Agenda packet — City Council and Authorities Concurrent, August 16, 2022 (part 7 of 7)

City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1022 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Receive Silicon Valley Power Quarterly Report (Deferred from July 5, 2022)

COUNCIL PILLAR
Deliver and Enhance High Quality Efficient Services and Infrastructure

BACKGROUND
SVP is a recognized industry leader with a strong history and reputation of providing excellent customer service. The electric industry is rapidly changing and undergoing a fundamental transformation, shifting from a centralized resource grid toward an increasing decentralized electrical grid with distributed renewable energy resources (e.g. wind, solar, hydrogen, and biogas), shifting variability in supply, and greater customer choice.

DISCUSSION
The report to be presented to Council will provide an update to Council on the status of the utility, current load and sales, recent accomplishments, and upcoming Council Actions for consideration.

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 associated with this update. Implementation of certain elements will require funding which will be requested through the normal budget process.

COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and the City Attorney’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]> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1022 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022

RECOMMENDATION
Note and file the Silicon Valley Power Quarterly Update.

Reviewed by: Manuel Pineda, Chief Electric Utility Officer Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-1016 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Consideration of Action on a Resolution to Remove Ron Patrick from the Planning Commission in Accordance with Council Policy 032; and to Appoint First Eligible Appointee Mario Bouza to the Planning Commission

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
On July 5, 2022 the Council considered a Council Policy 030 written request submitted by Councilmember Becker to discuss the recent appointment of Ron Patrick to the Planning Commission at a future City Council meeting. The Council considered the petition and voted affirmatively to place this item on the July 12, 2022 Council agenda. The item was discussed at the July 12th Council meeting and the City Council provided direction to staff to return to the City Council for Council action to remove Mr. Patrick from the Planning Commission.

DISCUSSION
At the July 12, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Attorney provided a memorandum to the City Council (attached) providing background information on potential concerns regarding the appointment of Mr. Patrick to the Planning Commission and provided the Council with four possible courses of action:

1. Determine the staff investigation sufficiently provided evidence of irregularities regarding Mr.

Patrick’s residency and take action in accordance with Policy 032.

2. Determine that Mr. Patrick remain as a Planning Commissioner and take no further action.

3. Direct staff to conduct further investigation.

4. If Mr. Patrick is removed, there should be an action to appoint a new Commissioner.

The City Council discussed the four possible actions and concluded that the staff investigation sufficiently provided evidence of irregularities regarding Mr. Patrick's residency and for the City to take action in accordance with Policy 032. Following the advice of the City Attorney regarding the correct procedure to implement Action #1, the City Council directed staff to return to the City Council with a Resolution to remove Mr. Patrick from the Planning Commission.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact related to the writing of this report.

COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.

City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-1016 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022

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] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff makes no recommendation.

Reviewed by: Andrew Crabtree, Director of Community Development Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution to Remove Ron Patrick from the Planning Commission with exhibits

