clerk Ballot Measure for November 2022

2. Election Reform / Campaign Contribution Cap

3. Internet Equity and WiFi
Additional Items (030) referred to 2022 Priority Session:

4. Ballot Measure for Infrastructure Bond or Tax (referred by 030)

5. Sanitary Sewer Laterals (referred by 030, heard at Feb. 23, 2021 Council) and Referred to this Session for presentation and potential action

6. Discussion of New City Hall in New Santa Clara Downtown Plan (referred by 030)

7. Proposal of New City Film Commission (referred by 030)

8. Construction of Lawn Bowl Facility for Consideration (referred by 030)

9. Installation of Rainbow Crosswalk(s) Painting in Santa Clara (referred by 030)

10.Installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon Crosswalk at Kiely/Mauricia

11.Establish Stadium Neighborhood Relations Committee (referred by 030)

12.Feasibility study for constructing a roadway undercrossing at the RR tracks separating Benton Street and Brokaw Road near the Santa Clara Caltrain Station and Future BART Station (Referred from Jan. 5 Study Session)

13.Approve the review of the Senior Advisory Commission Transportation Interest Letter and refer the issue of a transportation needs analysis (referred from Jan. 25, 2022 Council meeting)

14.Swim Club presentation on the remedial condition of the facility (referred from Jan. 25, 2022 Council meeting)

15.Consider current janitorial services contract renewal based on public comment experiences with vendor (referred from Jan. 25, 2022 Council meeting) In addition to the 15 referred items for consideration at this Priority Session, since December 2020, City staff have also been addressing additional directives and initiatives submitted by Council Policy 030. The list below outlines the 37 additional (030) items underway, completed, dropped, or no action made by Council, with an additional item recently submitted.

Additional Council Policy 0-30 Items Referred to Staff

1. (12/8/20) Action on Written Petition submitted by Councilmember Chahal Requesting a Discussion on the CVRA Appeal Case (Completed)
City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 8 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022

2. (12/16/20) Action on a Written Petition submitted by Sam Liu Requesting a Discussion and Reconsideration of a 10’ CMU Wall with the Project at 3200 Scott Blvd. (Underway) City provided a response to written petition on January 26, 2021, referred to staff

3. (1/26/21) Action on a Written Petition Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting a Discussion on the Vote on the Sale of the Loyalton Ranch Property (Underway)

4. (1/6/21) Action on a Written Petition Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting a Discussion and Vote of Revising the Terms of Franklin Mall Maintenance District Number 122 ( Completed, Note and Filed on Jan. 25, 2022)

5. (2/23/21) Action on a Written Petition submitted by Aryeh Korthamar Requesting a Discussion and Consideration of Encroachment of APN 290-35-048, staff contacted property owner for next steps. The City has not yet received a permit application related to this item (Underway)

6. (2/23/21) Action on a Written Petition Submitted by Councilmember Becker Requesting a Discussion on Amending of Section 18.102.010 (“Commercial Marijuana Activity Prohibited”) of Chapter 18.102 (“Regulation of Marijuana”) of Title 18 (“Zoning”) of “The Code of the City of Santa Clara, California” on removing the ban on all Commercial Cannabis Activity (No Action / Motion Failed)

7. (3/10/21) Action on a Written Petition Submitted by Councilmember Becker Requesting a Consideration on Adjusting the Start Times for Council, Stadium Authority, and Closed Session Meetings (Completed)

8. (4/20/21) Action on a Written Petition submitted by Kirk Vartan Requesting Elected City Councilmembers be Required to Turn on Video during Virtual Council Meetings (No Action / Motion Failed)

9. (5/4/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Hardy Requesting a Discussion on Council Policy 047 (Admonition and Censure) (Completed)

10.(5/4/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) submitted by Gabriela Gupta Requesting the Censure of Councilmember Watanabe and Admonishment of Mayor Gillmor - Council Policy 047 (Completed)

11.(6/8/21) Action on a Written Petition Submitted by Councilmember Becker Requesting a Public Apology to the Residents of Santa Clara for the CVRA Lawsuit (item continued to 6/10/21) ad Hoc Committee established to address item (Underway)

12.(6/22/21) Action on a Written Petition submitted by Robert Mezzetti, II Requesting to Discuss Amendment No. 3 to the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement by and between the City, VTA and Republic Metropolitan an LLC for the proposed project located at 500 S. Benton Street (APN 230-08-061 and 230-08-078) (No Action)

13.(6/22/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) submitted by Gabriela Landaveri Requesting the City of Santa Clara Adopt a “Vision Zero” Policy (deferred to 7/6/21) (Underway)

14.(6/22/21) Action on a Written Petition Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to have a Policy Discussion on Data Centers (deferred to 7/6/21) (Underway)

15.(7/6/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) submitted by Ana Vargas-Smith on June 28, 2021 to add an agenda item to consider financial and in-kind support for the Santa Clara Parade of Champions Plan A (Live Parade) or Plan B (Virtual Parade) (Completed)

16.(7/6/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Watanabe Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Discuss Preparation of a Letter from Mayor and Council to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission (Completed)

17.(7/13/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 9 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Discuss Creating a Special Ad Hoc Committee Consisting of Residents and Representatives of Housing Advocacy Groups to Discuss only the issues Concerning the Unhoused Population (Underway)

18.(7/13/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at the August 17, 2021 Goal Setting Meeting to Consider Topics Such as Staffing and Resources, Consultants, Budget, Council Direction on Densities, Car Parking Strategy, Coordination with VTA and San Jose, and Timeline for Implementing a Station Area Plan (Underway)

19.(8/17/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) submitted by Leonne (Lee) Broughman on July 12, 2021 to add an agenda item to a future date about Censure/Admonishment of Councilmember Park (Con’t to 8/24/21)(No Action)

20.(9/7/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) submitted by David Donaldson on August 14, 2021 to add an Agenda Item to a future Council Agenda to Consider Placing a Ballot Measure on the 2022 Ballot for Charter Amendments calling for the voters to consider (1) Establishing Mayor and City Council positions as full-time and with an annual salary of $96,000 and $80,000, respectively, plus commensurate benefits and COLA adjustments and (2) Campaign Reform actions relative to donations from Santa Clara businesses and residents, City matching funds for donations, funding caps, and disclosures of funding raising activities. (Underway) To be agendized at a future meeting to discuss considering Council/Mayor as full-time positions without salary component and return with comps with other cities and #2 was referred to elected City Clerk

21.(9/28/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Discuss the Rules for who can serve on Boards and Commissions, and Committees (Completed)

22.(9/28/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Consider Hiring an Ethics Consultant for Upcoming Elections (Underway) Referred to Governance and Ethics Committee/City Clerk

23.(9/28/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Discuss the use of Written Petition (Policy 030) by Members of the Public (Underway) Referred to Governance and Ethics Committee

24.(9/28/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Consider a Quarterly Report to Council of Legal Expenses to Outside Law Firms and any Settlement Costs (that can be disclosed) Once Cases are Settled (Underway) Referred to Governance and Ethics Committee

25.(10/19/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) submitted by Morteza Shafiei, as representative of HOAs on October 7, 2021 to add an Agenda Item to a future Council Agenda to Consider the Purchase of lot at 1601 Civic Center Drive (Underway/Ongoing) Target scheduled to be heard Spring 2022

26.(10/19/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Meeting to Discuss the Debt Acquisition Company of America Applying for a Conditional Use Permit to Build and Operate a 320 Acre Sand and Gravel Quarry at Sargent Ranch (Complete) Adopted resolution recognizing and supporting the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band in protecting tribal sacred lands of Juristac from development

27.(10/19/21) Action on Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 10 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
Becker Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting for Discussion to Propose a stricter and more Regulated Ordinance for AirBNB Properties/Operations (Dropped)

28.(10/19/21) Action on Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Becker Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting for Discussion to Change the Name of the City of Santa Clara Observed Holiday from Columbus Day to Indigenous People’s Day(Dropped) Councilmember Becker dropped item since the Task Force on DEI and the City already were completing this item

29.(10/19/21) Action on Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Becker Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting for Discussion to Propose an Ordinance to make it a Crime to Promote or Encourage Sideshows on Social Media (Dropped) Councilmember Becker dropped item since it has been completed

30.(11/9/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Brian Doyle Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Discuss FIFA Negotiations (deferred to 11/16/21) (Petition was denied)

31.(11/16/21) Action on a Council Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Hardy to Place an Item on a Future Council Meeting to Consider a Resolution to Support the Bid to FIFA for the 2026 World Cup and Related Events (Underway) Agendized tentatively for 3/8/22

32.(12/7/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Jared Peters Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Consider making a Policy Decision Regarding the City Assuming Responsibility of an Unstable and Dangerous Sound Wall in the Laurel Park East Neighborhood (Underway)

33.(12/7/21) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Travis L. Flora Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Consider Admonition or Censure of Councilmember Becker for his Retaliation Against a Member of the Public on at Least Two Separate Occasions During the Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting on Nov. 16, 2021 (Underway) Councilmembers Becker and Hardy met with Mr. Flora and will report back to Council

34.(1/11/22) Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Discuss making the Youth Soccer Park Parking Lot available when there are no events at the Youth Soccer Park (soccer gets absolute priority) in order to Generate Revenue for the City (To be Agendized at Future Meeting)

35.(1/11/22) Action on a Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Keith Stattenfield Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Discuss requirements from the Office of the City Attorney on Approving an Update to the CC&R’s of the Casa del Rey Homeowner’s Association Bylaws(Underway/Ongoing)

36.(1/22/22) Youth Soccer Park expansion of scope to be discussed (refer to item 34) to explore:

Under Measure R, identify if the City could contract annually to the Santa Clara Youth Soccer League (SCYSL) to manage parking lot and charge for parking during no soccer activity, consider SCYSL to do own scheduling, Parks & Recreation prioritize a scheduler for YSL, City acquire scheduling software to make process more efficient, report of staffing and budget needed to support soccer at SCYSL and Reed & Grant (To be Agendized at Future Meeting) Additional (030) Submitted Petition - Council to consider adding to a future agenda:

37.(1/31/22) Discussions with Franklin Mall Parking Maintenance District No. 122 - Franklin Mall City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 11 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
(PMD 122). Under the current contract for the PMD122, the City has no say in what the assessment will be. The property owners have all the decision power. Suggest to agendize a discussion of dissolving PMD122 and possibly negotiating a new agreement (Attachment 9) By review of the above, it is easy to determine that with our limited capacity coupled with our critical need to focus on our fiscal health, not everything will get done this year and are not as time sensitive when compared to the work that MUST be completed over the nine months. It also shows that there is work to be done by this organization on truly prioritizing and leading the organization strategically with where our focus and resources are invested.

For the Administration, the 2022 priorities are self-evident that is, preserve even the status quo of our already reduced services and completely focus on the success of revenue ballot measures that work toward stabilizing our services and our already-reduced workforce. We have a proven record of having changed the organization’s trajectory, and while it will be a bigger challenge this time, we can make every effort to do it again! But it cannot be done while concurrently supporting multiple changing priorities that can easily be delayed to focus on the true priority of our organization: our fiscal and workforce health, the foundation/backbone of our organization from which, if stable, all things are possible!
2022 Ballot Measure Strategy Development
In addition to the discussion of the current policy priorities, the City’s ballot measure consultants will present their community research on voter sentiment for the conceptual topics that the Council has discussed over the past year: business tax, Charter language change to confirm the existing General Fund transfer, and infrastructure bond measure. Over the past weeks, City staff and consultants have been focused on supporting the Council with developing a ballot measure strategy that focuses on the City’s service preservation.

Consultants will provide the results of their community engagement with statistically significant data and preliminary work of qualitative research completed. This work in standard for the development of a ballot measure strategy and, particularly, informs decision-making for the June and November 2022 elections. As it stands currently, based on law that allows for measures on a General and Special Election ballot the following items are more or less baked into the schedule, with an opportunity to add another:

June:

1. CVRA Settlement Agreement measure to establish Council Districts (Ballot Measure Language set and Council Approved)

2. To be Determined
November

1. Charter Language Amendment to Maintain Utility General Fund Transfer (Final Council Approval Pending)

2. Business License Tax (if Council approves)

PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 12 of 13
powered by Legistar™
22-1665 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022
Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.

RECOMMENDATION
A. Adopt the proposed Resolution establishing meeting procedures B. Note and File the Budget Update and 10-Year General Fund Forecast C. Adopt FY 2022-2023 Budget Principles
D. Provide direction and approval of decisions to move forward with potential ballot measures E. Validate 2022 Priorities and approve any amendments
F. Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Number 37 Submitted by Councilmember Jain
Approved by: Deanna J. Santana, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Council Priorities Matrix

2. FY 2022/23 Budget Principles

3. 2021 City of Santa Clara Annual Report of Accomplishments

4. MissionSquare Research Workforce Trends Report

5. Code of Ethics/Behavioral Standards for Councilmembers

6. Proposed Resolution Establishing Meeting Procedures

7. Western City Article: Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings

8. Additional Background Information for (030) Items

9. Written Petition (030)
City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 13 of 13
powered by Legistar™

City Council Priorities FY 2021/22 and 2022/23
At the February 2021 Council Priority Setting Session, the City Council identified COVID-19 Assistance and Relief as an urgent top priority.

During the mid-year August 2021 Priority Check-in, COVID-19 response and recovery remains a top priority. The Council discussed additional priorities at the following levels:
• Urgent/Top Priority: Items critical in the near-term, needing immediate focus and attention. • Important: Important items that will be included in staff’s work plans but not at the urgent/top priority level. • Already in Progress/Ongoing: Items that have already been initiated and will continue. • To Be Considered: Items for Council to consider at 2022 Priority Setting Session.

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

URGENT / TOP PRIORITY
1 COVID-19 Recovery &
Plan for Re-Opening, post
COVID-19
The City of Santa Clara continues to navigate through the pandemic and has shifted towards COVID-19 recovery. As the City provides City services and resources with the current workforce capacity and fiscal outlook, the City continues to emphasize the importance of COVID-19 vaccinations among employees. On Oct. 4, 2021, the City expanded hours, in-person services by appointment and walk-in at Santa Clara City Hall.

The City continues to pivot during COVID impacts to deliver City services while keeping employees and the public health a priority.

The City implemented COVID-19 relief programs for those impacted by COVID-19 including: Food for Families, Meals to Go Senior Nutrition Program, Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Energy Efficiency Grants for Businesses, Small Business Assistance Grants, Help Your Neighbor, Utility Bill Assistance

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

IMPORTANT
2 Levi Stadium Curfew and
Violation Fee

The City Council voted on Nov. 16, 2021 to direct the City Manager to provide exemptions under Conditions of Approval P22(c) for up to five weeknight concerts per year at Levi’s Stadium, including pyrotechnics ending no later than 11 p.m. on Sunday through Thursday.

If there are other additional requests beyond the five requested per year, the City Manager will bring to Council for discussion. The program will need to be consistent with the Stadium Permit.

◄
a I II I
-
►
•r111

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

IMPORTANT
3 Modernization of Business
Employee Tax

Pursuing a business employee tax which is already before the Council. A Study Session was held on Oct. 26, 2021 to discuss updating the City Business Tax as a potential revenue generating measure. Consultant Matrix Consulting is currently on contract and working on gathering data to assist with tax scenarios. On Dec. 7, 2021, the Council approved an agreement with Lew Edwards Group to provide voter research, strategic consulting, and community outreach services, with maximum compensation not-to-exceed $217,700. The focus group and voter research results will be presented at the February Priority Setting session.
4 Affordable Housing
Opportunities

Affordable and, particularly, low-income housing, inclusive of homeless housing opportunities remain a priority. Council has acted on various affordable housing projects and supports a variety of homelessness services (short and long-term). The City’s Affordable Housing Ordinance will produce nearly 1,000 additional affordable inclusionary units over the coming years and generate dedicated funds through non-residential impact fees to help meet the critical need for more affordable housing. In 2021, Council approved a Loan Agreement with Allied Housing, Inc. for a Loan of up to $4,000,000 to Support the Construction of 80 Affordable Housing Units at 3333-3337 Kifer Road (Kifer Senior Housing); Completed construction and began marketing and lease up at 2904 Corvin Drive (Calabazas Apts) to provide 145 Affordable Housing Units; and closed financing and started construction on the Agrihood Project with Core Affordable Housing that will bring 361 new residential units to Santa Clara. For 2022, the State issued its preliminary bond allocation recommendation list on Dec. 8, 2021. Two Santa Clara projects were recommended for funding including: Kifer Senior Housing ($28M), 100% affordable rental development and Monroe Street Apartments ($22M), a 65-unit building with 25% of units set aside for adults with disabilities.

On Nov. 2, 2021, the County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the acquisition of The Bella Vista Inn located at 3550 El Camino Real in Santa Clara. The developer, Resources for Community Development (RCD), will repurpose the property as Clara Gardens. An application for Project Homekey funds has been made to the State and was awarded $22 million of HomeKey Round 2 funds. Staff will return to Council in 2022 with a Phase 2 Development proposal for permanent housing. The City Council also directed staff to work with LifeMoves to explore a potential Project HomeKey site at a different location from the original proposal at White Oak Lane.

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

ALREADY IN PROGRESS / ONGOING
5 Homelessness

PARTIALLY FUNDED

During 2021, Staff facilitated three City Council study sessions focused on homelessness and approved the formation of a City Homelessness Taskforce. On Dec. 7, the Council voted to add the City’s Housing Commission and establish the powers, functions, and duties of the commission with the Commission to begin activity after conclusion of the Ad hoc Homelessness Task Force. Members of the Ad hoc Homelessness Task Force are targeted to be appointed in January 2022 and the City Housing Commission is targeted to be established in 2023.

On Dec. 14, 2021 as part of the FY 2020/21 Budget Year-End Report, the City appropriated $75,000 to support City implementation activities aligned with the Ad hoc Homelessness Task Force including facilitation of monthly Homelessness Taskforce meetings, preparation of meeting agendas, community education and engagement, and preparation of a Draft City Plan to End Homelessness. Ultimately, the Draft City Plan to End Homelessness may result in additional programmatic recommendations to Council for services that may require additional funding.

Staff also issued an RFP for mobile hygiene services to the City’s unhoused populations, which include bathrooms, showers, laundry, and comprehensive case management support to address a variety of individual challenges including job loss, illness, and food insecurity. 6 Adopt Vision Zero Policy

UNFUNDED

The City held a Study Session on a Potential Quiet Zone and Vision Zero Policy at the Nov. 16, 2021 City Council meeting. Council voted to move this item to be discussed at the February Priority Setting Session and directed staff to return to the Council with a funding source in the amount of $315,000 prior to the Priority Setting Session. On Dec. 14, 2021, City staff presented the FY 2020/21 Budget Year-End Report that included $400,000 for City Council initiatives, which could include the Vision Zero Policy. Of this amount, $75,000 was allocated to support homelessness and the remaining balance of $325,000 is available. Council has not appropriated the remainder of fund balance for this purpose.

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

ALREADY IN PROGRESS / ONGOING
7 Facilitate Economic
Recovery

PARTIALLY

FUNDED/STAFFED
The City has planned and implemented numerous COVID-related programs to facilitate economic recovery including: Grant programs for small businesses; temporary modification of City land use regulations; delivery service caps to protect restaurants; emergency rental assistance program; continuous communication regarding potential resources via eNews and City website; Worker Retention and Recall ordinances; and others. In addition, despite diminished resources, staff has worked to maintain the processing of development applications/permits that facilitate economic growth and recovery. The City has also continued its efforts with the Tourism Improvement District (TID) and DMO to support hotel and convention center sales activity. On Oct. 19, 2021, the City Council adopted the Ordinance No. 2033 to reflect the increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax rate to 11.5%.

The City has never had dedicated staff to economic development, nor an Economic Development Division. It is important to note that the City’s two staff members, that served as subject matter experts while holding other duties, have departed the City. Current work is only partially being completed and some has been suspended (for lack of capacity). 8 Transportation “Quiet Zone”

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
City Council voted at Nov. 16, 2021 City Council to discuss the Transportation Quiet Zone at February Priority Setting Session and City staff will research any potential funding sources, such as the infrastructure bill or grant programs, before the meeting. Staff could not identify any grant opportunities for this work and also checked in with the City’s Legislative Advocacy Consultant, Townsend Public Affairs, and they were not aware of any opportunities either. The estimated cost for the “Quiet Zone” study is $300,000. 9 Transportation Demand
Management Study

UNFUNDED
Staff is working on Request for Proposals (RFP) to get a third-party consultant as well as inclusion of a fee to fund work to include developing a TDM template and requirements for developers. At the Jan. 11, 2022 City Council meeting, the Council voted to note and file for the RFP to include support for online reporting of TDM reports. 10 Station Area Plan (staffing
and resources, consultants,
density, parking, timeline
and coordination with VTA
and San Jose)

PARTIALLY FUNDED
On Dec. 7, 2021 City Council approved the $400,000 in grant funding from the MTC for the preparation of the Santa Clara Area Plan. The City will also have access to up to $500,000 of consultant services funded by the Valley Transportation Authority. The typical cost for preparation of a Specific Plan, including CEQA review, totals $1-1.5M, so additional funding will be necessary to complete and adopt the Specific Plan. Work on the Specific Plan is scheduled to begin in the summer of 2022 and extend through 2025. The grants will not fund analyzing an extension of Brokaw (or any other connection) south of the train tracks.

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

ALREADY IN PROGRESS / ONGOING
11 Elections/Redistricting for
2022
The Independent Redistricting Commission was selected in August 2021. The Commission will adopt a new City Council District map no later than April 17, 2022 based on Census 2020 data and is currently conducting a community engagement process by hosting a series of public hearings as part of the Redistricting process. Upcoming meetings are scheduled for Feb. 10, and Feb. 28. The Independent Redistricting Commission will present to the City Council with the adopted Council map and Council will adopt an ordinance amending the current District Map with the newly adopted map in March 2022. The adopted Council map will be implemented starting with the November 2022 election. 12 Provide Core Services,
including Public Safety
The City continues to provide services in compliance with County, State and Federal safety guidelines. As approved by the City Council as part of the June 22, 2021 adoption of the FY 2021/22 and FY 2022/23 Operating Budget, $1.7 million was added to the Police Department operating budget to restore selected positions eliminated as part of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 budget reductions. The Police Department recommendation included the restoration of two sworn and eight non-sworn personnel. 13 Downtown Task Force /
Precise Plan for Downtown

The City continues to support the revitalization of our Downtown by developing a Precise Plan that will provide guidance through policies, guidelines, and illustrations that implement the community vision and objectives for a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented destination Downtown. Staff works with the Council-appointed Downtown Community Task Force (DCTF) to develop a plan that best represents the desires of the community. The DCTF makes periodic reports to Council on their progress. The schedule anticipates that the City Council will consider adoption of the Precise Plan in Fall 2022/Winter 2023. The Downtown Community Task Force requested a scope and cost to analyze relocating City Hall downtown. The study conceptually analyzes moving City Hall downtown, including conceptual building form/ space programming and an economic and financial analysis. The estimated cost for conceptual land use and economic analysis is $400,000, which is not currently funded.
14 Pilot Program for e-Bikes
and Scooters (Shared
Mobility Program)
The Shared Mobility Program was heard at City Council on Dec. 7, 2021 and Jan. 11, 2022.

Council approved the Ordinance for the Regulation of Shared Mobility Devices (Bicycles and Motorized Scooters) and Adopted a Resolution to Establish Shared Mobility Permit and Impound Fees.
◄
a

I I I I
-

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

ALREADY IN PROGRESS / ONGOING
15 Procurement Reform
Recommendations

City Council approved the proposed reforms and direct City staff to return to a future Council meeting with draft code amendments to be approved with City Attorney. Target Spring 2022 to bring to future City Council meeting.
16 Policy Discussion on Data
Centers

The proposal is for new data centers is to achieve carbon neutrality. Consideration to make this a requirement as part of all new Data Centers and optional for all other land uses. This project will require significant customer outreach and will be considered as part of the Climate Action Plan update targeted to go to the City Council in April / May 2022. City staff is also convening a Data Center working group to address data center issues and for the potential Business License Tax.
17 Economic Support from
Large Businesses
(voluntary)

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED

The City does not actively seek donations in order to ensure staff remains in compliance with City Code and FPPC regulations as well as adheres to the highest ethical standards. While the City does not actively seek donations, Policy 051 provides the methods in which the City may accept donations. During the height of the COVID pandemic, the City worked with two non-profit organizations to accept donations that the nonprofits collected for certain City programs such as the Small Business Assistance Grant and the Healthy Meals program.

18 Expand Councilmember
District Communication
Options
City Manager provided an update on how staff proposes to address this priority with a digital newsletter for district-based monthly newsletter, provided to each City Councilmember to distribute to district constituencies. This effort began in February 2022. 19 Task Force on Diversity,
Equity & Inclusion

The Task Force on Diversity, Equity & Inclusion continues to meet and move forward with their charge of identifying key issues facing the City involving historically disenfranchised communities and making recommendations to policies that help the City achieve racial equity. The Task Force provides quarterly reports on their work efforts to the Council.

Important to note that all staff that once supported this Task Force have departed the City and, to the extent possible, the staff person also assigned to ballot measures is absorbing this work (although it remains insufficient at this time and, accordingly, staff will be working on development of a workplan to focus this work).
◄
a

I I I I
-

Pillar Council Priorities Outcomes

ALREADY IN PROGRESS / ONGOING
20 Councilmember Conflict of
Interest

City staff conducts a review of City Council and Authorities meeting agendas when published for addresses and properties listed in agenda items. The addresses are searched in the City GIS system that contains a database of Councilmember-owned property. If the address is located within a radius (1,000 feet or less than 500 feet) of the Councilmember’s property, staff distributes an email outlining the agenda item(s) and provides this information. When there are instances that the address comes up in the search, staff defers to the City Attorney’s Office to make the determination of conflict of interest. For all other matters, the City Council appropriately self-reports on any potential conflicts of interest.

Pillar Item

Outcomes

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REFERRED TO FEBRUARY PRIORITY SESSION (030 AND OTHER)

1 Elected Police Chief and City
Clerk Ballot Measure for
November 2022

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: 2021 Priority Check-in

2 Election Reform/Campaign
Contribution Cap

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Written Petition Policy 030
Agendize Written Petition submitted by David Donaldson to a future Council Agenda to Consider Placing a Ballot Measure on the 2022 Ballot for Charter Amendments calling for the voters to consider Campaign Reform actions relative to donations from Santa Clara businesses and residents, City matching funds for donations, funding caps, and disclosures of funding raising activities. The component regarding Mayor and Council salaries will be removed. Directed staff to return with a comparison of what other cities do. .,,. ,,,
.,,.
~

Pillar Item

Outcomes

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REFERRED TO FEBRUARY PRIORITY SESSION (030 AND OTHER)

3 Internet Equity and WiFi

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: August 2021 Priority Check-in

The City does not have a franchise agreement for WiFi internet services. Silicon Valley Power offers free outdoor WiFi service provided by Silicon Valley Power Meter Connect.

Santa Clara City Library offers free hotspots for checking out, laptops and Chromebooks.

We are starting to develop plans for Smart Parks to offer free WiFi in City parks. The Emergency Broadband Benefit is an FCC program to help families and households struggling to afford internet service during the COVID-19 pandemic.

4 Discussion to add a Ballot
Measure in 2022 Election for
an Infrastructure Bond or Tax

PARTIALLY

FUNDED/STAFFED
Origin: Written Petition (Becker) 10/19/21 12H. 21-1491 A ballot measure to upgrade aging infrastructure including Santa Clara’s public pools and the International Swim Center. On Nov. 1, 2021, staff provided Council per request at the October 19, 2021 Council meeting, to background information on the Infrastructure Bond. 5 Sanitary Sewer Laterals

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Written petition by Joseph Ducato 2/23/21
Staff will return with a cost analysis on City’s undertaking of responsibility of sewer laterals on and options for potential grant program and/or insurance policies. Water & Sewer Utilities Director Gary Welling will present this at the February Priority Setting session, including the resources needed to implement (which currently do not exist within the budget or capacity).
6 Discussion of New City Hall
into New Santa Clara
Downtown Plan

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Council Policy 030 Written petition (Becker) 10/11/21 - Agenda Item 12C (10/19/21) Council
On Nov. 1, 2021, staff provided Council per request at the October 19, 2021 Council meeting, additional background information on the Civic Center Master Plan. The Downtown Community Task Force requested a scope and cost to analyze relocating City Hall downtown. The estimated cost for conceptual land use and economic analysis is $400,000, which is not currently funded.
7 Proposal of a New City Film
Commission

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Council Policy 030 Written petition (Becker) 10/11/21 Agenda Item 12E (10/19/21) No updates
◄
a

I I I I
-

Pillar Item

Outcomes

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REFERRED TO FEBRUARY PRIORITY SESSION (030 AND OTHER)

8 Discussion of Construction of
Lawn Bowl Facility for
consideration

UNRESOURCED/PARTIALLY
FUNDED
Origin: Council Policy 030 Written petition (Becker) 10/11/21 Agenda Item 12G (10/19/21) On Nov. 1, 2021, staff provided Council links to per request at the October 19, 2021 Council meeting, to background information on the Lawn Bowl Facility Background Information. The City currently has allocated $175,000 for the repair and maintenance of the Lawn Bowl facility (clubhouse). There has been no subsequent action to re-allocate or redirect that amount to the design and construction of the new Lawn Bowls facility. Given the current balance in the 3001 General Capital Park Maintenance account, Council would need to reprioritize and reallocate up to $175,000 for the required design and engineering of a new facility. There is no funding allocated for construction. 9 Discussion of Installation of
Rainbow Crosswalk(s)
Painting in Santa Clara

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Council Policy 030 Written petition (Becker) 10/11/21 - Agenda Item 12K (10/19/21)
This item requires a Council Policy and Program, as well as an Art Approval Process (similar to the City Utility Art Box Program through the Cultural Commission). Depending on the program developed, this may require additional capital and maintenance funding in the budget.

10 Discussion of Installation of
Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacon Crosswalk at
Kiely/Mauricia

UNFUNDED
Origin: Council Policy 030 Written petition (Becker) 10/11/21 - Agenda Item 12J (10/19/21) The City has over 200 uncontrolled crosswalks. Staff has preliminarily ranked these for review based on traffic/speed to establish a priority ranking to perform additional studies.

Staff is currently working on finalizing an agreement with a consultant to study and analyze approximately the first 30 on the list. The crosswalk at Kiely/Mauricia is on the initial list. The study and analysis will indicate if improvements such as flashing beacons, hawks or other improvements are needed or not. There is an unfunded project in the budget for additional work at uncontrolled crosswalks citywide estimated at about $7M over 5 years. Staff is seeking grant opportunities like OBAG to obtain additional funding.

Uncontrolled crosswalks were covered in the Safe Streets Unfunded Priorities that were presented to the public last year while ballot measures were being considered.

(i (i (i

Pillar Item

Outcomes

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REFERRED TO FEBRUARY PRIORITY SESSION (030 AND OTHER)

11 Establish Stadium
Neighborhood Relations
Committee

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Council Policy 030 Written petition (Jain) 12/7/21 Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Consider a Neighborhood Stadium Relations Committee. More staff resources would be required to support this Committee, due to staff reductions and departures.

12 Feasibility Study for
constructing a roadway
undercrossing at the railroad
tracks separating Benton
Street and Brokaw Road near
the Santa Clara Caltrain
Station and future Santa
Clara BART Station

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Origin: Referred from Jan. 5, 2022 Study Session
At the Jan. 5, 2022 Study Session for the BART Project, Council expressed interest in potentially studying connecting Benton Street and Brokaw Road with a roadway undercrossing under the railroad tracks. This is a new item that Staff has not previously explored, however it is estimated that a complex study like this could cost up to $500,000.

13 Approve the review of the
Senior Advisory Commission
Transportation Interest Letter
and refer the issue of a
transportation needs analysis

UNRESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Referred from Jan. 25, 2022 City Council meeting
14 Discuss the remedial
condition of the International
Swim Center facility

PARTIALLY

RESOURCED/UNFUNDED
Referred from Jan. 25, 2022 City Council meeting
Public presentation from the Santa Clara Swim Club
I
I

Pillar Item

Outcomes

ADDITIONAL ITEMS REFERRED TO FEBRUARY PRIORITY SESSION (030 AND OTHER)

15 Consideration of current
janitorial services contract
renewal
Referred from Jan. 25, 2022 City Council meeting
Consider current janitorial services contract renewal based on public comment experiences with vendor. Staff will initiate an RFP process for janitorial services in Q2 of 2022 and report to the Council for services commencing in 2023. The current contract has one more year option, allowing staff to engage in an RFP process and ensure workplace safety (during COVID) for our facilities.

◄
a

I I I I
-

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
PROPOSED BUDGET PRINCIPLES FOR FY 2022/23

1. Make decisions within the context of the City’s Code of Ethics and Values, especially being Fiscally Responsible, Communicative, and Service-Oriented.

2. Consider budget decisions with long- term implications tak ing into account data from the Ten- Year Financial Forecast.

3. To the extent possible, align ongoing expenditures with ongoing revenues to avoid negative impacts on future budgets and maintain the City's high financial management standards.

4. When addressing General Fund shortfalls , use a combination of ongoing and one- time solutions to balance the competing goals of aligning ongoing revenues and expenditures and minimizing the service delivery impacts to the community.

5. Continue cost control measures until the ongoing General Fund revenues and expenditures are in alignment.

6. Approve an exception to the Council Policy that dictates setting the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve at or above 25% of adopted budget expenditures; set the Reserve level at a minimum of 15% of expenditures and address any remaining FY 2022/23 shortfall with the use of the Land Sale Reserve.

7. Focus on projects and services that benefit the community as a whole.

8. Pursue economic development objectives and strategies to foster new public and private investment within Santa Clara, and to create employment opportunities.

9. Balance between compensation adjustments to retain and attract employees and funding for positions.

10. Use one- time unrestricted revenues (e.g., annual General Fund surplus) for one -time uses such as increasing reserves, funding capital or Information Technology projects, paying off debt, and/or paying off unfunded pension or other post-employment benefits liabilities.

11. Inform and communicate clearly and broadly to residents, businesses and employees regarding the City’s fiscal position and budget; schedule hearings to promote active participation in the City Council’s budget deliberations.

12. With limited exceptions, establish fees based on full cost recovery where individuals/businesses rather than the community at -large are benefitting from City services. This preserves limited unrestricted resources for providing services that benefit the community as a whole.

13. Focus on business process redesign in order to improve employee productivity and the quality, flexibility, and cost -effectiveness of service delivery (e.g., streamlining, simplifying, reorganizing functions, and reallocating resources).

14. Explore expanding existing revenue sources and/or adding new revenue sources.

15. Engage employees to contribute new and innovative ideas during the department budget development process.

16. Use the General Plan as a primary long-term fiscal planning tool and link ability to provide City services to development policy decisions.

CITY OF SANTA CLARA
PROPOSED BUDGET PRINCIPLES FOR FY 2022/23

1. Make decisions within the context of the City’s Code of Ethics and Values, especially being Fiscally Responsible, Communicative, and Service-Oriented.

2. Consider budget decisions with long- term implications tak ing into account data from the Ten- Year Financial Forecast.

3. To the extent possible, align ongoing expenditures with ongoing revenues to avoid negative impacts on future budgets and maintain the City's high financial management standards.

4. To address the projected General Fund shortfall When addressing General Fund shortfalls , use a combination of ongoing and one- time solutions to balance the competing goals of aligning ongoing revenues and expenditures and minimizing the service delivery impacts to the community.

5. Continue cost control measures until the ongoing General Fund revenues and expenditures are in alignment.

6. If an exception to the Council Policy to set the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve at or above 25% of adopted budget expenditures is considered, maintain the Reserve level at a minimum of 15% of expenditures. Approve an exception to the Council Policy that dictates setting the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve at or above 25% of adopted budget expenditures ; set the Reserve level at a minimum of 15% of expenditures and address any remaining FY 2022/23 shortfall with the use of the Land Sale Reserve.

7. Focus on projects and services that benefit the community as a whole.

8. Pursue economic development objectives and strategies to foster new public and private investment within Santa Clara, and to create employment opportunities.

9. Balance between compensation adjustments to retain and attract employees and funding for positions.

10. Use one- time unrestricted revenues (e.g., annual General Fund surplus) for one -time uses such as increasing reserves, funding capital or Information Technology projects, paying off debt, and/or paying off unfunded pension or other post-employment benefits liabilities.

11. Inform and communicate clearly and broadly to residents, businesses and employees regarding the City’s fiscal position and budget; schedule hearings to promote active participation in the City Council’s budget deliberations.

12. With limited exceptions, establish fees based on full cost recovery where individuals/businesses rather than the community at -large are benefitting from City services. This preserves limited unrestricted resources for providing services that benefit the community as a whole.

13. Focus on business process redesign in order to improve employee productivity and the quality, flexibility, and cost -effectiveness of service delivery (e.g., streamlining, simplifying, reorganizing functions, and reallocating resources).

14. Explore expanding existing revenue sources and/or adding new revenue sources.

15. Engage employees to contribute new and innovative ideas during the department budget development process.

16. Use the General Plan as a primary long-term fiscal planning tool and link ability to provide City services to development policy decisions.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS & PRIORITIES
City of Santa Clara Summary
of Accomplishments
2021
2 3
Senior Meal
Program
We transitioned our daily
Senior Nutrition Program to
maintain the health and safety
of the senior community.
103,000
free meals
Santa Clara City Library
COVID-19 Free Testing
22 days of testing
10,986 tests provided
Small Business Assistance
Grant Program
248 businesses supported
$1,745,000 in grants
Food for Families
In partnership with the Salvation Army and
Second Harvest Food Bank, distributed
free essential food items to those impacted
by the COVID-19 pandemic.
16,809 boxes of food
5,603 households
Greetings Santa Clara
Community,
I am excited to share some of the highlights and many
accomplishments we have experienced since the
previous year’s report. The accomplishments illustrate our remarkable achievements over the last year to support the City Council’s priorities while helping address the COVID-19 pandemic and maintaining the necessary services the
community counts on.

The City remains committed to improving the quality
of life in Santa Clara. Throughout the pandemic, the City continues to shine and get recognized for its leadership and public service quality. In addition to the strategic financial management of nearly $5 billion and the City Council’s solid leadership, our work is distinguished by these awards and recognitions.

Together, the community and City workforce has shown
their resilience and commitment to making Santa Clara “The Center of What’s Possible.”
It’s an honor to serve as Santa Clara’s City Manager. I am proud of the work my team and I do every day to support and implement the City Council’s goals and priorities and deliver a broad range of services to keep the community thriving.

Throughout the pandemic, the City continues to shine
and get recognized for its leadership and public service quality.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve as Santa Clara’s City Manager!
In community spirit,
Deanna J. Santana
City Manager
Santa Clara RespondEd
During The pandemic
City Council prioritized
COVID-19 response during
Priority Setting Sessions!
We quickly pivoted to provide City services in-person
while enhancing online digital services during the pandemic Healthy Meals Santa Clara
150,000 free meals
to youth and children in
partnership with Santa Clara
Unified School District to
supplement meals.
f
Emergency Rental Assistance
Assisted low-income households in
Santa Clara with rental assistance for past
due rent due to the COVID-19 crisis.
169 households
$734,000 in funding
4 5
2021 American Public Works
Association Project of the Year Reed
& Grant Sports Park Project
Ranked First Place for 3CMA 2021 Savvy
Award in Digital Interactive Overall
Website for City website redesign
Ranked First Place CMUA Resource
Efficiency & Community Service Award
for Silicon Valley Power innovative Energy
Efficiency Grant Program for Small
Businesses
Award for Excellence in Information
Technology Practices from Municipal
Information Systems Association of CA
2021 Achievement of Excellence in
Procurement Award for excellence in
public procurement
Award of Excellence from the American
Planning Association for Tasman East
Specific Plan
Clean Water Environment Association
Sewer Collection System of the Year
Silicon Valley Power recognized for Smart
Energy Provider designation from the
American Public Power Association
Mission Branch Library LEED Silver
Certification through the U.S. Green
Building Council
Certificate of Achievement in Excellence
in Financial Reporting for Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report ending FY June
2020
Award of Merit from California American
Planning Association for Reclaiming
Our Downtown, Santa Clara Parade of
Champions, and Old Quad Residents for
Rebuilding Downtown Santa Clara
Capital Budget Excellence Award for
Fiscal Year 2020/21 from the California
Society of Municipal Finance Officers
California Emergency Services
Association Coastal Chapter Exceptional
Award for LISTOS program for
Emergency Management
American Public Power Association’s
Safety Award of Excellence for Silicon
Valley Power
City Awards and recognition
2021
APWJi
"IIOTliCTINOCA~i, e l!NIA'~K01l
CRITICALIIUOORC£

AMERICAN
PUBLIC
P,~~~
v ..... K

ASSOCIATION
~-[-"P..t '"'"'"" in Public Procurement
3CCCMA
C'itv-Countv CommunK'11 ion1
'&Mmrlingt\ul:ICLl1ion
11111

AMERICAN
PUBLIC P,.~ ~ v ..... K

ASSOCIATION
Ge
,Certificate 'Achievement
F,-.,,,,,.,/Rtf-t, "1
II
American Planning Association
Making Great Communities Happen
6 7
City Council Policy Priorities

1. Deliver & Enhance High-Quality Efficient Services & Infrastructure 2 Manage Strategically Our Workforce Capacity & Resources 3 Promote & Enhance Economic, Housing & Transportation Development 4 Enhance Community Sports, Recreational & Arts Assets
5 Ensure Compliance with Measure J & Manage Levi’s Stadium 6 Enhance Community Engagement & Transparency
7 Promote Sustainability & Environmental Protection
2021
The City Managers’s Office has an amazing team ready to serve with integrity and humility. “I’m proud of the services and
dedication our City employees
provide the community,
working tirelessly, every day, all
year long, rain or shine.”

Deanna J. Santana
Pg 8-9
Pg 10-11
Pg 12-13
Pg 14-15
Pg 16-17
Pg 18-19
Pg 20-21
8 9
Deliver &
Enhance
High-Quality
Efficient
Services &
Infrastructure
W e were busy in 2021 delivering the
critical services the community expects
and going above and beyond when the
community needs us.