2. Exhibits to Removal Resolution
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA, TO

REMOVE RON PATRICK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND

APPOINT THE FIRST ELIGIBLE APPOINTEE, MARIO BOUZA, TO THE

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

WHEREAS, Article X of the City Charter, Section 1006, Planning Commission-Generally, provides that “There shall be a City Planning Commission consisting of seven members to be appointed by the City Council from the qualified electors of the City, none of whom shall hold any paid office or employment in the City government except that the City Manager, and the Director of Public Works and Utilities, or their designated representatives, shall serve as exofficio members of the commission”; WHEREAS, Article X of the City Charter, Section 1002, provides that, “Except as otherwise provided in this article, the members of each of such boards or commissions shall be appointed, and shall be subject to removal, by motion of the City Council adopted by at least four affirmative votes. Except as otherwise provided in this article, the members of such boards and commissions shall serve for a term of four years and until their respective successors are appointed and qualified; provided, however, the members first appointed to those boards and commissions shall so classify themselves by lot that each succeeding July 1st the term of at least one of their number shall expire”;
WHEREAS, Council Policy 032 recognizes that while the City Charter allows the Council to remove a Commissioner with no cause, the Council has created guidelines the Council may use to resolve a problem/complaint;
WHEREAS, Council Policy 032 provides that “options are available for resolving complaints,” against appointed commissioners, including referring the issue or complaint to the Mayor and/or City Council and “[i]f legal issues are involved, the concern/complaint is referred to the City Attorney,” and that “[d]epending on [the] nature of [the] concern/complaint, and factual information, range of actions/options are available including…[that the] City Council may take action ranging from note and file to removal from the Commission”; WHEREAS, on June 6, 2022, the Santa Clara City Council considered applications to the Planning Commission and took action to appoint Ron Patrick to serve on the Planning Commission and place Mario Bouza and Neil Cortez on the eligibility list for appointment to the Commission, where Mr. Bouza received the second highest polled support among the Council during the June 6, 2022 Council meeting;
WHEREAS, at the July 5, 2022 City Council meeting, by way of a petition pursuant to Council Policy 030, the City Council took action to place Mr. Patrick’s removal from the Planning Commission on a future Council agenda;
WHEREAS, at the July 12, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council considered the City Attorney’s July 7, 2022, memorandum to the City Council responding to the July 5, 2022 Council petition, outlining the background on the City’s investigation and evaluation of Mr. Patrick’s residency issues in the City of Santa Clara;
WHEREAS, at the July 12, 2022 City Council meeting, Mr. Patrick submitted public comment to the Council’s consideration of the response to July 5, 2022 Council petition, and also submitted a document entitled “Certification,” signed by the Deputy Registrar of Voters of Santa Clara County on July 7, 2022, which states as the address, “5191 Lafayette Street, Santa Clara, CA 95054,” the “Most Recent Date Registered: 09/05/2020”, and “Original Date Registered:
02/09/2019,” a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A WHEREAS, at the July 12, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council clarified and affirmed for future action that it “determine the staff investigation sufficiently provided evidence of irregularities regarding Mr. Patrick’s residency and take action in accordance with Council Policy 032,” as provided in the City Attorney’s July 7, 2022 Memorandum at Exhibit B to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, in response to its July 15, 2022 inquiry, the City Clerk’s office received an email from the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters on July 20, 2022, identifying a “clerical error” on the “Certificate” submitted by Mr. Patrick at the July 12, 2022 Council meeting, stating that the “‘Original Date Registered’ date of 2/9/2019 is in reference to Mr. Patrick’s initial voter registration here in Santa Clara County which was at his former City of Mountain View residential address,” and the “’Most Recent Date Registered’ date of 5/3/2022 is in reference to Mr. Patrick’s updated voter registration when he updated his residential address to his current City of Santa Clara residential address”; and that the Registrar of Voters provided a “new copy of the voter’s certificate that accurately reflects the dates,” a true and correct redacted copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

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

1. That pursuant to its discretionary authority provided in the City Charter and Council Policy 032, the City Council removes Ron Patrick from the Planning Commission effective immediately.

2. That pursuant to its authority provided in the City Charter, the City Council hereby appoints the first eligible appointee to the Planning Commission, Mario Bouza, effective immediately.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//

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

I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING TO BE AT 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

EXHIBIT A

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA } SS.

CERTIFICATION
I, Registrar of Voters, Santa Clara County Deputy, in the County and State aforesaid, and keeper of the records and files thereof, do hereby certify that the following is a true and correct certification of the registration record of:

RECEIVED
JUL· 1 2 ZOZZ
City Clerk's Office
City of Santa Clara
-
Facsimile Signature of Voter

VOTER INFORMATION
Ronald Patrick
Address: 5191 Lafayette St
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Township:

Precinct: 0009002
Birth Date: 05/26/1957
Party: No Party Preference
Voter Status: Active
Most Recent Date Registered: 09/05/2020
Original Date Registered: 02/09/2019
ELECTION INFORMATION - Most recent displayed -
Total Elections Voted: 3
06/07/2022 Statewide Direct Primary
Election
09/14/2021 California Gubernatorial
Recall Election
11/03/2020 Presidential General
Election
I do hereby certify the above to be a true and accurate copy of records on file in the office of the Santa Clara County Clerk. Certification is not valid unless the seal of Santa Clara County, California is affixed. ~~ Dep~Voters Date
Santa Clara County