Key accomplishments of the Deliver and
Enhance High-Quality Efficient Services
and Infrastructure City Council Pillar:

City of Santa Clara Continually Improving
Infrastructure
• Awarded the CMUA Resource Efficiency &
Community Service Award for outstanding proj-
ects advancing best practices and innovative
ideas in the water and power industry
• Awarded the Santa Clara Valley Section of the
Clean Water Environment Association’s (CWEA)
Sewer Collection System of the Year – Medium
Size
• Completed construction of speed humps
requested by residents as a traffic-calming
measure on Briarwood Drive between Cabrillo
Avenue and Warburton Avenue
• Took top honors in the 2021 CMUA Resource Ef-
ficiency & Community Service Awards for SVP’s
outstanding projects advancing best practices
and innovative ideas in the water and power
industry
• Completed flashing beacons for pedestrian
crossings at Halford Avenue at Burnley Way
and The Alameda between Mission and Bel-
lomy Streets; and a High-Intensity Activated
Crosswalk (HAWK) at Kiely Boulevard at Malabar
Avenue
• Completed design work for approximately 20
capital improvement program projects
• Completed the in-house design, construction,
and installation of approximately 4,000 linear
feet of water main
• Increased public-facing access to City services
at Santa Clara City Hall and additional locations
on Oct. 4, 2021
• Received a Safe, Clean Water Mini Grant in the
amount of $5,000 from the Santa Clara Valley
Water District
City Santa Clara Delivers High-Quality
Services & Enhances Technology
• Effectively navigated the impact of changing
public health orders to maintain access to core
Library services by launching contactless pick-
up services and implemented appointment con-
cierge services as well as “grab and go” curated
bundles of materials
• Declared a local drought emergency for the
City of Santa Clara and developed a water con-
servation and drought awareness campaign
• Accelerated the adoption of Lexipol public
safety policy manual intended to provide com-
prehensive, defensible Department policies
written by legal and public safety professionals
based on current government legislation and
case decisions
• Added over 50,000 digital titles to the library
collection
• Awarded $90,000 in grant funding for the
education, prevention, and enforcement of
impaired driving laws
• Expanded the Santa Clara Police Department
Community Response Team to include two
Crisis Intervention Specialists to provide consul-
tation and field support to Patrol, in the areas of
mental/behavioral health and service referrals
• Purchased a state-of-the-art use of force simu-
lator to provide a realistic, yet safe environment,
for law enforcement to practice responding to
various stimuli and as a community engage-
ment tool
• Implemented a third-party vendor for the man-
agement of the City’s residential and business
alarm
• Implemented a new email subscription service,
GovDelivery, to improve communications by
providing enhanced updates on news and top-
ics that interest residents
• Received the 2020 Achievement of Excellence
in Procurement® Award from the National Pro-
curement Institute
• Received the Government Finance Officers
Association (GFOA) award for excellence in
financial reporting for Fiscal Year 2019/20 for
the 29th year
• Earned the American Public Power Associa-
tion’s Safety Award of Excellence (APPA) for
Silicon Valley Power’s safe operating practices
in 2020
• Enhanced productivity, collaboration, and se-
curity via the roll-out and support of Microsoft
Teams and 365 SharePoint Online as the collab-
oration platform across City
• Awarded the 2021 Award for Excellence in
Information Technology Practices from the
Municipal Information Systems Association of
California (MISAC)
City of Santa Clara Provides Services Sup-
porting the Community
• Partnered with Second Harvest Food Bank and
the Santa Clara Unified School District to create
the award-winning Lunch at the Library free
summer meal program for local families
• Partnered with The Salvation Army and Second
Harvest Food Bank to launch a new program
called Food for Families, which will offer weekly
essential food items for all Santa Clara residents
• Provided the Annual Cleanup Campaign while
adhering to COVID-19 safety guidelines
• Received recognition by American Public Works
Association Silicon Valley Chapter 2020 Honor
Award for the City’s Santa Clara Safe Routes to
Schools Pedestrian Improvement Project
10 11
Manage
Strategically
Our Workforce
Capacity &
Resources
W e invest in our staff to ensure they
continue to provide the best possible
service while remaining fiscally
responsible and focused on strategic goals.

Key accomplishments of the Manage
Strategically Our Workforce Capacity and
Resources City Council Pillar:

City of Santa Clara Continues to
Strengthen Workforce
• Appointed a new City Librarian after a
nationwide search
• Added $1.7 million to restore Police services
impacted by budget reductions in the biennial
operating budget
• Established a list of eligible Firefighter
candidates after implementing a new
recruitment campaign with the objective of
diversifying the applicant pool
• Added fee-supported positions and third-party
plan check and inspection funding to support
building development services in the biennial
operating budget
• Transitioned two employees from the Finance
Department to the City Auditor’s Office as
placements from Phase 1 Budget Rebalancing
proposals
• Facilitated the onboarding and orientation of
three new City Councilmembers
City of Santa Clara Enhances Workforce
Resources
• Coordinated complex plan check processes
between many City divisions, departments, and
outside agencies while working remote
• Achieved Type II Urban Search and Rescue
(USAR) certification from the California Office of
Emergency Services (CalOES)
• Acquired Law Enforcement Field Training
Application (LEFTA) software to review and
track training records, vehicle damage, vehicle
pursuits, use of force reports, and professional
standards
• Awarded a new banking services contract to JP
Morgan generating cost savings and enhancing
customer service and technology efficiencies
• Completed approximately 1,270 legal service
requests while maintaining full City Attorney
operations during the Covid-19 pandemic under
reduced FTE, budget and increased workload
due to the departure of the City Attorney.
• Completed significant large generation
projects at Don Von Raesfeld (DVR) power
plant to replace obsolete equipment, improve
functionality, and ensure reliability
• Implemented new case management system,
Advologix, to accurately manage and track
transactional and litigation matters
• Launched a mobile inventory (barcode) system
to improve inventory management efficiency
and accuracy at the City’s central warehouse
• Selected a vendor for a new Records
Management System and the housing of legacy
data; anticipated “go live” timeframe of fall 2021
• Launched a new website to attract quality
sworn and civilian professional candidates, aide
applicants in the recruiting process and help
differentiate the City of Santa Clara from fellow
agencies
• Completed the upgrade of City’s phone system
to Mitel
City of Santa Clara Strategically Manages
Productivity
• Facilitated critical service delivery with an
increase in workload and decreased resources,
including the loss of approximately 450 as-
needed employees (equivalent to 450,000
hours), 26% reduction of full-time staffing, and a
17% staff vacancy rate, as of July 2021.
• Developed Revenue Strategies to plan for
the City’s future needs and engaged a third-
party consultant to poll for potential revenue
strategies/tax measures
• Updated structure for annual two-day Council
Priority Setting Session to highlight budget and
fiscal needs and COVID-19 efforts
• Reached successor Memoranda of
Understanding agreements with five of the
City’s bargaining units
• Increased Lobbyist Fees for full cost recovery
of the program
• Executed an agreement with the Salvation
Army Silicon Valley for on-going use of City
employees as Disaster Service Workers for
weekly food distribution program
• Developed and implemented various programs
and policies including the COVID-19 leave
policy as well as leaves mandated by State and
federal laws
• Pre-refunded multiple bonds through direct
placement which will achieve $20 Million Net
Present Value savings over the next 12 years
• Reviewed FEMA requirements and accounted
for citywide COVID-19 expenditures to
maximize federal funding
• Developed reserve policy that will enable SVP
to remain solvent, handle emergency financial
needs, and levelized future rate increases
• Strategically distributed $1.59 million in CARES
Act funding that supported the City’s food
assistance program, Small Business Assistance
Grant Program and other COVID-19 related
expenditures
• Transitioned investment services to a
professional financial advisor to maximize the
City’s investment returns
• Continued the maturity of the City’s
cybersecurity posture, safeguarding resident
and city sensitive data
• Deployed mutual aid resources to numerous
wildfires and USAR responses
The City has had to address a 42M fiscal deficit
due to the COVID-19 pandemic. City Council and staff
worked hard to balance a two-year budget; however, a

17.6M ongoing fiscal deficit remains.
12 13
Promote
& Enhance
Economic,
Housing &
Transportation
Development
W e will continue to look for opportunities
to provide additional housing and
transportation and partner with other
agencies to make progress in these areas.

Key accomplishments of the Promote
and Enhance Economic, Housing and
Transportation Development City Council
Pillar:

City of Santa Clara Committed to Housing
& Transportation Development
• Invested over $0.8 million in the City’s
Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement
Program (NCIP) and $1 million in the City’s
Tenant Based Rental Assistance Programs
• Celebrated the start of construction of
Agrihood, an affordable housing development
at 90 North Winchester Blvd
• Broke ground on a new 100% affordable-
housing community developed by St. Anton
Communities at 2233 Calle Del Mundo in
the city of Santa Clara Received an Award of
Excellence in the category of Comprehensive
Plan-Large Jurisdiction for the Tasman East
Specific Plan
• Assisted two families in purchasing Below
Market Purchase (BMP) homes, 5,000 residents
through public service programs and 20
homeless or at-risk Santa Clara residents
through the County Supportive Housing
Partnership
• Completed the El Camino Real Specific Plan
which will implement the City’s General Plan
goals and policies for the El Camino Real
corridor by providing more detailed guidance
for future land uses and urban design elements
• Executed an extension to the Exclusive
Negotiating Agreement (ENA) and License
agreement with Habitat for Humanity, De La
Cruz Project
• Managed, maintained, and provided Sanitary
Sewer Hydraulic Modeling support services for
approximately 20 Land Development Projects
• Awarded American Planning Association Award
of Excellence in the category of Grassroots
Initiative for grassroots efforts for Rebuilding
Downtown Santa Clara, American Planning
Association Award of Excellence in the category
of Comprehensive Plan-Large Jurisdiction for
the Tasman East Specific Plan
City of Santa Clara Promotes Economic
Development Supporting Businesses
• Named one of the 2021 Top 25 Best Places to
Live in America by Niche
• Ranked 2nd among the top 30 economically
dynamic cities by Heartland Forward (San Jose-
Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area)
• Launched the Worker Cooperative Initiative to
help retain businesses in Santa Clara
• Hosted eight educational webinars on the
Worker Cooperative business model with over
122 attendees
• Amended the City’s Worker Retention
Ordinance to permanently add hotel workers as
a covered employee group
• Enacted an emergency ordinance to add
worker recall protections for Santa Clara
workers
• Launched marketing for the sale of Successor
Agency property located at 5201 Great America
Parkway
• Established a temporary ordinance that caps
fees that a third-party delivery service can
charge Santa Clara restaurants for their services
during the COVID-19 pandemic
• Lead efforts in the successful formation of
the new Destination Marketing Organization
(DMO) including the development of Articles
of Incorporation and Bylaws; appointment of
a Board of Directors; hiring of new CEO; and
development of a funding model
• Implemented a cap on third-party food delivery
fee
• Upgraded the Business Tax License system

14 15
Enhance
Community
Sports,
Recreational &
Arts Assets
W e will continue to provide public
amenities, programs and services that
provide opportunities to stay active
and engaged. W e are also continuing
to maintain and improve our parks
and facilities that best align with the
community’s needs.

Key accomplishments of the Enhance
Community Sports, Recreational and Arts
Assets City Council Pillar:

City of Santa Clara Parks Make Life Better!
• Awarded Project of the Year Award for the En-
vironment/Parks (>$25M) Category for Reed &
Grant Sports Park Project
• Opened community facilities at the Lawrence
Station Area development
• Created an interdepartmental “Smart Parks”
planning team to collaborate on technology
in parks (electronic locks, wi-fi, EV charging
stations, etc.)
• Hosted the 110th Annual Holiday Tree Lighting
Ceremony virtually from Central Park
• Partnered with the Magical Bridge Foundation
to bring an all-inclusive playground providing
play features for children and adults of all abili-
ties and ages to Central Park
• Recognized as #18 on BarBend’s 2020 list of
California’s Top Cities for Fit Lifestyles
• Initiated a Cemetery Census to confirm and/or
update contact information for the interred at
Mission City Memorial Park
Community Projects
Completed
• Reed & Grant Sports Park
Opened the 9.75-acre Reed & Grant Sports
Park located at 750 Reed St. It has five light-
ed sports fields, four synthetic turf fields and
one natural grass field, that can be set up
in multiple regulation size configurations, a
3,500 square foot multipurpose building for
recreation and activities, concession stand,
restrooms, on-site parking and playground
• Raymond G. Gamma Dog Park
Rehabilitated the Raymond G. Gamma Dog
Park located at 888 Reed St. It includes area
for small and large dogs, ample lighting, new
paved parking lot, EV charging stations and
restrooms
• Homeridge Park
Celebrated the completion and opening of
the rehabilitated playground located at 2985
Stevenson St. The project includes a nature
themed playground with great features and
accessible, developmentally appropriate play
elements
• Santa Clara Senior Center
Senior Center fitness center floor was redone,
and new fitness equipment was added, locat-
ed at 1303 Fremont St.
• Nuevo Community Public Park
Celebrated the completion and opening of
a new playground, small grass field and BBQ
area, located at 3505 Kifer Rd.
• Creekside Park
Celebrated the completion and opening of
the park located at 3225 Scott Blvd. This park
is along the Redwood Creek Trail in Santa
Clara Square and features a lit pathway, picnic
tables with BBQs and seating area
• Bowers Park
Completed rehabilitation of playground locat-
ed at 2582 Cabrillo Ave. The new playground is
inclusive for all ages and abilities
• Machado Park
• Completed rehabilitation of playground, locat-
ed at 3360 Cabrillo Ave. Features two separate
playgrounds for 2-5 and 6-11
• Agnew Park
Completed rehabilitation of the playground,
located at 2150 Agnew Rd. The new play-
ground is great for those who like to swing,
slide and climb
• Fuller Street Park
Completed rehabilitation of Fuller Street
sports court and added new fitness equip-
ment, located at 61 Fuller St..

Key accomplishments of the Ensure
Compliance with Measure J and Manage
Levi’s Stadium City Council Pillar:
• Rebalanced Stadium Authority budget due to
COVID-19 impacts
• Adopted Stadium Authority Budget reflective
of Board’s priorities and the protection of public
funds
• Completed review of Non-NFL Events for
first three years of Stadium operations by
forensic accountant to improve Management
Company’s accounting processes, procedures,
and practices
• Continued efforts to provide procurement
oversight and coordinate with Management
Company to obtain Stadium Authority Board
approval to execute conflict-free agreements
for Non-NFL marketing, capital projects, and
stadium maintenance and repairs
• Initiated a collaborative implementation of
shared financial management services with
the Management Company to ensure greater
financial transparency and efficiency
• Procured and awarded multi-year agreement to
auditor for annual financial audit
• Implemented Statement of Qualifications
(SOQ) to procure a third-party marketing
consultant to assess the Management
Company’s Non-NFL Events Marketing Plan to
maximize revenue for Non-NFL events
• City Council directed the City Manager on Nov
16, 2021 to provide exemptions under conditions
of approval for up to 5 weeknight concerts per
year including pyrotechnics ending no later than
11:00 p.m.
• Continued efforts to collaborate with
Management Company to mitigate event
impacts for surrounding neighborhoods
• Continued working with Stadium Authority
Counsel’s Office on several litigation and
arbitration actions filed by the Management
Company, along with the issuance of
Notices of Breach and Default related to the
Stadium Manager’s non-compliance with the
Management Agreement
• Continued oversight with Stadium Authority
Counsel’s Office of ADA compliance with
improvements to Main Lot
• Continued efforts to ensure transparency from
Management Company and sharing of public
records (Stadium Builder Licenses, financial
information, and Non-NFL event agreements)
• Continued efforts to maintain and engage the
Stadium Authority Board on improving the Noise
Monitoring Program and related reporting
16 17
Ensure
Compliance
with Measure J
& Manage Levi’s
Stadium
W e are committed to managing Levi’s
Stadium with integrity, protecting public
funding and complying with Measure J.
18 19
Key accomplishments of the Enhance
Community Engagement and
Transparency City Council Pillar:

City of Santa Clara Celebrates Community
• Hosted “Celebrate Santa Clara” event at Central
Park that drew 3,000 attendees
• Developed a series of videos from the City
Council on cultural & holiday events including
Eid al-Fitr, Kwanzaa, 4th of July, Black History
Month, Diwali and more
• Hosted the first Girl’s Fire Camp, introducing
60 high-school-aged girls to the firefighting
profession
• Hosted National Night Out lead by Santa Clara
Police Department
• Promoted Community Building with Citywide
Chalk Art Contest, Halloween Decorating and
Holiday Home Decorating Contests
• Brought together over 1,500 residents at four
outdoor Sunset Cinema movie nights at City
parks
• Hosted Children’s SpooktaClara Halloween
Party at the Youth Activity Center, Halloween
events at the Santa Clara City Library
City of Santa Clara Promotes Community
Engagement
• Kicked off the 2020/21 Redistricting effort
by selecting a 7-member Independent
Redistricting Commission
• Launched the Pruneridge Avenue Complete
Streets Plan
• Coordinated informational campaign about
City infrastructure needs with virtual community
meetings and behind-the-scenes tours on
Facebook Live garnering thousands of views
• Continued implementation of the City’s
Smoking and Tobacco regulations by adopting
Ordinance No. 2029 repealing Section 8.35.130
(“Possession of Tobacco by Persons Under 21
Years of Age”)
• Approved a settlement and release agreement
to end the lawsuit brought against the City of
Santa Clara under the California Voting Rights
Act (CVRA)
• Launched the Commit to Action webpage on
ways the Santa Clara Police Department can
ensure it meets community expectations
• Established the Task Force on Diversity, Equity
and Inclusion
• Successfully oversaw the City’s first
district-based election in FY 2020/21 which
encompassed four council seats
• Supported an extended outreach campaign for
2020 Census to ensure all Santa Clarans were
counted, resulting in a higher self-response rate
than 2010 Census
• Provided fire and life safety education to
K-6th grade students via the outcome-based
education program called Firefighters in Safety
Education (FISE)
• Provided additional bilingual story times and
sensory programming for children on the autism
spectrum
City of Santa Clara Prioritizes
Transparency and Communication
• Received the National Association of
Government Web Professionals (NAGW) 2020
Pinnacle Award (City/County Medium High
Population Group) for the City website
• Launched a new redesign for the City Manager’s
biweekly report as “City Hall News” to provide
an improved user experience to disseminate
pertinent information to the community
• Received 1st place honors in the 2020
Excellence in Public Information and
Communications, or EPIC, awards, held by the
California Association of Public Information
Officials (CAPIO)
• Awarded the 3CMA 2021 Savvy Award in Digital
Interactive - Overall website (population 44,000
and up) for the City website redesign
• Received the 2020 Northwest Public
Power Association (NWPPA) Excellence in
Communications Awards for Silicon Valley
Power
Enhance
Community
Engagement and
Transparency
W e continue our long-standing tradition
of being a transparent and inclusive City
that provides many opportunities to get
involved and connect with us.

THE NEWSLETTER FOR CITY OF SANTA CLARA RESIDENTS & BUSINESSES WINTER/SPRING 2021

IN THIS ISSUE:

City Manager's Community Letter (p.2) | Reed
DQG*UDQW6SRUWV3DUN2ŖFLDOO\2SHQV
S
_
7DVN)RUFHRQ'LYHUVLW\(TXLW\ ,QFOXVLRQ
S
_
5HODWHG6DQWD&ODUD
S
_$JULKRRG$œRUGDEOH
+RXVLQJ&RPPXQLW\
S
_6LOLFRQ9DOOH\3RZHU
/DXQFKHV1HZ3URJUDPVWR6XSSRUW(9V
S

FIND

OUT MORE

ON PAGE
11 A partnership with The Salvation Army
and Second Harvest Food Bank
Pick Up Free Food Items Weekly
Every Wednesday, 2-3:30 p.m.

THE NEWSLETTER FOR CITY OF SANTA CLARA RESIDENTS & BUSINESSES SUMMER 2021

SUMMERTIME FUNSUMMERTIME FUN
in Santa Clarain Santa Clara
IN THIS ISSUE:

City Manager's Letter (pg. 2) / Budget Update
(pg. 3) / A Vision for the El Camino Real (pg.
4) /State of the City (pg. 5) / Pruneridge Ave.

Study (pg. 7) / Sustainability Corner (pg. 10)
/ Water Conservation (pg. 12) /
Summertime
Safety (pg. 14) / National Night Out (pg. 15)
FIND

OUT MORE

ON PAGE
9 :DWHU4XDOLW\&RQVXPHU&RQŔGHQFH5HSRUW
included in this issue
THE NEWSLETTER FOR CITY OF SANTA CLARA RESIDENTS & BUSINESSES FALL 2021

IN THIS ISSUE:

City Manager's Letter (pg. 2) / City's New
Librarian (pg. 4) / Redistricting (pg. 4) / Zoning
Code Update (pg. 5) / Water Conservation (pg. 6) /
Special Events (pg. 10) / Parade of Champions
(pg. 12) / Virtual Firehouse Family Fair (pg. 12) /
Flood Preparedness (pg. 14)

HELP SAVE

OUR WATER
Check out page 6 for water-saving tips.

It’ s a DROUGHT Emergency - Reduce Your Water Use
Inside Santa Clara newsletter is produced three times a year in the fall, winter/spring and summer.

It is also available at SantaClaraCA.gov/InsideSantaClara with an improved digital experience.

Mayor and City Council present Santa Clara University 2020 NCAA Division 1 Champions with keys to the City City staff at a booth getting feedback from the community The City’s
Public Records
Requests have
increased year
to year by
more than
60%
- -~ ...

City of Sant
_________ / .

INSIDE INSIDE INSIDE
Here’s a list of accomplishments for the
Promote Sustainability and Environmental
Protection City Council Pillar:

Silicon Valley Power Leads the City of
Santa Clara in Green Power Excellence
• Ranked second place in the nation for
SVP’s Green Power Excellence from the U.S.

Department of Energy
• Activated a 40-Megawatt Central 40 Solar
Project - Enough to Power more than 16k
Average Santa Clara Homes
• Deployed two new solar-powered electric
vehicle (EV) charging stations with three
charging ports at each station
• Offered a $1,000 rebate when you upgrade
your electric panel to accommodate additional
load from converting natural gas to electric
appliances and adding a Level 2 (Electric
Vehicle) charger to your home
• Approved a 30-year extension agreement of a
federally owned hydropower project with the
United States Department of Energy’s power
market administrator, Western Area Power
Administration, to continue to provide clean
cost-effective hydropower through December
31, 2054
• Received recognition for Silicon Valley Power’s
Santa Clara Green Power program as one of
the top green power programs for the 14th
year in a row by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL)
• Entered into a three-year contract with CIM
Group’s Aquamarine Westside Project to
purchase approximately 500,000 Megawatt
Hours (MWhs) of renewable energy
• Received recognition for Silicon Valley Power’s
Santa Clara Green Power program as one of
the top green power programs for the 14th
year in a row by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL)
• Awarded the American Public Power
Association’s Safety Award of Excellence (APPA)
for safe operating practices in 2020
• Awarded by U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency for Responsible Appliance Disposal
Program for ensuring the proper disposal of
refrigerant-containing appliances by using best
environmental practices that go beyond what
is required by federal law, including recovering
appliance insulation foam, encouraging the
recycling of all durable goods, and promoting
the permanent retirement of old, inefficient
appliances to save energy
City of Santa Clara Promotes
Sustainability to Protect Our Environment
• Developed strategy for establishing new City
Sustainability Program as a roadmap to launch
the new City Council Sustainability Pillar
• Began implementation of mixed-waste
processing for organics collection in
collaboration with Public Works Department
• Created a pilot residential e-bike rebate
program to encourage the adoption of electric
bicycles for commuting to work, shopping,
going to school, visiting friends, etc. instead of
commuting by car
• Developed new City Climate Friendly
Sustainable Purchasing Policy
• Established nine new Sustainability
Program priorities under three category
areas (innovation, integration, collaboration)
approved by City Council
• Installed a photovoltaic (PV) system on the
roof of Northside Branch Library as part of a
community-supported and funded program
administered by the SVP
• Installed twelve new electric vehicle (EV)
charging stations available to the public at four
locations throughout Santa Clara
• Launched the California Electric Vehicle Incentive
Project (CALeVIP) to provide Electric Vehicle
Infrastructure incentives to commercial and multi-
family utility customers
• Launched two low-income programs directed
at energy efficiency (1) Solar Grant Program in
FY 2020/21 that aims to provide enough energy
through solar installations to offset nearly the
entire annual energy consumption for qualified
customers and (2) electric vehicle rebate program
• Offered a rebate of 10% off the purchase price,
up to $300 of new e-bikes
• Offered , in partnership with the California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project (CALeVIP), free
technical assistance or small businesses and
multifamily properties serving disadvantaged and
low-income communities to help plan and install
EV charging stations
• Provided a rebate of 10% of the purchase cost of
a new electric bicycle, up to $300 to assist those
who want to ride a bicycle but want to travel
faster or need the extra assistance
20 21
Promote
Sustainability &
Environmental
Protection
The City of Santa Clara is dedicated
to environmental sustainability and
climate action through community
programs, projects, partnerships and
policy development.

Ranked second place
in the nation for
SVP’s Green Power
Excellence from the
U.S. Department of
Energy
1500 Warburton Ave., Santa Clara, CA 95050

The Great Resignation
and COVID-19:

Impact on Public Sector Employment
and How Employers Can Help
MissionSquare Research Institute has been tracking state and local government employee sentiment since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The latest data from a survey of public employees shows they are increasingly inclined to leave their jobs. But there are practical steps employers can take to stem resignations as we enter the next phase of the pandemic .

Trend in Considering Changing Jobs
Oct/Nov 2020
(n- 1,195)
May2020/ (n- 989)
~
20%
March 13, 2020
U.S. declares nationa l
emergency to combat
corona virus.

December 14, 2020
U.S. announces
first doses of
FDA.authorized
COVID -19 vacc ine
del ivered to all
50 states .

Nov/ Dec 2021
(n- 1,100)
May2021 '
(n- 1,203) 36%'
3~
April 17, 2021 Decembe r 1, 2021
Globa l tally of First confirmed U.S.
deaths from case of Omicron
COVID-19 ident ified .
surpasses
3 m illion .
25% of those
consid ering changing
jobs would like to leave
the government
sector entirely.
6 in 10 say
their organization
has expe rienced
an increase in the
number of people
leaving their jobs
voluntarily since the
start of the pandemic .

Why Employees Are Leaving
Top 3 Reasons
Employees Are Consider ing
Changing Jobs
152%
Want a highe r salary or a better
benefits package
147%
Feel burned out from stress of job
during pande m ic
[36%
Need better work -life balance
Top 3 Reasons
Considering Retiring and/ or
Leaving the Workforce Entirely
i42%
Feel bu rned out from stress of job
during pande mic
•31%
Wan t time to do things that bring j oy
!26%
Tension have faced wor king with the
public (or students' parents}
Top 3 Reasons
Causing Increase In People
Leaving Their Jobs Voluntarily
58%
Added stress due to the pandemic
52%
Concern about safety due to
COVID -19
--------- ~
47%
Peop le are reth inking what they
want to do
88888888
8 . 1 Q say the increase in numb er of people leaving volu ntarily has put a In strain on their workload .

Employee Views on How Public Employers Can Curb
the Great Resignation
To Reduce Stress
24%
Prov ide salary increases
Hire more st aff o r red uce workload

IIEIIIIIIII
Prov ide emotio nal su p port
To Retain More Employees
62%
Im p rove salaries
50%
O ffer/increase bonuses
38%
Show more appreciation and recog nition of employees
and the w ork they do
Showing more appreciation and recognit ion of emp loyees outranked actions includ ing improving benefits, incre asing amount of leave allowed, offering more flexible schedu ling, and offe ring more oppo rtunities for remote work.

In November / December 2021 , MissionSquare Research Institute conducted an on line survey of 1,100 state and local government employees , fielded by Greenwald Research , to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on public sector workers (prior surveys were conducted in May 2020 , October / November 2020 , and May 2021) .

Final data were weighted by gender , age , income , and industry type to reflect the distribution of the state and local government workforce as found in the U.S. Census Bureau 's Current Population Survey and the U.S. Census of Governments .

Visit mission-sq.org/msriresources for past infographics and reports and be on the lookout for full results for the November / December 2021 survey in the coming months.

Missb:~nsquare
July 2021
Report prepared by MissionSquare Research Institute
formerly the Center for State and Local Government Excellence at ICMA-RC 2021 Updated Survey Results
Public sector employee views on finances
and employment outlook due to COVID-19
SLGE is now
Missi~:~nsquare
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared by Rivka Liss-Levinson, PhD
(MissionSquare Research Institute) and describes results of a survey conducted with Greenwald Research.

The author gratefully acknowledges the insights and expertise of her collaborators on this research: Joshua Franzel, PhD and Gerald Young (MissionSquare Research Institute), and
Doug Kincaid and Marie Ammar (Greenwald Research).

Thank you to Anne Phelan for copy editing this report and Susan Zarriello (Night Owl Design Studio, LLC).
/
--
3 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 As of May 2021, 70% of state and local
government workers are fully vaccinated, and
another 6% are partially vaccinated. The most
influential factors in the decision to get vaccinated
were ensuring their own personal health (63%),
ensuring the health of friends and family (58%), and
having the freedom to travel without worry (26%).

Positive
morale regarding work among
state and local government employees has
increased over the past six months, from
41% in October 2020 to 56% in May 2021.

Thinking about their job going forward,
respondents are most concerned about
keeping their family safe from contracting
COVID-19 (81%) — this percentage has
remained above 80% since May 2020.

While 60% report that they value serving their
community during this difficult time, 31%
say that working during the pandemic has
made them
consider changing jobs. One
in four considering changing jobs would like
to leave the government sector entirely.
41% of state and local government
employees say they and their family have
been
negatively impacted financially
by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nearly one in three state and local government
workers (31%) have had to take on more debt
since the start of the pandemic, and 38% of those
with an emergency fund have had to spend money
from it during the pandemic to make ends meet.
76% of respondents reported that the COVID-19
pandemic has impacted the nature of their
job. Of those, 31% say that it has been extremely
or very difficult to adjust to those changes.

The percentage of state and local employees
who are working in person has more
than doubled over the past year, from
26% in May 2020 to 58% in May 2021.
74% of those engaged in any in-person
work consider it at least somewhat
risky in terms of their potential exposure
to people who may have COVID-19.

The top three suggestions respondents
had for how employers could make their
organization a better place to work were:
issuing bonuses or raises (21%), allowing work
from home/remote work and flexible hours
(20%), and promoting safety by following
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) guidelines and providing/enforcing the
use of personal protective equipment (17%).

Executive summary
This report presents the results of a May 2021 national online survey conducted by MissionSquare Research Institute
(formerly the Center for State and Local Government Excellence at ICMA-RC) and Greenwald Research of 1,203 state and
local government employees, assessing their views on the coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine, general concerns about
COVID-19, the impact of the pandemic on their financial and employment outlook, and general satisfaction with their employer and their benefits.

Where applicable, comparisons are made between this survey and two prior MissionSquare Research Institute/Greenwald Research surveys of state and local government employees, conducted May 2020 (n=1,008) and October 2020 (n=1,205). 1 2
3 4
5 Top 10 takeaways
6 7
8 9
10 □
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
4 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Introduction
With the emergency use authorization of three COVID-19
vaccines for adults in the United States, and one for children as young as 12 years of age, the nation is in a sprint to get as many Americans vaccinated as possible. Across the nation, 149.7 million Americans are fully vaccinated, representing 45.1% of the total population, and 52.8% of those age 12 or older.1 But even with these valuable strides, there are still pockets of the country where vaccination rates lag and where COVID-19 cases are on the rise. Further, the damage that the COVID-19 pandemic has already inflicted on the United States and the entire world is substantial and devastating. As of July 8, 2021, more than 185 million cases and 4 million deaths due to COVID-19 have been recorded around the world, with the United States accounting for nearly 34 million cases and 606,000 deaths.2
As some states begin to lift emergency disaster declarations and cities and counties across the country consider what the “new normal” will look like and how to build resilient communities, the work of the state and local government workforce will be as critical as ever. From teachers and public safety professionals to public health and public works personnel, the approximately

18.7 million individuals who are employed by state and local government provide crucial services, programs, and activities for their communities.

To ensure that state and local governments have a resilient workforce that can respond to the current challenges and those that lie ahead, it is critical to understand how the public sector workforce views vaccines, their perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on their jobs and finances, and their outlooks on the short- and medium-term impacts of the pandemic.

In May 2020, MissionSquare Research Institute (formerly the Center for State and Local Government Excellence at ICMA-RC) and Greenwald Research conducted an online survey of 1,008 full-time state and local government employees, assessing their views on the COVID-19 pandemic’s financial impacts, job impacts, and other related issues. The results of that survey were released in a June 2020 report, and key findings were also developed into three infographics (see Additional Resources).

In October 2020, a follow-up survey was conducted with 1,205 full-time state and local government employees to understand how these perceptions had changed over the course of
six months. These results were also developed into several reports, including one focused on the K-12 workforce, and corresponding infographics (see Additional Resources).

This report provides the results of a third round of COVID-19 survey research that assesses state and local government employees’ views on the COVID-19 vaccine, general concerns about COVID-19, perceptions of financial and job impacts, and satisfaction with their employer and benefits. It presents the results of an online survey of 1,203 state and local government employees conducted by MissionSquare Research Institute (“The Institute”) and Greenwald Research May 12-28, 2021. Where applicable, comparisons are made between this survey and the May and October 2020 Institute/Greenwald Research surveys. 5 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Note: n=1,203; some figures throughout this report may not total to 100% due to rounding or due to the allowance for multiple applicable responses.

Survey results
Sample demographics
The demographic characteristics of the 1,203 survey
respondents are displayed in Table 1. The majority of survey respondents are female, White or Caucasian, working for local government, have children or stepchildren, and have a total annual personal income of less than $75,000. Respondents have a median age of 453 and tend to be well educated (71% have received their bachelor’s or a graduate/professional degree).

More than half of respondents are married and 53% work in education. There is more variation in respondents’ household income, geographic region, area type and population size, and number of years working for their employer.

The demographic characteristics of the survey sample
generally align with the overall state and local government workforce profile. Of the approximately 19.8 million state and local government employees who worked across the United States in 2020, 11.2 million worked in education and nearly 1 million were in police protection, with the rest filling all other state and local positions (e.g., general administration, utilities, transportation, hospitals).4 As of 2020, state and local workers have an average age of 44.4 years; 61% are female; 78% are White; 58% are married; and 58% have a bachelor’s, advanced, or professional degree.5
Table 1 Sample demographics
Gender
Male 34%
Female 66%
Prefer to self-describe 0%
Age
Under 40 37%
40-59 49%
60 or older 14%
Education
Less than a high school diploma 0%
Graduated high school 7%
Some college (no degree) 12%
Associate’s degree or
completion of technical or
vocational school 11%
Bachelor’s degree 38%
Graduate/professional degree 33%
Race/ethnicity
White or Caucasian 68%
Black or African American 15%
Hispanic/Latino/Spanish
descent 14%
Asian or Pacific Islander 5%
Native American <0.5%
Other <0.5%
Marital status
Married 54%
Single, never married 23%
Divorced or separated 12%
Living with a partner 8%
Widowed 3%
Prefer not to say <0.5%
Children/stepchildren
Yes, under 18 33%
Yes, 18 or older 33%
No children/stepchildren 40%
Prefer not to answer 1%
Region
South 41%
Midwest 21%
West 20%
Northeast 18%
Area type
Urban 28%
Suburban 47%
Small town 11%
Rural 14%
Employer
State government 32%
Local government 68%
Industry
Administration and Finance 4%
Education 53%
Health & Human Services 13%
Public Safety 16%
Parks & Recreation 1%
Public Works/Utilities 4%
Transportation 5%
All Other 3%
Number of years working
with current employer
Less than 1 year 6%
1 to 5 years 32%
6 to 10 years 19%
11 to 15 years 12%
16-20 years 11%
20+ years 19%
Total annual personal income
Less than $25,000 6%
$25,000 to $49,999 36%
$50,000 to $74,999 26%
$75,000 to $99,999 17%
$100,000 to $124,999 6%
$125,000 to $149,999 4%
$150,000 or more 5%
Don’t know 1%
Total annual household income
Less than $25,000 4%
$25,000 to $49,999 22%
$50,000 to $74,999 22%
$75,000 to $99,999 21%
$100,000 to $124,999 14%
$125,000 to $149,999 8%
$150,000 or more 9%
Don’t know 1%
Area population size
Less than 10,000 11%
10,000 to 24,999 12%
25,000 to 49,999 14%
50,000 to 99,999 15%
100,000 to 199,999 11%
200,000 to 499,999 9%
500,000 to 999,999 5%
1,000,000 or more 8%
Don’t know 14%
6 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Views on COVID-19 vaccine
Of the 1,203 state and local government workers who responded to the May 2021 survey, 70% reported that they are fully vaccinated (Figure 1). Another 6% indicated that they are partially vaccinated (e.g., they have received first of two doses or it has been less than two weeks since their final dose). Meanwhile, 22% have not been vaccinated, and 1% of respondents preferred not to answer this question.

When asked to indicate the three factors that were most influential in their decision to get the COVID vaccine, respondents were most likely to report that they got vaccinated to ensure their own personal health (63%), to ensure the health of their friends and family (58%), and to have the freedom to travel without worry (26%; see Figure 2).

Breaking down
the numbers
Fully vaccinated state and local
government workers were
significantly more likely to be:
„ Non-Black/African American
„ Over the age of 40
„ Earning a household
income of $50K+
„ Working in the
education industry
„ Living in a community with
a population size of 50K+
Figure 1 Vaccination status, May 2021 (n=1,203)
Fully vaccinated
Partially vaccinated
Not vaccinated
Prefer not to answer
70%
6%
22%
1%
Figure 2 Main reasons respondents got vaccinated, May 2021 (n=976) To ensure the health of your
friends and family
To ensure your own personal health
To fulfill community responsibility/
sense of patriotism
The freedom to travel without worry
Being able to go to public events/gatherings
To socialize and reconnect with others
It was convenient (i.e., walk-in clinic, offered by
employer or doctor’s office, someone came door to door)
Was advised by your doctor, government
officials, or other trusted professional
The quality of vaccine testing ensured
it was safe
The prospect of no longer having to
wear a mask
It was required by your job
Was encouraged by family or friends
Not sure
Other
63%
58%
26%
19%
18%
16%
14%
13%
13%
12%
10%
6%
2%
1%
■
■
■
■
00 7 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Among those who have not received the COVID-19 vaccine, 22% reported that they will definitely or likely get the vaccine at some point (Figure 3). Nearly half of those unvaccinated, on the other hand, said that they will definitely not or likely not get the vaccine. A fairly large percentage (29%) are undecided.

Among those state and local government workers who are undecided or will not get the vaccine, the main reasons cited were a concern about the side effects of the vaccine (64%), that they require more information about how well the vaccine works (37%), and lack of trust in the government (33%).

Figures 3 and 4
Figure 3 If unvaccinated, plan to get COVID vaccine? May 2021 (n=210) Will definitely get the vaccine
Will likely get the vaccine
Undecided
Will likely not get the vaccine
Will definitely not get the vaccine
Prefer not to answer
10%
12%
29%
20%
28%
1%
Figure 4 Main reasons undecided/not getting vaccinated, May 2021 (n=169)
Not sure
Other
Isn’t offered at a convenient
time or place
Have a religious objection to it
Don’t like needles/afraid of needles
Enough people have already received
the vaccine to stop the spread
Am immunocompromised or cannot
receive for other health reasons
Reject all vaccinations on principle
Do not think it is needed
due to lack of danger perceived
Belief that new strains of COVID-19
have made the vaccine ineffective
Lack of trust in
the government
Require more information
about how well the vaccine works
Concern about side effects
Friends or family are encouraging me
not to get it
64%
37%
33%
25%
20%
6%
5%
4%
4%
4%
3%
0%
10%
2%
Nearly half of those
unvaccinated said that
they will definitely not or
likely not get the vaccine.
8 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Respondents were then asked about their employer’s stance on the COVID-19 vaccine, in terms of whether they encouraged it and whether they have been accommodating for those getting it (e.g., providing a financial or other incentive for getting it, allowing paid time off for getting the vaccine and for the possible side effects after). Results are displayed in Figure 5. Nearly two in three respondents reported that their employer has been somewhat or strongly encouraging of the vaccine, while 22% indicated that their employer has been neutral on it (Figure 5). Far fewer report that their employer has provided incentives for receiving the vaccine (8%) or mandated it (5%).

Respondents were also asked about their own views on the COVID-19 vaccine. As can be seen in Figure 6, more than half of respondents (59%) believe that the vaccine will only be effective if everyone receives it. Meanwhile, 45% said that government employers should mandate that employees get vaccinated against COVID-19, and 44% reported that they are concerned about whether or not their coworkers will get the vaccine.

Frontline feedback
“Mandate vaccinations
for all employees or
offer an incentive to
get vaccinations.”
— Health worker
Figure 6 Views on vaccines, May 2021 (n=1,203)
Figure 5 Employer’s stance on the COVID-19 vaccine, May 2021 (n=1,203) Mandated it
Provided incentives for it
Strongly encouraged it
Somewhat encouraged it
Been neutral on it
Somewhat discouraged it
Strongly discouraged it
5%
8%
48%
17%
22%
0%
0%
The vaccine will only be
effective if everyone recieves it
Government employers should
mandate that employees get
vaccinated against COVID-19
24% 21% 23% 11% 22%
17% 26% 24% 13% 19%
22% 37% 19% 13% 9%
I am concerned about whether
my coworkers will get the vaccine
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagree
General COVID-19 concerns and morale
Positive morale regarding work among state and local government workers has increased over the past six months. While 41% of respondents reported very or somewhat positive morale in October 2020, this number climbed to 56% in May 2021 ■ ■
■ ■
■
9 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 (Figure 7). Negative morale, meanwhile, decreased from 27% in October 2020 to 21% in May 2021.

In May 2021, respondents were most likely to report feeling stressed (42%), burnt- out/fatigued (42%), and anxious (31%). Since May 2020, there have been large shifts in the emotions that respondents are feeling while at work about the COVID-19 pandemic, showing several distinct patterns. As can be seen in Figure 8, while stress rose from May 2020 to October 2020, it reverted to its initial levels in May 2021.