EXHIBIT B
From: Amanda Lopez
Cc: Rajeev Batra; Hosam Haggag; Nora Pimentel; James Sanchez; Steve Ngo; Sujata Reuter Subject: Memorandum: Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick Date: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:19:03 PM
Attachments: 2022-07-07 - Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick.pdf image001.png
Dear Mayor & Council,
On behalf of Interim City Attorney James Sanchez, please see the attached memorandum regarding the Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick, dated July 7, 2022.

Thank you,
Mandy Lopez | Legal Executive Assistant
City Attorney’s Office
1500 Warburton Avenue | Santa Clara, CA 95050
M: 408-615-2230 | D: 408-615-2236 | F: 408-249-7846
City Attorney’s Office
Memorandum
Date: July 7, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
From: James Sanchez, Interim City Attorney
Subject: Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick This memorandum provides you background on your July 5, 2022 action to place the 030 request on this agenda for possible action.

Background
Mr. Ron Patrick, was appointed by the Council to serve on the Planning Commission at the June 6, 2022 Council meeting. At the request of Councilmember Becker, City staff investigated whether Mr. Patrick was an actual Santa Clara resident, as Mr. Becker remembered that Mr. Patrick was recently living in Mountain View. The City Clerk’s Office verified with the registrar of voters that Mr. Patrick changed his voter registration to a Santa Clara address, 5191 Lafayette Street, on May 3, 2022.

The property Mr. Patrick listed as his residence, 5191 Lafayette, is an industrial building constructed in 1979, and it is also the location of Mr. Patrick’s business. Although this property was previously zoned Light Industrial, in 2018 the City Council rezoned 5191 Lafayette to Transit Neighborhood (TN) as part of the Tasman East Specific Plan.

Multifamily residential uses are a permitted use in the TN zoning. SCCC §

18.25.030(a). That being said, no modifications have been made to the industrial building to convert it to a residential use (such as a kitchen, or a bedroom with a window). In addition, the use of the building for one “dwelling unit” would also not comply with the minimum density for residential units on the site, which is 60 dwelling units per acre. SCCC § 18.25.060(b). The property is 0.51 acres in area, and so a residential development on the site would need a minimum of 31 units in order to comply with the zoning. As such, the use of the property for a single dwelling violates the zoning ordinance.

The Finance Department verified that the property is using City utilities (electric, water), so it is likely occupied in some fashion. However, the establishment of a residential use on the property is also a violation of the California Building Code, as Mr. Patrick has not secured a residential certificate of occupancy. After consulting with the Building Re: Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick
July 7, 2022

Page 2 ends

Division and Fire Department, it was determined that a B-2 (business) certificate of occupancy was issued in 1979. An application to change the occupancy to S-3 (storage) was received in 2008, but the application was never completed. There has never been an application to change the occupancy to a residential use. As such, Mr.

Patrick could be cited for occupying the property illegally.

Nevertheless, Mr. Patrick’s illegal residential occupancy of the Lafayette Street property does not, by itself, disqualify him from being a Planning Commissioner (if he is in fact living there). In order to serve as a Planning Commissioner, the City Charter only requires that an individual be a “qualified elector” of the City, Charter § 1006, and an “elector” is a U.S. Citizen who is a resident of an election precinct on or before the day of an election, Elec. Code § 321(a). A “residence,” in turn, is a person’s domicile, which in turn is the place where his or her habitation is fixed, where the person has the intention of remaining, and whenever absent, has the intention of returning. Elec. Code § 349.

A court of appeal interpreted these statutes in a 1985 case, holding that unhoused persons who were camping in a city park could register to vote using the park as their home address, even though a city ordinance prohibited camping in the park. Collier v.

Menzel, 176 Cal. App. 3d 24, 32 (1985) Consequently, the fact that Mr. Patrick’s use of the industrial building at 5191 Lafayette for his residence does not bar him from being registered to vote there, and as a registered voter, he is a qualified elector who can serve as a Planning Commissioner.