Frontline feedback
“More cross-training
between different job
functions to make filling
in for others more
possible and ease the
chance of burnout by
providing more variety
of job-related tasks.”
— Judicial and legal worker
Figure 8 Emotions felt at work about the COVID pandemic Figure 7 Current morale regarding work
Strongly negativeSomewhat negativeNeutralSomewhat positiveVery positive 11%
19%
30%
37%
32%
23% 20%
15%
7% 6%
October 2020 (n=1,195) May 2021 (n=1,203)
October 2020 (n=1,195)
May 2021 (n=1,208)
Stressed
May 2020 (n=989)
Burnt-out/fatigued
Anxious
Indifferent/neutral
Depressed/sad
Grateful
Optimistic
Confident
Lonely
Pessimistic
Accomplished
Other
United
Relieved
Afraid
44%
52%
42%
27%
47%
42%
43%
44%
31%
33%
25%
23%
15%
15%
21%
16%
15%
20%
22%
20%
14%
13%
11%
12%
22%
16%
11%
17%
18%
10%
10%
10%
9%
16%
21%
8%
5%
3%
7%
8%
7%
5%
4%
2%
2%
■
10 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Burnout/fatigue, on the other hand, which also jumped from May to October 2020, has gone down slightly over the past six months, but is nowhere near early pandemic levels. Meanwhile, while levels of anxiety started out high in May 2020 and remained so in October 2020, anxiety decreased significantly in May 2021.

Other noteworthy trends include a significant increase in optimism from October 2020 to May 2021 (from 15% to 21%), several emotions showing incremental levels of decline over the course of the pandemic (e.g., depression/sadness, loneliness), and sharp decreases in pessimism and fear from October 2020 to May 2021. Many of the shifts observed in emotions felt at work may be at least partially explained by the changes in the availability of vaccines and the gradual lifting of restrictions, among other factors.

Thinking about their job going forward, respondents continue to be most concerned about keeping their family safe from contracting COVID-19 (81%) — this percentage has remained consistent over the three survey time points (see Figure 9). While 64% remain concerned about staying protected from contracting COVID-19 at work, this number has dropped from prior rounds of the survey. Concern about having one’s benefit package reduced, pay reduced, hours reduced, or losing one’s job all also showed declines from May 2020 and October 2020.

Losing job
Having hours severely reduced or
being furloughed
Having pay reduced
Having employee benefits package reduced
in some way
Staying protected from contracting the virus
at work (or once return to the workplace)
Keeping family safe from contracting the virus
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)May 2020 (n=1,008) 83%
81%
81%
80%
78%
64%
50%
48%
42%
52%
44%
38%
49%
39%
30%
40%
39%
30%
Figure 9 Concerns about job going forward (% very/extremely/somewhat concerned) Respondents continue
to be most concerned
about keeping their
family safe from
contracting COVID-19
(81%) — this percentage
has remained consistent
over the three survey
time points.
■ ■ ■
11 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 When it comes to respondents’ feelings about working in the public sector during the COVID-19 pandemic, 60% report that they value serving their community during this difficult time. This finding has remained fairly stable across all three survey time points (see Figure 10). Feelings that the pandemic has made the public more aware of the importance of what they do, that working in the public sector during the pandemic is a source of pride, and that the pandemic makes their work feel more meaningful showed small increases from October 2020 to May 2021, with 40-48% endorsing each of these items.

At the same time, feeling that the risks they are taking during the pandemic are not on par with their compensation also rose slightly, from 48% in October 2020 to 50% in May 2021. Feeling that working during the pandemic has made them consider changing jobs remained at 31% in May 2021, the same as in October 2020 and 11 percentage points higher than in May 2020.

Figure 10 Feelings about working in the public sector during COVID (% somewhat or strongly agree)
Working during the COVID-19 pandemic has
made me consider changing jobs
The COVID-19 pandemic makes my work
feel more meaningful
The pandemic has made the public more
aware of the importance of what I do
Working in the public sector during the COVID-19
pandemic is a source of pride
The risks I’m taking working during the COVID-19
pandemic are not on par with my compensation
I value serving my community
during this difficult time
October 2020 (n=1,195) May 2021 (n=1,203)May 2020 (n=989) 61%
63%
60%
32%
48%
50%
45%
43%
48%
48%
44%
47%
39%
37%
40%
20%
31%
31%
Frontline feedback
“I began this pandemic
as a classroom teacher
and then moved into
my current role of
opening a school. In
my eyes, when I was
a teacher teaching
through this, and if
I had to continue, I
would have left
the profession.”
— K-12 educator
■ ■ ■
12 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Respondents who indicated that the pandemic has made them consider changing jobs were asked about the type of job change they had in mind. Respondents were split in terms of what type of job change they were considering, with one in four indicating that they would like to leave the government sector entirely (Figure 11). Another 22% would like to stay with the same employer but have a different role/level/number of hours, and 20% would like to stay in the government sector but change the industry or department they work for. Only 13% wanted to stay in the same line of work, but with a different employer.

Respondents were also asked about their trust in government leaders to make appropriate decisions about employee safety during COVID-19. As shown in Figure 12, while trust in state and local government leaders had decreased from May 2020 to October 2020, level of trust remained stable from October 2020 to May 2021, with 55% reporting a fair amount or great deal of trust in local government leaders, and 51% in state government leaders. For federal government leaders, on the other hand, trust jumped from a low of 29% in October 2020 to 49% in May 2021, a level of trust nearly equal to trust in state and local government leaders.

Breaking down
the numbers
Those considering changing jobs
were significantly more likely to be:
„ Female
„ Black or African American
„ Under 40 years of age
„ Working in education or in
health and human services
„ Concerned about their risk of
exposure to COVID-19 at work
„ Working fully remotely
Figure 11 Type of job change respondents have in mind, May 2021 (n=323) (Among those considering changing jobs)
22%
13%
20%
25%
4%
15%
Stay in the same general line of
work, but a different employer
Stay with the same employer, but
a different role/level/number of hours
Leave the government sector entirely
Change the industry/department you work
for, but remain in the government sector
Not sure
Other
Figure 12 Trust in government leaders to make appropriate decisions regarding employee safety during COVID-19 (% with fair amount/great deal of trust) FederalStateLocal
67%
54% 55%
67%
50% 51%
39%
29%
49%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)May 2020 (n=1,008) 00 ■ ■ ■
13 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Financial impact
In May 2021, more than four in ten (41%) of state and local government employees surveyed reported that they and their family have been negatively impacted financially by the COVID-19 pandemic; 7% reported that they have been negatively impacted financially to a significant extent. This is lower than the 56% and 54% who reported negative impacts in May 2020 and October 2020, respectively. Asked for the first time this survey round about positive financial impacts due to the pandemic, 14% reported a positive financial impact (Figure 13).

Respondents were asked to what extent debt (e.g., a mortgage, car loan, student loans, credit card debt, medical debt) is a problem for them and their family. As shown in Figure 14, the percentage reporting that debt is either a major or a minor problem for them and their family was 54%, a slight decrease from October 2020 (60%) and May 2020 (57%).

Frontline feedback
“My work hours were
cut resulting in less pay.

I would like to get back
my time so I can get
the pay I was receiving
before COVID which
will great[ly] help my
financial situation
and retirement.”
— K-12 educator
Figure 13 Financial impact of COVID-19, May 2021 (n=1,203) Negatively impacted to a significant extent
Negatively impacted somewhat
Not impacted
Positively impacted somewhat
Positively impacted to a significant extent
7%
35%
44%
11%
3%
Figure 14 Extent to which debt is a problem
Do not have any debtNot a problemA minor problemA major problem 19% 19%
14%
38% 41% 40%
31% 31% 32%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,205)May 2020 (n=1,008) 12% 9% 12%
Note: Percentages may not equal 100% due to excluding responses for “Not sure” from figure. •
• • • • •
• •
14 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Nearly one in three state and local government workers (31%) have had to take on more debt since the start of the pandemic (Figure 15). This is the same percentage that reported having to do so in October 2020.

About seven in 10 respondents (71%) reported that, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, they and their family had an emergency fund set up to help pay for major unexpected expenses or to cover necessities if they lost their main source of income (Figure 16).

Among those with an emergency fund partially or fully funded, 38% have had to spend money from it since the start of the pandemic to make ends meet, similar to the 40% who reported having to do so in October 2020 (Figure 17).

Breaking down
the numbers
Those who have had to spend
down all of their emergency fund
since the start of the pandemic
were significantly more likely to be:
„ Female
„ Black or African American
„ Under age 60
„ Earning a household income
of less than $100K
„ Working in education or
health and human services
„ Concerned about their risk of
exposure to COVID at work
Figure 15 Had to take on more debt since start of pandemic? NoYes, somewhat moreYes, significantly more
10%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)
7%
21% 24%
68% 68%
Figure 16 Emergency fund prior to pandemic? May 2021 (n=1,203) Yes, had an emergency fund fully funded
Yes, but was in the process of building it up
No
30%
41%
27%Figure 17 Had to spend money from emergency fund to
make ends meet?
No, and don’t expect
to need to in the near future
No, but expect to spend
at least some of it
in the near future
Yes, have spent some
of emergency fund
Yes, have had to spend
down all of emergency fund
7%
October 2020 (n=873) May 2021 (n=898)
8%
33% 29%
19% 16%
46%
41%
Note: Percentages may not equal 100% due to excluding responses for “Not sure” from figures. ■
■
■
■
■
■
■
15 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 When asked whether they have changed the amount they are saving for retirement since the start of the pandemic, 23% report that they have reduced their retirement savings, down slightly from 26% in October 2020 (Figure 18). Fewer (15%) have increased their retirement savings.

More respondents (33%) reported that they have reduced the amount they are saving in general or for things other than retirement. This is down from 40% in October 2020 (Figure 19). In contrast, one in four respondents (25%) have increased their general savings.

Many respondents have also changed their spending habits. As can be seen in Figure 20, 41% have spent significantly or somewhat less than normal since the start of the pandemic (down from 46% in October 2020). Meanwhile, 25% have spent somewhat or significantly more — slightly less than the 26% who reported doing so in October 2020.

Throughout the last year there has been a great deal of media coverage of new and emerging investing trends, such as the rise in popularity of NFTs, Bitcoin and other Figure 18 Change in amount saving for retirement since
start of pandemic?
Significantly increasedSomewhat increasedNo changeSomewhat reducedSignificantly reduced 8%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)
6%
18% 18%
65% 60%
7% 13%
2% 2%
Figure 19 Change in amount saving in general since start of pandemic? Significantly increasedSomewhat increasedNo changeSomewhat reducedSignificantly reduced 14%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)
9%
26% 24%
40% 41%
15%
20%
4% 5%
Figure 20 Change in spending since start of pandemic?
Spent significantly
more than normal
Spent somewhat
more than normal
No change Spent somewhat
less than normal
Spent significantly less
than normal
13%
8%
33% 33%
28%
32%
22% 20%
4% 5%
Significantly increasedSomewhat increasedNo changeSomewhat reducedSignificantly reduced 14%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)
9%
26% 24%
40% 41%
15%
20%
4% 5%
41% have spent
significantly or
somewhat less than
normal since the
start of the pandemic
(down from 46% in
October 2020).
■ ■
16 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 crypto-currencies, and activist online investing such as with WallStreetBets and GameStop. Respondents were asked about their level of interest in these topics. In total, 18% of those surveyed were very or extremely interested in these investments, while 49% were not too interested or not at all interested (Figure 21).

Respondents were also asked how concerned they are that the COVID-19 pandemic and the related economic crisis will impact being able to retire when they want. As shown in Figure 22, respondents’ concern remained fairly steady over time from May 2020 (38% very or extremely concerned) to October 2020 (40%) and May 2021 (39%).

A similar trend can be seen in Figure 23 for being able to save enough to be financially secure throughout retirement. While 41% were very or extremely concerned about this in May 2020, this number was 43% in both October 2020 and May 2021.

Figure 21 Interest in new and emerging investment trends, May 2021 (n=1,203)
Extremely interested
Very interested
Somewhat interested
Not too interested
Not at all interested
Not sure/not familiar with the topic
8%
10%
25%
21%
28%
8%
Figure 22 Concern about being able to retire when want due to pandemic Not at all concernedNot too concernedSomewhat concernedVery concernedExtremely concerned 18%
21% 20% 20% 19% 19%
27% 28% 30%
25% 23% 22%
10% 9% 9%
Figure 23 Concern about being able to save enough to be financially secure throughout retirement due to pandemic
Not at all concernedNot too concernedSomewhat concernedVery concernedExtremely concerned 19% 22% 21% 22% 21% 23%
33% 31% 32%
20% 18% 18%
6% 8% 7%
May 2020 (n=1,008) October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203) Concern about being
able to retire when they
want remained fairly
steady over time from
May 2020 (38% very or
extremely concerned)
to October 2020 (40%)
and May 2021 (39%).
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■ ■
17 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Job outlook
In May 2021, more than three in four respondents (76%) reported that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the nature of their job (e.g., what they do, where they work, how they go about the tasks required). This is down slightly from the 85% in May 2020 and the 82% in October 2020 who reported that the nature of their job had changed (Figure 24). About one in three respondents (32%) indicated that the pandemic has impacted the nature of their job significantly, down from 41% in both May 2020 and October 2020.

Respondents were relatively split at all three time points surveyed in their assessment of how difficult it has been to adjust to those changes. Among those reporting some impact to the nature of their work in May 2021, 31% reported that it has been extremely or very difficult to adjust to those changes (Figure 25). This number is similar to the 32% in October 2020 who reported it had been very or extremely difficult, and slightly higher than the 26% in May 2021.

In contrast, 34% reported that it had been not too difficult or not at all difficult, similar to the 37% in May 2020 and the 33% in October 2020.

To better understand how the nature of their job has changed, respondents were asked about their current work location. As displayed in Figure 26, while 42% of respondents reported working fully remotely in May 2020 (i.e., not going into a workplace or Figure 24 Extent to which COVID has impacted nature of job Figure 25 Difficulty adjusting to changes to job as a result of COVID-19 Figure 26 Working remotely?
No impactImpacted somewhatImpacted significantly
41%
October 2020 (n=1,195) May 2021 (n=1,203)May 2020 (n=989) 41%
32%
44% 41% 44%
13% 18% 23%
Not at all difficultNot too difficultSomewhat difficultVery difficultExtremely difficult 8%
October 2020 (n=972) May 2021 (n=903)May 2020 (n=815)
12% 8%
18% 20% 23%
38% 35% 35% 31% 27% 30%
6% 6% 4%
OtherNo remoteSome remoteMostly remoteFully remote
42%
October 2020 (n=1,195) May 2021 (n=1,203)May 2020 (n=989) 16% 14%
21% 17% 14% 8%
17% 11%
26%
49%
58%
3% 1% 2%
Note: Percentages may not equal 100% due to excluding responses for “Not sure” from figures. 76% reported that the
COVID-19 pandemic
has impacted the
nature of their job.
■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■
18 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 interacting in person with other people) and only 26% reported no remote work (i.e., job requires going into a workplace and/or interacting in person or with other people), the percentage of state and local workers working in person has continued to rise over the past year, jumping to 49% in October 2020 and increasing further to 58% in May 2021.

Among those currently engaging in any remote work, only 23% had worked remotely prior to the pandemic (Figure 27).

Respondents were asked how difficult it has been over the past six months to balance the many competing work and homelife demands that individuals have faced since the start of the pandemic. About one in four said that it has been very or extremely difficult, and another 31% reported that it has been somewhat difficult (Figure 28).

Balancing these demands may be particularly challenging for those who have needed to take care of their children during the workday. As shown in Figure 29, among those with children or stepchildren under the age of 18, in the past six months 71% have had to work from home while also taking care of their children (whether during school or Breaking down
the numbers
Those who have found it extremely
difficult to balance work and
homelife demands during the past
six months were significantly more
likely to be:
„ Female
„ Non-White/Caucasian
„ Under age 40
„ Living in an area with a
population of 200K+
„ Working in education
„ Concerned about their risk of
exposure to COVID at work
Figure 27 Working remotely pre-COVID-19? May 2021 (n=546) Yes, and you worked even more remote then than you do now Yes, to the same extent that you do now
Yes, but you work even more remote now than you did then No
8%
9%
7%
77%
Figure 28 Difficulty balancing work and homelife demands during past six months, May 2021 (n=1,203)
Extremely difficult
Very difficult
Somewhat difficult
Not too difficult
Not at all difficult
9%
15%
31%
32%
12%
Figure 29 Had to work from home while also taking care of your children in past six months, May 2021 (n=362)
Yes, for a lengthy period
Yes, briefly
No
37%
34%
29%
■
■
■
00 19 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 day care closures or when they have been participating in virtual schooling), with 37% having done so for a lengthy period.

Among those respondents engaged in any in-person work in May 2021 or prior to the pandemic, the majority (74%) considered it at least somewhat risky, in terms of their potential exposure to people who may have COVID-19 (Figure 30). These numbers were 70% in May 2020 and 76% in October 2020. Meanwhile, 39% believed that it is very or extremely risky, down from 47% in October 2020 and similar to the 40% in May 2020.

Among those respondents engaged in any in-person work in May 2021, the majority (75%) felt they did not have a choice as to whether or not to do so (Figure 31). Two in three (66%) reported that their employer did not give them the choice, while 12% said that this was due to a factor outside of work.

Asked whether they think there will be more or less of an opportunity to work remotely than there was prior to the pandemic, just over one in four respondents (26%) believe there will be significantly or somewhat more opportunity. A greater percentage of respondents (32%) think there will be less opportunity, while 42% anticipate no difference (Figure 32).

Frontline feedback
“My employer could
do a better job
communicating with
their employees
during this pandemic,
especially with regard
to a plan for returning
to the workplace. For
example, I would love
to continue working
remotely most of the
time post-pandemic,
but there has not
been any mention
made of what will be
expected as things
‘get back to normal.’”
— Government
administration professional
Figure 31 Feel had a choice about return to work in person during past six months, May 2021 (n=1,009)
Yes, considerable choice
Yes, some choice
No, employer did not give you a choice
No, did not have a choice because of factors outside of work 5%
20%
66%
12%
Figure 32 Perceptions of change in opportunity for remote work post-pandemic, May 2021 (n=1,203)
Significantly more opportunity
Somewhat more opportunity
No difference
Somewhat less opportunity
Significantly less opportunity
7%
19%
42%
8%
23%
Figure 30 Perceived risk of exposure to COVID-19 at work Not at all riskyNot too riskySomewhat riskyVery riskyExtremely risky 21%
October 2020 (n=1,176) May 2021 (n=1,009)May 2020 (n=960) 23%
17% 19% 24% 22%
30% 29%
36%
24%
17% 21%
7% 7% 5% GG
■ ■ ■
20 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Satisfaction with employer and benefits
Overall, just over half of respondents (51%) reported in May 2021 that they are very or extremely satisfied with their employer, up slightly from the 46% in October 2020.

In contrast, only 12% said they were not too satisfied or not at all satisfied, down from 17% in October 2020 (Figure 33).

As shown in Figure 34, the three elements of their job that they were most satisfied with are job security (66% were extremely or very satisfied), their leave benefits (65%), and their health insurance (60%). These are the same three elements that they were Frontline feedback
“Show appreciation for
the work that we’ve
done during the
pandemic. It doesn’t
have to be monetary
— a simple ‘thank you’
goes a long way.”
— K-12 educator
Figure 33 Satisfaction with employer
Non-traditional benefits
Potential for career advancement
Salary
Work/life balance
Insurance benefits other than health
Personal satisfaction the job gives me
Ability to serve my community
Retirement benefits
The quality of my colleagues/coworkers
Health insurance
Leave (vacation days, sick days, PTO,
family/medical leave)
Job security
The quality of my boss/supervisor
62%
66%
62%
65%
59%
60%
54%
57%
52%
57%
57%
55%
52%
55%
51%
55%
54%
53%
46%
49%
32%
32%
29%
32%
25%
29%
Figure 34 Satisfaction with job elements (% extremely or very satisfied) Not at all satisfiedNot too satisfiedSomewhat satisfiedVery satisfiedExtremely satisfied 13%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)
18%
33% 33% 37% 36%
13% 8% 4% 4%
October 2020 (n=1,205) May 2021 (n=1,203)■ ■
21 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 most satisfied with in October 2020. In contrast, less than one in three respondents were very or extremely satisfied with their potential for career advancement, their salary, and their nontraditional benefits (e.g., tuition assistance or student loan repayment, employee assistance programs, child care assistance).

Finally, with the pandemic creating many challenges for government workers over the past year, respondents were asked to describe in their own words what one or two realistic actions their employer could take that would be most impactful in making their workplace a better place to work. Responses were coded and are displayed in Figure

35. Respondents were most likely to recommend the issuing of bonuses or raises (21%), allowing work from home/remote work and flexible hours (20%), and promoting safety by following CDC guidelines and providing/enforcing the use of PPE (17%).

Figure 35 Realistic action employer could take to make the workplace better, May 2021 (n=1,203)
None/employer is doing all they can
Refuse to answer
Don’t know
Other
Advocate job stability (e.g., increase
staffing/work hours, reduce workload, work equality)
Abolish COVID regulations
(e.g., eliminating masks, return to work in person)
Increase communication frequency
and consistency
Encourage or mandate the
COVID vaccine
Support workers (e.g., providing tools and
tech. needed, respecting decisions)
Expand benefits (e.g., more time off,
retirement benefits, mental health benefits)
Promote safety by following CDC
guidelines and providing/enforcing PPE
Allow work from home/remote
and flexible hours
Issue bonus/raises
Acknowledge and appreciate workers
21%
20%
17%
10%
9%
7%
7%
6%
6%
5%
3%
4%
1%
10%
Frontline feedback
“The pay in public
education is insultingly
low. I could make the
same at McDonald’s,
but I’d have to go to
McDonald’s every day.

If you break it down, I
make $12 an hour. I
appreciate working in
a climate-controlled
office and getting
holidays off, but I’ll
never be able to take
a vacation or retire
on what I make. The
problem is bigger than
just one school, it’s
a national issue that
needs to be addressed.”
— Postsecondary educator
22 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Conclusion
This report describes the results of a survey of state and local government employees that assessed their views on the
COVID-19 vaccine, the pandemic’s impact on their employment outlook, general concerns about COVID-19, perceptions of their finances, and satisfaction with their employer and their benefits.

Where applicable, comparisons are made between this survey and surveys conducted in May 2020 and October 2020.

Results indicate that many state and local government workers are fully vaccinated, and many have chosen to receive the vaccine to protect their health and the health of their family, friends, and communities. With an increasing number of public sector workers returning to in-person work, employees are particularly concerned about keeping themselves safe at work and protecting their family from contracting COVID-19.

Morale has increased over the past six months, and many feel a sense of pride working during the pandemic and that the pandemic has made their work feel more meaningful. However, one in three still indicate that working during the pandemic has made them consider changing jobs, with many of those considering leaving the public sector entirely.

The negative financial impact of the pandemic continues to affect a significant portion of state and local government employees, with many having had to take on more debt, spend from their emergency fund, or reduce other savings.

Despite the many challenges they have faced and continue to face, more than half of state and local government workers are satisfied with their employer, and they have concrete recommendations for steps their employer can take to improve the workplace.

As state and local government leaders navigate the road ahead and consider what the “new normal” will look like, understanding their employees’ views on the COVID-19
vaccine — and the financial, personal, and job impacts that the pandemic has had and continues to have — will help ensure that public sector organizations remain employers of choice and can successfully recruit, retain, and retire a talented and diverse workforce of the future.

Methods
Information for this report was collected from a 12-minute survey with 1,203 full-time state and local government
employees. The online survey was fielded by Greenwald
Research from May 12 through May 28, 2021. Where
appropriate, data was compared with MissionSquare Research Institute/Greenwald Research surveys of full-time state and local government employees conducted in May 2020 (n=1,008) and October 2020 (n=1,205). The final data for all three surveys were weighted by gender, age, income, and industry type to reflect the distribution of the state and local government workforce as found in the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey and the U.S. Census of Governments.
23 | 2021 Updated Survey Results: Public sector employee views on finances and employment outlook due to COVID-19 Additional resources
Reports
Survey Results: Public Sector Employee Views on Finances and Employment Outlook Due to COVID-19 (June 2020)
Update on Public Sector Employee Views on Finances and
Employment Outlook Due to COVID-19: May vs. October 2020 (January 2021)
K-12 Public School Employee Views on Finances, Employment Outlook, and Safety Concerns Due to COVID-19 (February 2021)

Infographics
Public Sector Employee Views on COVID-19 (June 2020)
K-12 Education Employee Views on COVID-19 (August 2020) African American State and Local Employee Views
on COVID-19 (September 2020)
Public Sector Employee Views on COVID-19: May 2020
vs. October 2020 (December 2020)
K-12 Education Employee Views on COVID-19: March 2020
vs. October 2020 (December 2020)
Career Stage Differences in Public Sector Employee Concerns about COVID-19 (March 2021)
COVID-19 Vaccines: Public Sector Worker Vaccination Status and Views (June 2021)
Endnotes

1. C enters for Disease Control and
Prevention, “COVID Data Tracker,”
available at https://covid.cdc.gov/
covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations.

2. “C oronavirus Dashboard,” Center for
Systems Science and Engineering at
Johns Hopkins University, available at
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

3. The mean (average) age of
respondents was also 45.

4. U.S. Census Bureau, “2020 Government
Employment and Payroll Tables,”
available at https://www.census.gov/
data/datasets/2020/econ/apes/
annual-apes.html

5. Author analysis of IPUMS-CPS. See
IPUMS-CPS, “Current Population
Survey,” at https://cps.ipums.org/cps/
sda.shtml
6D
8 MissionSquare Research Institute (formerly the Center for State and Local Government Excellence at ICMA-RC) promotes excellence in state and local government and other public service organizations so they can attract and retain talented employees. The organization identifies leading practices and conducts research on retirement plans, health and wellness benefits, workforce demographics and skill set needs, labor force development, and topics facing the not-for- profit industry and the education sector. MissionSquare Research Institute brings leaders together with respected researchers. For more information and to access research and publications, visit slge.org and follow on Twitter and LinkedIn.

MissionSquare Research Institute 777 N. Capitol Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4240 www.slge.org
SLGE is now
Missi;:enSquare

City of Santa Clara
Code of Ethics and Values

PREAMBLE
The proper operation of democratic government requires that decision-makers be independent, impartial, and accountable to the people they serve. The City of Santa Clara has adopted this Code of Ethics and Values to promote and maintain the highest standards of personal and professional conduct in the City’s government. All elected and appointed officials, City employees, volunteers, and others who participate in the city’s government are required to subscribe to this Code, understand how it applies to their specific responsibilities, and practice its eight core values in their work.

Because we seek public confidence in the City’s services and public trust of its decision-makers, our decisions and our work must meet the most demanding ethical standards and demonstrate the highest levels of achievement in following this code.

1. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be ethical.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I am trustworthy, acting with the utmost integrity and moral courage. b.) I am truthful, do what I say I will do, and am dependable. c.) I make impartial decisions, free of bribes, unlawful gifts, narrow political interests, and financial and other personal interests that impair my independence of judgment or action. d.) I am fair, distributing benefits and burdens according to consistent and equitable criteria. e.) I extend equal opportunities and due process to all parties in matters under consideration. If I engage in unilateral meetings and discussions, I do so without making voting decisions. f.) I show respect for persons, confidences, and information designated as “confidential.” g.) I use my title(s) only when conducting official City business, for information purposes, or as an indication of background and expertise, carefully considering whether I am exceeding or appearing to exceed my authority.

2. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be professional.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I apply my knowledge and expertise to my assigned activities and to the interpersonal relationships that are part of my job in a consistent, confident, competent, and productive manner. b.) I approach my job and work-related relationships with a positive attitude. c.) I keep my professional knowledge and skills current and growing.

3. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be service-oriented.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I provide friendly, receptive, courteous service to everyone. b.) I am attuned to, and care about, the needs and issues of citizens, public officials, and city workers. c.) In my interactions with constituents, I am interested, engaged, and responsive.

Santa Clara
lttO•-
mr
2001

4. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be fiscally responsible In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I make decisions after prudent consideration of their financial impact, taking into account the long-term financial needs of the City, especially its financial stability. b.) I demonstrate concern for the proper use of City assets (e.g., personnel, time, property, equipment, funds) and follow established procedures.
c.) I make good financial decisions that seek to preserve programs and services for City residents.

5. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be organized.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I act in an efficient manner, making decisions and recommendations based upon research and facts, taking into consideration short and long term goals.
b.) I follow through in a responsible way, keeping others informed, and responding in a timely fashion. c.) I am respectful of established City processes and guidelines.

6. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be communicative.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I convey the City’s care for and commitment to its citizens. b.) I communicate in various ways that I am approachable, open-minded and willing to participate in dialog. c.) I engage in effective two-way communication, by listening carefully, asking questions, and determining an appropriate response which adds value to conversations.

7. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be collaborative.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I act in a cooperative manner with groups and other individuals, working together in a spirit of tolerance and understanding.
b.) I work towards consensus building and gain value from diverse opinions. c.) I accomplish the goals and responsibilities of my individual position, while respecting my role as a member of a team.
d.) I consider the broader regional and State-wide implications of the City’s decisions and issues.

8. As a Representative of the City of Santa Clara, I will be progressive.

In practice, this value looks like:
a.) I exhibit a proactive, innovative approach to setting goals and conducting the City’s business. b.) I display a style that maintains consistent standards, but is also sensitive to the need for compromise, “thinking outside the box,” and improving existing paradigms when necessary. c.) I promote intelligent and thoughtful innovation in order to forward the City’s policy agenda and City services.

Approved by City Council on April 4, 2000; modified by Council on August 21, 2001

2 1

City  of  Santa  Clara
PROGRAM  IN  ETHICS  & VALUES

BEHAVIORAL  STANDARDS  FOR  CITY  COUNCIL  MEMBERS 1

INTRODUCTION

Ten  years  ago,  the  City  of  Santa  Clara  began  its  ethics  and  values  program  to  foster public  trust  by  promoting  and  maintaining  the  highest  standards  of  personal  and professional  conduct.   Since  the  adoption  of  the  Code  of  Ethics  & Values  in  2000, the  City  Council  has  promised  the  people  of  Santa  Clara  that  Council  Members,  all elected  and  appointed  officials,  candidates  for  public  office,  and  City  Staff  will  meet the  most  demanding  ethical  standards  and  demonstrate  the  highest  levels  of achievement  in  practicing  eight  core  values  identified  in  the  Code.

Those  values,  which  are  fundamental  to  public  trust,  were  adopted  to  guide  the decisions  and  actions  of  individual  Council  Members  and  the  Council  as  a whole.

City  Council  and  City  Staff  have  worked  hard  to  integrate  these  values  into  the everyday  operating  culture  of  City  Hall.   The  City  has  conducted  extensive  outreach to  residents  encouraging  them  to  hold  public  officials  accountable  at  the  ballot  box for  being  credible  role  models  for  these  values,  in  word  and  in  deed,  in  public  or  in private.

To  help  the  Council  make  these  values  real  in  their  regular  work  with  the  City,  the Code  describes  for  each  value  a basic  set  of  character  traits  and  actions  residents  can expect  to  see  Council  Members  meet  and  exceed.

This  document  translates  these  traits  and  actions  into  concrete  behavioral  standards for  the  City  Council.    These  standards  describe  what  impeccable  leadership  ethics looks  like  in  the  everyday  work  of  the  Council.  They  reflect  commonly  accepted  “best practices,”  rather  than  specific  issues  or  problems  the  Council  has  faced.   The  list seeks  to  include  enough  positive  behaviors  to  practice  (and  negative  behaviors  to avoid)  that  a reasonable  person  can  assess  how  credible  he  or  she  is  as  a role  model and  ethical  leader.

This  information  is  presented  in  four  columns.   Columns  1 and  2 reproduce  the approved  Code  of  Ethics.   Columns  3 and  4 list  the  behavioral  standards.

1 This document is based on the Behavioral Standards for Commissioners, Boards, and Other Appointed Officials, developed during 2000-2002, and approved by the City Council in February 2003. A representative committee of Board Members and Commissioners, working with the City’s initial Ethics Ordinance Committee, drafted that document. It was then revised based on extensive feedback from all Board Members, Commissioners, and Staff Liaisons. In a working session in April, 2008, the Council used that docume t to develop the fi rst draft of its own standards. The City’s Ethics Consultant, Dr. Tom Shanks, and City Staff drafted the final version for City Council review on May 6. 2008. n
Approved by City Council on May 20, 2008.

2 City  of  Santa  Clara
PROGRAM  IN  ETHICS  & VALUES

BEHAVIORAL  STANDARDS  FOR  CITY  COUNCIL  MEMBERS

The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
As  a Santa  Clara  representative,  I will  be:

Ethical   I am  trustworthy,
acting  with  the
utmost  integrity
and  moral  courage
• Making  careful  decisions,
advancing  the  best  long ‐
term  interests  of  the
City,  after  considering  all
available  facts,  City  Staff
recommendations,  and
public  comment
• Making  hasty,  ill ‐
informed  decisions  based
on  politics,  bias,  faulty
assumptions,  prejudice,
self ‐interest,  gossip,  and
half ‐truths
• Voting  my  honest
conviction,  explaining  my
ethical  reasoning,
respecting  the  minority,
and  upholding  the
majority   as  the  decision
of  the  Council
• Promising  my  vote  before
facts  are  known  in  order
to  gain  favor  with  a
crony,  endorser,  lobbyist,
or  special  interest
• Vigorously  debating  an
issue,  listening  carefully
to  all  sides,  making  my
best  judgment  call,  even
if  it’s  not  popular,  and
taking  responsibility  for
my  actions
• Saying  whatever  the  vocal
public  wants  to  hear,
dodging  criticism  of  an
unpopular  vote,  shifting
the  blame  to  the
majority,  other  members,
or  City  Staff
• Preparing  to  vote  by
assessing  how  various
options  advance  or  harm
the  best  interests  of  the
City  as  well  as  the  City’s
Mission  and  Core  Values,
working  to  minimize  any
harm
• Always  taking  the  short ‐
term  view,  representing
few  stakeholders,
believing  ethics  and  City
values  have  no  bearing  on
decisions
• Finding  an  imaginative
solution  that  is  in  the
best  interests  of  the
City,  is  fair,  respects
individual  rights  and  the
Council’s  duties,  and
advances  City  values
• Saying  and  doing
whatever  it  takes,  no
holds  barred,  to  advance
one’s  personal  position,
power,  influence  or
political  career

3 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Ethical
(continued)
I am  truthful,  do
what  I say  I will
do,  and  am
dependable
• Giving  complete,  factual,
unbiased  information  to
colleagues,  public,  and
the  press
• Concealing,  fabricating,
overstating,  under ‐
stating,  or  denying  the
truth;  spinning  the  truth;
leaving  out  context
• Making  promises  to  the
public,  City  Staff,  and
Council  members   which
can  be  kept  and  do  not
exceed  the  authority  of
any  individual  Council
Member
• Promising  more  than  can
be  delivered,  over ‐
extending  oneself,  or
taking  sole  credit  for  the
work  of  the  Council  and
others
I make  impartial
decisions,  free  of
bribes,  unlawful
gifts,  narrow
political  interests,
and  financial  and
other  personal
interests  that
impair  my
independence  of
judgment  or  action
• Seeking  advice  from  the
City  Attorney  and  City
Manager  when
confronting  a real  or
potential  conflict  of
interest,  and  making  a
full  public  disclosure
when  the  Council
considers  the  agenda
item
• Helping  a friend  get  a
project  through  the
Council  in  return  for  a
donation  to  a campaign
fund,  school  or  charity,  or
the  gift  of  tickets  or
another  perk
• Having  declared  a
conflict,  leaving  the  dais
and  Council  Chambers,
so  other  Council
members  are  free  of  any
undue  influence
• Talking  to  fellow  Council
Members  prior  to
declaring  a conflict,  and
asking  them  to  take  care
of  the  item  in  a way  that
advances  personal
interests
I am  fair,
distributing
benefits  and
burdens  according
to  consistent  and
equitable  criteria
• Listening  attentively  to
all  sides,  keeping  an
open  mind  and  avoiding
even  the  appearance  of
bias,  following
precedents  consistently,
treating  equals  equally
• Paying  more  attention  to
friends’  and  supporters’
projects
• Making  “back  room”
deals  and  decisions
• Giving  preferential
treatment  to  special
interests,  consultants,
and  former  Council
Members
4 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Ethical
(continued)
I extend  equal
opportunities  and
due  process  to  all
parties  in  matters
under
consideration.  If  I
engage  in
unilateral  meetings
and  discussions,  I
do  so  without
making  voting
decisions
• Being  available  to
anyone   who  wants  to
discuss  an  issue,  keeping
an   open  mind  and  not
committing  to  vote  for  or
against  an  item  until
after  hearing  the  full
public  discussion
• Promoting  the  interests
of  the  business
community  without  first
considering  the  interests
of  all  stakeholders
• Giving  special  treatment
to  the  companies  that  pay
the  most  in  taxes  and  to
my  largest  campaign
donors
I show  respect  for
persons,
confidences,  and
information
designated  as
“confidential”
• Referring  media
questions  on  Closed
Session  or  other
confidential  matters  to
the  City  Manager’s
Office,  rather  than
saying  “No  Comment”
• Telling  others  about
Closed  Session
proceedings,  especially
when  it  is  an  important
issue  and  I want  input  on
how  to  decide
• Confirming  a rumor,
remaining  silent,
communicating  non ‐
verbally,  or  in  other  ways
providing  information
that  is  confidential  or
that  the  Council  Member
has  promised  not  to
reveal
• Treating  the  public  and
City  Staff,  at  all  times,
the  way  I treat  highly
regarded  colleagues  in
businesses  or
professions
• Acting  based  on
stereotypes,  rumors,
“ancient  history,”  and
prior  negative
experiences  with  an
individual  or  groups

• Bringing  to  the  attention
of  the  City  Manager  any
concern  about  the
actions  or  work  of  City
Staff,  or  any  complaint
from  the  public

• Criticizing  or
embarrassing  the  City
Manager  or  other  City
Staff  in  public
• Failing  to  publicly
recognize  extraordinary
City  Staff  work

5 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Ethical
(continued)
• Showing  courtesy  and
interest  in  word  and
action  to  City  Staff,
public,  and  elected  and
appointed  officials
• Complimenting  the  work
of  a single  City  Staff
member  when  a staff
team  actually  did  the
work
• Speaking  and  acting  out
of  the  belief  that  City
Staff  and  all  members  of
the  Council  are  on  the
same  team  and
committed  to  doing  their
best  to  serve  residents
• Engaging  publicly  or
privately  in  personal
verbal  attacks  against
Council  colleagues  or  City
Staff;  interrupting  while
they  are  speaking,  rolling
eyes,  demeaning  them,  or
in  other  ways  treating
them  inappropriately
Professional   I use  my  title(s)  only
when  conducting
official  City
business,  for
information
purposes,  or  as  an
indication  of
background  and
expertise,  carefully
considering  whether
I am  exceeding  or
appearing  to  exceed
my  authority
• Using  City  titles  for
identification  at  League
meetings  or  when  on
other  official  City
business,  or  when
seeking  information
directly  related  to  a
Council  matter  from
appropriate  sources
• Using  a City  title  when
making  dinner
reservations  or  making
purchases
• Referring  friends  to  City
businesses  and  suggesting
they  mention  the  name  of
a Council  Member  to  get
the  best  prices
I apply  my  know‐
ledge  and  expertise
to  my  assigned
activities  and  to  the
interpersonal
relationships  that
are  part  of  my  job  in
a consistent,
confident,
competent,  and
productive  manner

• Preparing  by  reading  the
agenda  packet  before
meetings
• Asking  the  City  Manager
informational  questions
ahead  of  time  to  assist  in
being  prepared
• Arriving  on ‐time  to
meetings,  paying
attention  and  listening
actively
• Rushing  into  meetings
late  and  being  obvious
about    opening  the
agenda  packet  for  the
first  time  or  speed‐
reading  the  packet  while
City  Staff  or  the  public
are  presenting
information
6 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Professional
(continued)
• Asking  questions  that
will  advance  the
discussion,  contribute  to
decision ‐making,  and
have  not  been  covered  in
the  agenda  packet
• Taking  no  notes,
remembering  little,  if
any,  of  the  information
in  the  agenda  packet,
asking  to  have
information  repeated
constantly
• Listening  attentively  to
the  public,  City  Staff,
and  other  Council
members    who  may
speak  at  meetings
• Making  little  or  no  eye
contact  with  any  speaker
during  the  meeting
• Leaving  during  public
comment  and  returning
only  after  it  is  over
• Making  comments  to
someone  else  while  the
public  is  speaking
I approach  my  job
and  work ‐related
relationships  with  a
positive  attitude
• Approaching  Council
work  informed  of  issues,
enthusiastic,  energized,
interested,  ready  to
participate,  and  focused
• Approaching  Council
work  half ‐heartedly,
coming  to  meetings  eager
to  leave
• Short ‐circuiting  a
discussion;  being
perceived  as  rude  by
other  Council  Members,
City  Staff,  or  the  public
• Making  guests  feel
welcomed  at  meetings
• Treating  new  Council
Members  as  colleagues,
encouraging  them  to
express  their  opinions,
and  offering  them
positive  feedback
• Acting  in  a superior
manner  with  newly
elected  Council  members
• Never  making  time  to  be
responsive  to  residents
who  want  to  discuss
issues
I keep  professional
knowledge  and
skills  current  and
growing
• Making  it  a priority  to
attend  League  meetings,
Electric  Joint  Powers
Agency  meetings,  and
committees
• Assuming  there  is  nothing
new  to  learn
• Going  to  League  meetings
and  conferences  to  be
seen,  but  never  attending
any  training
7 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Professional
(continued)
• Reading  background
materials  for  general
preparation  including
professional  journals,
books,  and  articles
• Skipping  meetings  with
the  City  Manager,
assuming  you  know  as
much,  if  not  more,  than
she  does  on  this  issue
Service ‐Oriented

I provide  friendly,
receptive,
courteous  service
to  everyone
• Not  just  answering
questions,  but  sharing
helpful  knowledge  of
Council  or  government
functions,  even  if  the
person  asking  isn’t  sure
what  they  need  to  know
• Acting  like  it’s  a bother
anytime  a resident  asks  a
question  or  when  they
make  inquiries  about
Council/government
business
• Seeking  the  opinions  of
those  who  are  hesitant
or  unwilling  to  come
forward  with  their  ideas,
but  trying  not  to  force
anyone  to  speak  in  a
public  forum  if  they  are
uncomfortable  or
unprepared
• Making  guests  or  others
feel  stupid,  intimidated,
dismissed,  manipulated,
or  demeaned  by  reading
the  newspaper,  falling
asleep,  laughing  at  a
private  joke  with  another
Council  Member,  or
repeatedly  leaving  the
room  during  discussions
I am  attuned  to,
and  care  about,
the  needs  and
issues  of
residents,  public
officials,  and  city
workers
• Talking  with  residents
and  actively  listening  at
City  gatherings  to  be
aware  of  what  is  going
on  in  this  community  and
other  communities
• Being  arrogant  or
uninterested  when
responding  to  residents
outside  of  City  Hall  about
their  concerns  and
debating  with  them  to
prove  them  wrong  or
misinformed
• Attending  City  events
and  interacting
effectively  with  the
public,  aware  that  others
expect  Council  Members
to  be  role ‐models
• Showing  up  late  to  City
events,  leaving  early,  and
spending  most  of  the  time
talking  only  to  one  or  two
friends
8 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Service ‐Oriented
(continued)
• Relaying  things  heard  or
provided  to  the  Council
or  the  City  Manager  or
other  appropriate  parties
for  follow‐ up
• Withholding  important
information  to  use  it  for
narrow  personal  purposes
at  a later  time
In  my  interactions
with  constituents,  I
am  interested,
engaged,  and
responsive
• Acting  in  a pleasant  and
friendly  manner  and
encouraging  people  to
speak  their  mind;
welcoming  constructive
criticism  as  well  as
compliments
• Through  word  and  action,
discouraging  people  from
proposing  what  they
believe  are  solutions  or
expressing  their  concerns
• Focusing  on  the  speaker
and  trying  to  see  the
world  as  they  do  in  order
to  understand  their
needs
• While  seeming  to  be
engaged  in  one
conversation,  scanning
the  environment  for
someone  more  interesting
or  important  to  speak
with;  abruptly  stopping
the  previous  conversation
to  speak  with  the  more
important  person
FiscallyResponsible   I make  decisions
after  prudent
consideration  of
their  financial
impact,  taking  into
account  the  long ‐
term  financial
needs  of  the  City,
especially  its
financial  stability
• Before  deciding  how  to
vote,  reviewing
cost/benefit  analysis  and
all  related  studies,  along
with  City  Staff
recommendations
• Allowing  other  Council
members  who  have  more
expertise  in  budgeting  to
take  the  lead  in  budget
discussions,  trusting  that
they  know  better,  and
never  improving  personal
expertise
• Consider  the  City’s  short
and  long  term  financial
condition  prior  to
proposing  new  or
expanded  City  projects
• Ignoring  the  constraints
of  the  City  budget  when
making  decisions
• Citing  “budget
constraints”  as  the  reason
for  not  supporting  a
motion,  when  the  real
reason  is  how  it  will  look
in  the  next  election
9 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Fiscally  Responsible
(continued)
I demonstrate
concern  for  the
proper  use  of  City
assets  (e.g.,
personnel,  time,
property,
equipment,  funds)
and  follow
established
procedures
• Allocating  resources
according  to  the  City’s
plan  and  in  compliance
with  the  law  and  the
City’s  goals  to  provide
residents  with  a better
environment  in  which  to
live
• Taking  advantage  of  any
opportunity  to  get
something  “free”  from
the  City
• Seeking  discounts  from
the  City’s  vendors  solely
because  of  my  position
• Using  City  equipment
only  for  Council  work,
not  for  personal  use  or
for  my  business
• Coming  to  City  Hall
regularly  and  asking  City
Staff  to  make  just  a few
copies  for  personal  use
• Respecting  City  Staff
time  and  being  especially
careful  to  ask  the  City
Manager  to  take  on
special  research  or  other
projects  only  if
convinced  that  this  work
is  critical  and  necessary
for  the  Council  to  better
serve  the  needs  of
residents
• Asking  a lot  of  questions
that  focus  on  non
substantive  details,  being
unable  to  separate  what’s
important  from  what’s
not
• Representing  the  public’s
interests  to  the  best  of
my  ability
• Balancing  long ‐term
impacts  and  short ‐term
goals
• Acting  as  if  I “own”  the
City  or  my  seat  on  the
Council

I make  good
financial  decisions
that  seek  to
preserve  programs
and  services  for  City
residents
• Being  fully  aware  of  and
understanding  the
approved  City  budget,
having  solicited
explanations  from  the
City  Manager,  if
necessary
• Taking  as  many  trips  as
possible  at  the  City’s
expense  because  of  a
personal  feeling  that  the
compensation  is  not
sufficient  and  some
reward  for  City  work  is
deserved
10 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Organized   I act  in  an  efficient
manner,  making
decisions  and
recommendations
based  upon  research
and  facts,  taking
into  consideration
short  and  long ‐term
goals
• Being  cognizant  of  the
importance  of  scarce
meeting  time  and
preparing  accordingly,
with  the  result  that  the
Council  spends  time  on
the  important  issues  and
deals  efficiently  with
other  issues
• Relying  solely  on  prior
knowledge  and  spending  a
great  deal  of  the
Council’s  time  proving  to
everyone  how  much  I
know  on  all  issues,  large
and  small
I follow  through  in  a
responsible  way,
keeping  others
informed,  and
responding  in  a
timely  fashion
• Sharing  my  research  and
experience  with  others
on  the  Council,  making
worthwhile
contributions  and
welcoming  alternative
viewpoints
• Using  hear ‐say  from  a
third  party  as  the  sole
basis  for  making  a
decision
• Returning  phone  calls
and  email  promptly,  if  at
all  possible;  if  unable,
letting  the  person  know
when  to  expect  a
response
• Failing  to  acknowledge
receipt  of  requests  for
information
• Responding  only  to
people  who  can  help  with
personal  political  goals
• Eventually  getting  around
to  sending  information,
but  never  in  a timely
manner
I am  respectful  of
established  City
processes  and
guidelines
• Participating  fully  in
orientation  sessions  and
other  sessions  in  order
to  understand  how  the
City’s  policies  and
procedures  impact  the
effectiveness  of  the
Council
• Criticizing  City  policies  in
public  without  first
expressing  concerns  to
City  Staff  or  gaining
knowledge  necessary  in
order  to  offer
constructive  criticism
• Helping  to  establish
reasonable  timetables
and  then  following  them
• Being  flexible  in  setting
meeting  dates  and  times
• Ignoring  deadlines,  not
keeping  people  informed,
and  making  excuses  which
damage  public  trust
11 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Organized
(continued)
• Being  able  to  explain  to
residents,  businesses,
and  visitors  how  the
City’s  policies  and
procedures  are  examples
of  the  City’s  Core  Values
in  practice
• Being  cynical  about
policies  and  cavalier
about  following
procedures  because  of  a
failure  to  see  how  these
are  related  to  fairness
and  the  common  good
Communicative  I convey  the  City’s
care  for  and
commitment  to  its
residents
• Being  able  to  explain  the
City’s  goals  to  anyone
and  describe  personal
commitment  to  them
• Supporting  superb,
affordable  City  services
and  conveying  that
commitment  effectively
to  residents
• Plotting  and  scheming  to
accomplish  personal
agendas
• Deciding  how  you  will
vote  and  writing  out
those  reasons  prior  to  any
public  comment
• Becoming  angry  at  a
resident  who  is  critical  of
the  Council
I communicate  in
various  ways  that  I
am  approachable,
open ‐minded  and
willing  to
participate  in  dialog
• Being  available  to  the
public  in  person,  at
events,  and  through
telephone  and  written
correspondence  to
provide  both  answers  to
questions  and
dissemination  of
important  information
• Confusing  residents,
spreading  rumors  and
gossip,  or  slandering
elected  or  appointed
officials,  City  Staff,  or
anyone
• Interrupting  someone
who  has  the  floor
• Listening  attentively,
being  open  to  multiple
perspectives,  and
allowing  the  possibility
of  changing  opinions  and
points  of  view
• Listening  solely  to  find
flaws,  to  spot  differences,
and  to  counter  arguments
• Going  out  of  my  way
during  meetings  to  show
why  I am  always  right  and
others  are  not
• Making  it  a practice  to
communicate  equally
well  to  all  stakeholders,
regardless  of  their
influence,  power,  or
campaign  donations
• Dominating  meetings  and
asking  many  more
questions  than  time
allows,  effectively
excluding  the  input  of
others
12 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Communicative
(continued)
I engage  in  effective
two ‐way
communication,  by
listening  carefully,
asking  questions,
and  determining  an
appropriate
response  which  adds
value  to
conversations
• During  meetings,  giving
residents  and  others  the
benefit  of  the  doubt  and
listening  to  identify
needs  and  interests
• Asking  questions  to
clarify,  to  understand,
and  to  augment,  in  order
to  hear  the  truth  as  the
resident  sees  it
• Making  the  best  decision
to  advance  the
community’s  values  and
goals
• Considering  people  on  the
other  side  of  issues  as
enemies,  rather  than  as
colleagues  or  fellow
residents
• Weakening  public  debate
by  belittling  or  mocking
someone’s  viewpoint
• Demonizing  anyone  who
disagrees  with  a personal
conviction  or  viewpoint
Collaborative   I act  in  a
cooperative  manner
with  groups  and
other  individuals,
working  together  in
a spirit  of  tolerance
and  understanding
• Submitting  one’s  best
thinking,  respecting  all
other  participants  and
inviting  their  thoughts  in
order  to  develop  better
solutions
• Seeing  value  in  working
with  other  agencies  to
develop  consistent
policies,  where
appropriate
• Describing  people  who
hold  different  viewpoints
as  “them”
• Failing  to  recognize
personal  biases,
prejudices,  stereotypes,
and  their  influence  on
language  and  attitudes
toward  residents  and
others
I work  towards
consensus  building
and  gain  value
from  diverse
opinions
• Approaching  meetings
and  discussions  assuming
that  many  people  have
pieces  of  answers  and
that  cooperation  will
lead  to  workable
solutions  for  the  most
difficult  problems
• Approaching  discussions
as  if  there’s  already  a
single  right  answer  that
needs  to  be  defended
against  opposing
viewpoints

I accomplish  the
goals  and
responsibilities  of
my  individual
position,  while
respecting  my  role
as  a member  of  a
team
• Understanding  that  what
I do  speaks  more  loudly
than  what  I say
• Showing  respect  for
Council  Members,  Staff,
and  residents  by  giving
priority  to  my  City
commitment,  doing  my
homework

• Focusing  first  on
satisfying  a personal  or
hidden  agenda
• Actively  weakening  the
team  that  the  Council  and
City  Staff  have  devoted
efforts  to  build

13 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Collaborative
(continued)
• Understanding  that  each
Council  decision  either
builds  public  trust  or
detracts  from  it
• Dismissing  any  idea
proposed  by  a Council
colleague  who  supported
someone  else  in  the  last
election
• Working  hard  to  develop
among  Council  Members,
other  officials,  City  Staff,
and  the  public  a kindred
spirit  of  cooperation
when  working  toward
implementing  City  values
• Reaching  conclusions
based  on  satisfying
personal  or  special
interests  and  refusing  to
change  one’s  position
despite  good  reasons  to
reconsider
• Holding  grudges  and
considering  some  people
as  permanent  enemies
I consider  the
broader  regional
and  State ‐wide
implications  of  the
City’s  decisions  and
issues
• While  serving  on  County ‐
wide  committees,  acting
in  a professional  manner
and  approaching  the
tasks  responsibly
• Making  derogatory
remarks  about  other
cities,  feeling  that  Santa
Clara  is  superior
• Serving  on  County  or
State‐ wide  panels,  freely
sharing  information  and
resources  so  everyone
may  benefit  from  the
City’s  experience
• Having  tunnel  vision  and
ignoring  anything  beyond
the  City,  depriving  the
City  of  the  benefit  of  a
broader,  regional
perspective
14 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Progressive

I exhibit  a
proactive,
innovative  approach
to  setting  goals  and
conducting  the
City’s  business
• Contributing  personal
experiences  and
expertise  to  advance  the
goals  of  the  Council  and
the  City  as  a whole
• Anticipating  future
problems  or
opportunities,  raising
the  issues  at  the
appropriate  time  for  City
Staff  to  investigate  and
for  Council  to  consider
• Being  dogmatic  in
approaching  decision ‐
making  and  only  doing
things  the  way  they’ve
always  been  done
• Never  taking  a forward
looking,  principled  or
values ‐centered  stand,
but  preferring  to  solve
issues  in  an  ad  hoc
manner
• Focusing  on  the  short
term,  being  concerned
only  about  meeting
minimum  requirements  of
law,  politics,  or  efficiency
I display  a style
that  maintains
consistent
standards,  but  is
also  sensitive  to
the  need  for
compromise,
“thinking  outside
the  box,”  and
improving  existing
paradigms  when
necessary

• Being  able  to  explain
how  a decision  is
consistent  with  ethical
standards  and  the  City’s
Core  Values
• Committing  to  ongoing
improvement,
progressive  government,
and  moral  imagination  in
solving  problems
• Lying  about  personal
mistakes  and  downplaying
their  importance
• Manipulating  discussions
and  decisions  to  advance
personal,  political
aspirations
• Speaking  and  listening
only  to  one’s  friends  on
the  Council

• Taking  responsibility  for
actions,  making
appropriate  apologies  or
restitution  when  a
mistake  is  made,  and
implementing  a plan  to
develop  practical  skills
to  avoid  such  mistakes  in
the  future
• Actively  listening,  asking
clarifying  questions,  and
giving  careful
consideration  to  all
• Holding  on  to  opinions
and  viewpoints  so
stubbornly  that  mistakes
are  made,  impacting
public  trust
• Letting  personal
limitations  impede
progress  or  the  work  of
the  Council
• Playing  the  role  of
pessimist  whenever  a new
idea  is  presented,  trying
to  bulldoze  personal  ideas
15 The  Code  of  Ethics  & Values   Behavioral  Standards 1 City
Core  Value
2 Basic  Actions  and
Character  Traits
3 Council  Members  Engage
in  Positive  Behaviors  Like

4 Council  Members  Avoid
Negative  Behaviors  Like
Progressive
(continued)
comments  and
viewpoints,  even  if  they
are  expressed  by  people
who  think  differently,
have  different  beliefs,
and  have  different
groups  of  supporters
despite  budget
limitations,  prior
agreement,  or  consensus,
and  undermining  new
ideas  by  gossiping  with
others  before  the  idea
has  a chance  to  be
explored

I promote
intelligent  and
thoughtful
innovation  in  order
to  forward  the
City’s  policy
agenda  and  City
services
• Encouraging  talented
and  diverse  individuals
to  become  involved  in
City  service,  as  well  as
recognizing  and
celebrating  talent  and
new  ideas  that  help  the
City  reach  its  goals,
improve  City  services,
and  implement  City  Core
Values  in  best  practice
• Pushing  change  in  the
City  without  ample
thought,  and  causing
change  only  for  the  sake
of  change,  or  only  to
fulfill  a campaign  promise

Resolution/Meeting Procedures Page 1 of 2
Rev: 11/22/17
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

ADOPTING PROCEDURAL PRACTICES FOR THE CONDUCT OF

BUSINESS AT MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ITS

AUTHORITIES TO IMPROVE MEETING EFFICIENCY

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting of August 8, 2021, the City Council determined that it was in the best interests of the City to promote Council meeting efficiency by adopting a set of meeting procedures governing the process by which Council would conduct its discussion of agenda items;
WHEREAS, the City Council agreed to use this process for a period of approximately six months, and to revisit the topic at the February priority setting meeting ; and, WHEREAS, the City Council hereby approves the continued use of the meeting procedures, which shall be adopted as a Council Policy Manual section as set forth below .

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA AS FOLLOWS:

1. That each item on a Council and/or Authorities agenda shall be heard and discussed in the following procedure:

A. City staff provides a report on the item (if a staff report is applicable); B. Each Councilmember who wishes to ask questions, shall then have the opportunity to ask their questions;
C. City staff shall, to the extent possible, then provide a response to all Councilmember questions;
D. The public shall then have the opportunity to provide comment or ask questions; E. City staff shall, to the extent possible, then provide responses to the comments or questions from the public;
F. A Councilmember shall then make a motion;
Resolution/Meeting Procedures Page 2 of 2
Rev: 11/22/17
G. Each Councilmember who wishes to speak to the m otion shall then have the opportunity to make a statement regarding the motion;
H. A vote shall then be taken.

2. That the City Manager is authorized to update the Council Policy Manual, and number the policy as necessary, to reflect this Resolution without further action by the City Council.

3. Effective date. This resolution shall become effective immediately.

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE A TRUE COPY OF A RESOLUTION PASSED

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE ___ DAY OF _________, 202 2, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

ATTEST: ______________________________

NORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

Attachments incorporated by reference:

1. None

1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 1/9 In a recent report by the National League of Cities, 87% of public officials have observed an increase in some form of harassment, abuse, or violence while in office, with many noting a dramatic increase since the beginning of the pandemic.

January 1, 2022 News from the Institute for Local Government By Melissa Kuehne Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing
negative discourse and incivility in public
meetings
Melissa Kuehne is the senior program manager for the Institute for Local Government; she can be reached at [email protected].

WESTER1t'ity·
1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 2/9 According to a recent report from the National League of Cities, more than 80% of local government officials have experienced some form of harassment, abuse, or violence while in office. That same report states that 87% of public officials have observed an increase in such behavior, with many noting a dramatic increase since the beginning of the pandemic.

Representative participation and open and transparent meetings are the foundation of our democracy. If left unchecked, this increased vitriol and incivility threaten to weaken that foundation. This leaves many local officials and staff asking the same question: “How do we maintain public access and participation while ensuring the safety of elected officials, staff, and community members?”
Civility matters
The type of discourse in public meetings has far-reaching effects. Negative comments can derail and prolong council meetings, impacting the council’s ability to conduct the public’s business.
“Lack of civility is occurring everywhere, including on the roads, in social media, and at city council meetings,” says Judy Mitchell, a former mayor and council member from Rolling Hills Estates. “The real work doesn’t get done when you are fighting amongst each other. You need to keep your focus and operate in the best interest of your community.” Incivility in public meetings and other aspects of public service can also impact a city’s ability to attract and retain talent. In an informal survey conducted by the International City/County Management Association, 25% of respondents indicated they had left public service because of the lack of civility. Without talented staff, cities will not be able to provide the level of service our communities need and have come to expect. Without high-quality staff, cities will not be able to tackle the range of complex and ever-changing issues facing local government.

There are growing fears that continued negative discourse could discourage broad community engagement with local governments. The general public may be less inclined to participate in meetings that frequently turn negative or violent. This could result in councils only hearing 1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 3/9 from a very vocal minority of their community, who may not represent the thoughts, feelings, or preferences of the community as a whole.

Incivility from the public can derail and prolong council meetings, impacting the council’s ability to conduct the public’s business.

Improving civil discourse: Codes of conduct
While there is no simple solution for improving civility overnight, there are several actions local governments can take to incrementally improve public discourse. For starters, remember that local officials are role models and should act accordingly. “Civility starts with the council. As leaders, we need to model the behavior we expect from the community,” says Carlsbad Council Member Teresa Acosta. “We set the tone. When we are on the dais, we are recorded, and our behavior and what we say can be referred to and referenced in articles, videos, or even future meetings.”
1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 4/9 To encourage and model civility, elected leaders can:
collaborate and operate as a team.
demonstrate honesty and integrity in every action.
prioritize strengthening relationships and building trust. accept personal responsibility.
focus on civil discourse; disagree agreeably and professionally. work for the common good, not personal interest.
attack the problem, never the person.
be open-minded and embrace diverse points of view.
strive for a win-win; work toward consensus and seek common ground. practice active listening.
think about shared values and find common ground.

Some cities, such as Carlsbad, have identified shared values and created a set of agreed-upon norms with a documented civility policy, code of conduct, or rules of decorum. These documents set expectations for how the city council will model the behavior it expects from the public. ILG has compiled a list of sample codes and policies for city officials online. Some common elements in these policies include variations of the following expectations:

Treat everyone courteously.

Be inclusive.

Show respect.

Exercise self-control.

Take responsibility.

Give consideration to all viewpoints.

Focus on the issues and avoid personalizing debate.

Disagree agreeably and professionally.

These policies can include provisions against conduct by meeting attendees that could provoke violent or riotous behavior or disturb the orderly management of the meeting. Examples include physical or verbal threats vulgar or boisterous language refusing to abide by time •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 5/9 include physical or verbal threats, vulgar or boisterous language, refusing to abide by time limits, throwing objects, or other disorderly conduct. Adopting an official policy for all attendees can also allow for enforcement measures such as warnings, ejections from meetings, or even suspension from government buildings.
“In my experience, the good balances out the bad,” said Acosta. “We need to try to focus on the positive, celebrate success, and find ways to decompress after challenging meetings and interactions. For me, engaging with Cal Cities and connecting with my fellow council members has been essential to my ability to do that.”
Improving civil discourse: Engaging the community in equity conversations
No city is exempt from discussions about social justice and equity. By seeking clarity on these complex issues and committing to civility, councils can work together to determine how best to explore these challenging issues productively and respectfully. Some jurisdictions are actively exploring how best to embed the principles of equity and authentic engagement in their codes of conduct and apply an equity lens to their decision-making processes. “COVID-19 has illuminated a lot of injustices throughout the state,” says Maywood Mayor Pro Tem Heber Marquez. “As elected leaders, we need to not just hear people’s complaints, we need to acknowledge what might be fueling them.”
Relatedly, providing opportunities for community engagement and input outside standard city council meetings can potentially offset the volume of public comments received in official council meetings. Consider employing different public engagement efforts for the community to provide feedback and be heard on hot button issues. Approaches such as town halls, coffee chats, surveys, websites, public workshops, and emails can allow for an additional, broader range of public input.
“As a teacher, an educator, and an elected official, I’ve seen a lot of people speaking out of frustration,” said Marquez. “We need to identify and model the difference between communication and complaining. When we demonstrate how to have a constructive, respectful 1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 6/9 conversation and acknowledge that others are often coming from different experiences, we have better and more civil outcomes.”
Providing opportunities for community engagement and input outside standard city council meetings can potentially offset the volume of public comments received in official council meetings.

Improving civil discourse: Meeting design
If a community decides to hold a public workshop, there are several key things to consider before and during the meeting to limit grandstanding and provide space for more balanced conversations.

Before the workshop:

Be strategic about meeting design. Consider the room’s setup and the incorporation of small and large group discussions, different ways to provide input, or real-time polling.

Clearly define the roles of staff and elected officials. •
•
1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 7/9 Establish a clear facilitation and governance process in advance. Discuss how decisions, if applicable, will be made, determine who is leading the meeting, and identify any follow-up activities or engagement opportunities that need to be shared.

Consider language access and accessibility needs to ensure that key stakeholders can participate in the process. Addressing this early will minimize frustration.

Understand hot button issues in advance.

Draft and rehearse sample verbal prompts or scripts for various scenarios in advance so that electeds and staff can be prepared for challenging topics.

During the workshop:

Manage expectations. Explain the process, meeting design, and timelines, including how community feedback will be used and how participants can remain engaged throughout the process. This will reduce the uncertainty of nonparticipation.

Publicly clarify the roles and responsibilities of staff and elected officials so that participants know which city officials can address which issues.

Offer multiple formats for public comment. Some participants may not be comfortable providing verbal comments, so consider surveys, notecards, or other options for nonverbal feedback.

Take breaks as needed to reset. This strategy may help defuse tense situations.

Consider using a neutral facilitator to lead the meeting — an expert that does not have a stake in the outcome of the meeting.

Since city council meetings are regulated by the Brown Act, elected officials and staff have limited options when changing the format of meetings and responding to public comments.

However, there are still options to consider when officiating a council meeting.

Agree on a process in advance. Does each council member have an option to speak on every agenda item? Does your city use Robert’s Rules of Order or Rosenberg’s Rules of Order? Do you have a code of conduct that the council and community are expected to abide by? How are those rules enforced?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 8/9 Manage expectations. Residents may not understand all the intricacies of the local government decision-making process. When possible, explain engagement opportunities and the limitations elected leaders may have when responding.

Make sure your chair understands the meeting format, process, and options.

Be thoughtful and deliberative; use scripts as appropriate to ensure an accurate, respectful, and courteous response.

Take a break if things get heated and only use ejection as a last resort.

Consistently enforce your code of conduct or civility policy.

While there is no easy solution to the increase in incivility and harassment, it is important to remain committed to finding ways to increase civility, build bridges, and design a governance model that reinforces positive and equitable outcomes for the city and the community.

As John F. Kennedy said, “Let us begin anew — remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof…Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.” As the League of California Cities’ nonprofit education and training affiliate, the Institute for Local Government offers resources and training to help city officials operate more effectively as a team and better engage with each other, city staff, and the community. When it comes to improving civility, ILG offers resources on responsibilities and powers, decision-making, effective meetings, and community engagement. Visit ILG’s leadership and public engagement web pages for more information about these opportunities.

ILG can also customize tailored training sessions and private, facilitated discussions for jurisdictions throughout the state. Whether your team is struggling with maintaining civility in public meetings or is looking to go from good to great, ILG can help you meet those goals.

Sessions are offered in both virtual and in-person formats.

ILG also has a recurring thought leadership forum, “Leading Local”, which focuses on addressing difficult topics and sensitive issues local government leaders face. These free webinars cover a wide range of issues and share expert guidance from leaders from academia, •
•
•
•
•
1/4/22, 9:13 AM Breaking the cycle: Steps for reducing negative discourse and incivility in public meetings - Western City Magazine https://www.westerncity.com/article/breaking-cycle-steps-reducing-negative-discourse-and-incivility-public-meetings 9/9 government, and beyond. The content for each session is curated for elected officials and staff at California cities, counties, and special districts. ILG also recently hosted its first virtual training for individual council members and executive staff on topics such as effective councils, civility, and community engagement. Another workshop will be offered in the spring.

For more information about how ILG can help increase civility and effective communications in your community, contact Melissa Kuehne at [email protected].

Related Content
December 1, 2021
News from the Institute
for the Local
Government By Julia
Salinas
Change happens at the
speed of trust: Key
lessons from ILG’s
equity roundtable
The pandemic has brought equity to the
forefront of many city programs and
services. From updating recruitment
practices and hiring equity officers to
developing equity ordinances and
reexamining public policies and programs,
cities throughout California have made
notable changes to their daily and long-
term operations._

City Manager’s Office

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
PROVIDED FOR ITEMS (030)

BACKGROUND
The following copies of email correspondence provides the additional links and background information related to various (030) items provided to Council. These items were referred to be discussed at the 2022 Priority Setting Session.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
From: Nora Pimentel
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 7:11 PM
To: Nora Pimentel <[email protected]>
Cc: Deanna Santana <[email protected]>; Nadine Nader <[email protected]>; Julie Minot <[email protected]>; Sujata Reuter <[email protected]>
Subject: Additional links related to Infrastructure Bond- Swim Center

Good evening Mayor and Councilmembers:

Per your request at the October 19, 2021 Council meeting, below are additional links to background information related to Infrastructure Bond.

WRITTEN PETITION HYPERLINKS (POLICY 030)
OCTOBER 19, 2021 MEETING

3. Infrastructure Bond Background Information (Continued)

Reference: 12H. 21-1491
Discussion to Add a Ballot Measure in 2022 Election for an Infrastructure Bond or Tax That Would Modernize/Remodel/Upgrade all of Santa Clara’s Public Pools Including Construction of a Replicated New Central Park International Swim Center

Hyperlinks:

May 29, 2018: Review of Various Infrastructure Improvement Needs and Funding Levels for Consideration as Part of a Potential November 2018 Infrastructure Ballot Measure and Approval of a Related Budget Amendment.

City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-287 (legistar.com)

February 20, 2018: Project Finance Advisory Limited (PFAL) Presentation Regarding the Central Park Community Recreation and Aquatic Center Project (pdf) City of Santa Clara – File #: HIST-64059 (legistar.com) City of
Santa Clara
The Center of What's Possible
Attachment 8 – 2022 Priority Setting Session RTC
February 1, 2022

July 18, 2017: Presentation by Project Finance Advisory Limited (PFAL) regarding the International Swim Center, Community Recreation Center and International Swimming Hall of Fame Project.

City of Santa Clara – File #: HIST-60356 (legistar.com)

From: Nora Pimentel
Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 3:05 PM
To: Nora Pimentel <[email protected]>
Cc: Deanna Santana <[email protected]>; Nadine Nader <[email protected]>; Julie Minot <[email protected]>; Sujata Reuter <[email protected]>
Subject: Background Information on Various 030 Items

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:

Per your request at the October 19, 2021 Council meeting, below are links to background information on some of the items raised under the written petition section of the agenda. The Council directed that these items be included as part of the Council Priority Setting Session scheduled for February 8, 2022, which we have noted.

WRITTEN PETITION HYPERLINKS (POLICY 030)
OCTOBER 19, 2021 MEETING

1. Civic Center Master Plan Background

Reference: 12C. 21-1431
Discussion to Propose a New City Hall Plan Incorporated into the New Santa Clara Downtown Plan

Hyperlinks:

December 17, 2019: Informational Report on Santa Clara Civic Center Master Plan and Utility Building Project Financial Feasibility and Economic Analysis City of Santa Clara - File #: 19-1384 (legistar.com)

January 28, 2020: Action on Confirming Strategic Direction for the Civic Center Master Plan from December 17, 2019 Study Session [Council Pillar: Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure]
City of Santa Clara - File #: 20-73 (legistar.com)

2. Lawn Bowl Facility Background Information

Reference: 12G. 21-1490
Attachment 8 – 2022 Priority Setting Session RTC
February 1, 2022

Discussion on Construction of New Lawn Bowl Facility to Follow through on Past Promises

Hyperlinks:

August 22, 2017: Central Park Lawn Bowl facilities and Santa Clara Lawn Bowls Club Informational Report on Background of the Club
City of Santa Clara – File #: HIST-60793 (legistar.com)

August 28, 2018: Action on Central Park Guiding Principles City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-1184 (legistar.com)

October 9, 2018: Follow Up to Written Petition and Potential Action on Central Park Lawn Bowl Clubhouse Refurbishment
City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-1120 (legistar.com)

December 11, 2018: Update and Potential Action on Lawn Bowl Clubhouse City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-1429 (legistar.com)

July 9, 2019: Action on A written Petition submitted by Jerry R Patrignani Requesting an Update and Potential Action on Lawn Bowl Clubhouse Project
City of Santa Clara – File #: 19-781 (legistar.com)

October 19, 2021: Action on Written Petition (Council Petition 030) Submitted by Councilmember Becker Requesting to Place and Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting for Discussion on Construction of New Lawn Bowl Facility to Follow Through on Past Promises City of Santa Clara – File #: 21-1490 (legistar.com)

3. Infrastructure Bond Background Information

Reference: 12H. 21-1491
Discussion to Add a Ballot Measure in 2022 Election for an Infrastructure Bond or Tax That Would Modernize/Remodel/Upgrade all of Santa Clara’s Public Pools Including Construction of a Replicated New Central Park International Swim Center

Hyperlinks:

April 24, 2018: Discussion on Current City Infrastructure Needs Including Project Options, Costs, and Possible Funding Opportunities
City of Santa Clara - File #: 18-303 (legistar.com)

April 24, 2018: Kitchell Report Executive Summary & individual park site and park buildings:

City of Santa Clara - File #: 18-091 (legistar.com)

May 29, 2018: Discussion and Review of Potential General Fund Revenue Opportunities and Related Budget Amendment
City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-388 (legistar.com)

Attachment 8 – 2022 Priority Setting Session RTC
February 1, 2022

July 5, 2018: Presentation of Community Research Survey Results and Draft Ballot Questions for Potential 2018 November Ballot Revenue Opportunities City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-845 (legistar.com)

July 16, 2018: Actions Related to Revenue Opportunities for a November 2018 Ballot Measure – Cannabis Business Tax
City of Santa Clara – File #: 18-637 (legistar.com)

August 28, 2018: Study Session on Central Park Master Plan Guiding Principles City of Santa Clara - File #: 18-033 (legistar.com)

August 28, 2018: Action on Central Park Master Plan Guiding Principles City of Santa Clara - File #: 18-1184 (legistar.com)

October 15, 2019: Parks & Recreation Commission—Initiate Review and Public Comment on Central Park Master Plan
City of Santa Clara - File #: 19-1202 (legistar.com)

November 5, 2019: Discussion of, and Possible Direction On, Review of Potential General Fund Revenue Opportunities for the November 2020 Ballot; Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Contracts for Community Research and Outreach City of Santa Clara – File #: 19-1104 (legistar.com)

November 19, 2019: The Central Park Master Plan (CPMP) (pdf) City of Santa Clara - File #: 19-1353 (legistar.com)

February 11, 2020: Discussion of, and Possible Direction on, Revenue Measures for the November 2020 Ballot
City of Santa Clara – File #: 20-41 (legistar.com)

June 23, 2020: Presentation on Voter Research Activities Related to Potential Revenue Measures for the November 2020 Ballot
City of Santa Clara – File #: 20-633 (legistar.com)

COUNCIL ITEM REQUEST FORM
The Council Item Request Form is for members of the City Council to submit written requests to the City Manager's Office for inclusion of an item on a future City Council meeting agenda. At the meeting where the initial written request is heard, discussion should be limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. A majority vote of the City Council is required for the item to be added to future Council meeting agenda for action.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Requesting Member of City Council : Suds Jain
Contact E-mail _ [email protected]_
Contact Phone _ 408-499-2955
Today's Date __ 1/31/2022

WRITTEN REQUEST
I, Suds Jain , hereby request that the following item be placed on the City of Santa Clara Council and Authorities Concurrent meeting agenda:

At the January 25th, 2022, City Council received a update from Staff on the Discussions with Parking Maintenance District No.122 - Franklin Square (PMD 122) Property Owners RegardingCouncil’s Request to Explore Increased Contributions for Operations and Maintenance Costs.

The Staff report said that the property owners voted not to increase their contributions. Council voted to note and file the report.

1. Property owners currently pay nothing for Operations and Maintenance of the Franklin Mall Area outside of the buildings including the parking lots. Property owners collectively pay $14,200 per year to a fund that is used for capital repairs like resurfacing parking lots. This number has not increased since 2002 even though cumulative inflation over that period was 55% so, had the number simply been increased to match inflation, the value today would be $22,010. I imagine that most property owners have increased their rents at least once over the past 19 years.

2. In FY2021/22, the City budgeted $138,163 to cover the day-to-day maintenance of PMD 122.

Property Owners pay nothing towards those costs. However, in 1996, property owners were paying 75% of the O&M costs and that was Staff’s recommendation on June 14, 2002. 75% of $138,163 is $103,622 which is 7.3 times what property owners currently pay.

3. Buildings occupy 36% of the land area in PMD122. 36% of $138,163 is $49,738 which is 3.5 times what property owners currently pay.

Under the current contract for the PMD122, the City has no say in what the assessment will be. The property owners have all the decision power. Therefore, I suggest we agendize a discussion of dissolving PMD122 and possibly negotiating a new agreement.

Cityo ,f
Santa Clara
The Cente r of Wh al's Possible

Reference: Council Policy 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 20-8895
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-236 Agenda Date: 2/8/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Tentative Meeting Agenda Calendar (TMAC)

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The purpose of the TMAC is to provide the public advanced notifications of tentative dates of Council Study Sessions, Joint Council/Commission meetings, as well as Council Public Hearing and General Business agenda items. It is important to note that the TMAC is a Tentative Calendar planning tool and reports listed are subject to change due to Public Hearing publication requirements and agenda management.

The TMAC will be published weekly no later than Friday on the City’s website.

City of Santa Clara Printed on 2/4/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™

2/4/2022 1:29:39 PM

________

Tuesday, February 15, 2022 Joint Council and Valley Water (Santa Clara Valley Water District Meeting

Tuesday, February 22, 2022 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Stadium Authority Meeting
Public Hearing/General Business
22-78 Adopt a Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of a Special Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, June 7, 2022 for a Vote on One Ballot Measure that, if passed, Would Amend Sections 600, 700.1 and 700.2 of the Santa Clara City Charter; Requesting the Consolidation of the Special Municipal Election with the Statewide Direct Primary Election to be Held in Santa Clara County on June 7, 2022; and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare the Impartial Analysis

22-1496 Action on Modifications to P&P 049 Community Grant Policy

22-179 Action on Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation for Approval of the Westwood Oaks Park Master Plan Update, Preferred Playground Schematic Design, and Draft Measure R Ordinance

22-104 Discussion and Action on Councilmember Hardy’s Request to Consider a Resolution to Support the Bid to FIFA for the 2026 World Cup and Related Events

March 1, 2022 Special Council Meeting

Note: Holding Date for possible carry over of Feb 8 Priority Setting Session

Tuesday, March 8, 2022 Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting Note: Last meeting for potential ballot measures for June 2022

Study Session
22-1669 Study Session - Pruneridge Avenue Complete Streets Plan

City of Santa Clara
Tentative Meeting Agenda Calendar
Note: These proposed dates are tentative and subject to change based on staff capacity, meeting management, and deferred items by Council requiring other items to free up agenda meeting time.

Special Order of Business
22-127 Recognition of the donation in the amount of $6,500 from Jerold W. Louderback, Jr. for the purchase and installation a Memorial Bench to be located in (section) of the Mission City Memorial Park in Honor of Pauline M. Louderback, Ernest M.

Peterson, and Helen F. Peterson
Public Hearing/General Business
22-65 Action on 2022 Legislative Advocacy Positions

22-000 Action on Adoption of Ordinance Amending the District Map

22-69 Adoption of the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan

22-90 Public Hearing: Action on a Resolution Approving the Findings from the Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan Infrastructure Impact Fee Nexus Study and Setting the Rates for the Infrastructure Impact Fee, Action on the Introduction of an Ordinance Adding Section 17.15.360XXX to Chapter 15 of Title 17 of the Santa Clara City Code, and Establishment of the Patrick Henry Drive Infrastructure Improvement Fund and Related Budget Actions

Tuesday, March 22, 2022 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Stadium Authority Meeting
Study Session
22-149 Study Session - VTA re: BART Architecture Session with Council Public Hearing/General Business
22-34 Action to Approve Amendments to the Water Supply Agreement (WSA) between the City and County of San Francisco and the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and its Represented Water Retailers

22-109 In Response to Written Petition Regarding Responsibility of a Sound Wall in the Laurel Park East Neighborhood

22-139 Public Hearing: FY 2022-2023 DRAFT Annual Action Plan for the use of Federal Housing and Urban Development Grant Funds, and CDBG Guideline

22-1757 Public Hearing: Adoption of a Resolution Ordering the Abatement of a Nuisance Consisting of Growing Weeds in Association with the County Weed Abatement Program for 2021-2022

Tuesday, April 5, 2022 Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting

Study Session
22-105 Study Session to Review the Proposed FY 2022/23 Municipal Fee Schedule Public Hearing/General Business
22-000 Action on Adoption of Ordinance Amending the District Map

22-148 PLACEHOLDER: Consideration of Silicon Valley Power Quarterly Strategic Plan Update

Tuesday, April 19, 2022 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Stadium Authority Meeting
Public Hearing/General Business
22-80 Action on Resolution Establishing the Political Campaign Voluntary Expenditure Limit and Campaign Contribution Limit for the November 8, 2022 Municipal Election
22-99 Public Hearing: Adoption of the Proposed FY 2022/23 Municipal Fee Schedule 22-201 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update Adoption

Tuesday, May 10, 2022 Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting

Study Session
22-100 Joint Study Session to Review Proposed FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 Biennial Capital Improvement Program Budget and Operating Changes Public Hearing/General Business
22-208 Action on the Adoption of a Resolution to Modify the Files Management Manual for the City of Santa Clara

Tuesday, May 24, 2022 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Stadium Authority Meeting

Public Hearing/General Business
22-1725 Public Hearing: Adoption of a Resolution Setting Rates for Overall Solid Waste Services, Annual Clean-up Campaign, and Household Hazardous Waste in the Exclusive Franchise Area
Tuesday, June 7, 2022 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Stadium Authority Meeting

Study Session
22-101 Joint Study Session to Review Proposed FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 Biennial Capital Improvement Program Budget and Operating Changes Consent Calendar

22-77 Adoption of a Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 for the Election of Two Councilmembers one each for Council District 2, 3, and one Mayor; Requesting that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara Consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide Gubernatorial General Election; and Adopt Regulations for Candidate Statements of Qualifications Submitted to the Voters and Levying a Share of the Cost of the Candidates’ Statements

Public Hearing/General Business
22-66 Public Hearing: Action on Resolutions Approving Water, Sewer and Recycled Water Rates to be Effective July 1, 2022

Tuesday, June 21, 2022 - Council and Authorities Concurrent Meeting 22-102 Public Hearing: and Adoption of Proposed FY 2022/23 and FY 2023/24 Biennial Capital Improvement Program and Changes to the Operating Budget

AGENDA ITEMS TO BE SCHEDULED TO A FUTURE DATE

21-1318 Action on Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement for Services with NewGen Strategies and Solutions LLC to Perform a Cost of Service Analysis and Rate Study for Silicon Valley Power

22-000 Response to Vice Mayor Jain’s Written Request to Discuss making the Youth Soccer Park Parking Lot available when there are no events at the Youth Soccer Park (soccer gets absolute priority) in order to Generate Revenue for the City approved to be agendized to a future meeting

22-184 Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Jain Requesting to expand the scope of a previous council written request relating to the Youth Soccer Park Parking Lot (Council Policy 030) agenda item already approved to be agendized at future meeting for discussion with additional topics: 1) Under Measure-R, can the City contract out annually to the SCYSL to manage parking the parking lot as it sees fit and charge for parking when there is no soccer activity at YSP? The Parks and Rec department would retain control and could override any decision by the SCYSL. 2) It is my understanding that there have been games at the YSP but no practices this past year due to lack of City staff to schedule practices. I would like a discussion of how scheduling works at the YSP and Reed and Grant. Are only SCYSL events allowed at YSP? Under Measure R, could the SCYSL do its own scheduling, again with override authority (ultimate control) by Parks and Rec? 3) Can the City prioritize staffing a scheduler for YSL as Parks and Rec begins to hire more staff that was reduced under COVID so that we can start having practices at YSP? 4) If staffing for scheduling is short for YSP, can the City look at acquiring some facilities scheduling software to make the process more efficient? SCUSD uses Facilitron. Perhaps this software could be used to schedule all parks and rec facilities. It would be nice for the public to make scheduling requests online to Parks and Rec for meeting rooms, picnic areas, etc. and 5) Can we get a report of the staffing and budget needed to support soccer at YSL and Reed and Grant?

22-001 Response to Written Petition (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Keith Stattenfield Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Discuss requirements from the Office of the City Attorney on Approving an Update to the CC&R’s of the Casa del Rey Homeowner’s Association Bylaws approved to be agendized to a future meeting