Director of Community Development Andrew Crabtree raised some of the zoning and building code issues with Mr. Patrick on June 13. In response, Mr. Patrick indicated he would provide Mr. Crabtree with an alternate address. On June 14, Mr. Patrick sent Mr.

Crabtree an email with the subject line “Ron Patrick stays here,” and the content of the message was “4666 Armour Dr. Santa Clara, CA 95054.” Mr. Patrick did not provide any further details about how often he stays at 4666 Armour Dr. or how long he has been staying there. The Armour Drive address contains a single-family home, is zoned R1-6L (Single Family Residential), and has a General Plan designation of Very Low Density Residential. Again, for any property to qualify as his residence, his habitation must be fixed at that location, and Mr. Patrick must have the intention of remaining, and whenever absent, the intention of returning. At the July 5 Council meeting Mr. Patrick publicly represented to the Council his intent to maintain a city of Santa Clara residency.

Assuming all of the above factors, Mr. Patrick is able to serve as a Planning Commissioner, whether he is living (illegally) at 5191 Lafayette or (legally) at 4666 Armour. Accordingly, the Council may choose to take no action, and allow Mr. Patrick to serve out his term on the Commission. Nevertheless, given the irregularities Re: Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick
July 7, 2022

Page 3 ends

described above, the Council’s appointment power also includes the ability to remove Mr. Patrick from the position.

We include a copy of the City Policy and Procedure Manual 032 regarding Complaints of City Boards and Commissions for your consideration.

Options

1. Determine the staff investigation sufficiently provided evidence of irregularities regarding Mr. Patrick’s residency and take action in accordance with Policy 032, copy attached (up to and including removal).

2. Determine that Mr. Patrick remain as a Planning Commissioner and take no further action.

3. Direct staff to conduct further investigation.

4. If Mr. Patrick is removed, there should be an action to appoint a new Commissioner.

Thank you,
James Sanchez
Interim City Attorney
I/Council/Memoranda/2022-07-07 - Planning Commission Appointment of Mr. Ron Patrick City of Santa Clara
Policy and Procedure Manual

REVIEW OF CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS REGARDING CITY

BOARD/COMMISSIONS
July 2002 P&P 032 Page 1 of 3
POLICY The City of Santa Clara believes that “decision-makers must be independent, impartial, and accountable to the people they serve.”1 The
City’s Code of Ethics and Values lists the ethics and values-based standards the City has agreed will guide the decisions and conduct of everyone who participates in the City’s government. Because we seek public confidence in the City’s services and public trust of its decision-makers, we hold ourselves accountable to “meet the most demanding ethical standards and demonstrate the highest levels of achievement in following this code.” Although the City Charter allows the Council to remove a Commissioner with no cause, the Council has created the following process, which provides guidelines the Council may choose to use to resolve a problem/complaint. The policy is based on a recommendation from the Ethics Ordinance Committee. It is consistent with the Code of Ethics and Values, in terms of fairness and respect towards the individual. It preserves the Council-granted Charter authority of removal, but also provides optional courses of action.

PROCEDURE The Charter of the City of Santa Clara provides for the removal of a City Commissioner by a vote of four City Council members. No cause has to be given. The action to remove a Commissioner would be an agendized City Council action item.

When a concern/complaint is received regarding a City Board Member/Commissioner, it is referred to the City Manager for review and follow-up. If possible, it is preferable to resolve a concern through open communication channels at the staff level. Complainants are encouraged to solve the problem informally prior to registering a formal complaint.

The City Manager has several options for handling a concern/complaint:

1. The first step is to verify the information. If not verified, the complainant is informed and no further action taken. If initially verified, the City Manager conducts an investigation/review of situation in consultation with the City Attorney, where appropriate. The individual who is the subject of the complaint will be notified unless criminal or legal nature precludes notification. Issues that relate to the jurisdiction of the Fair

1 From the Preamble of The Code of Ethics and Values, City of Santa Clara, 2001 City of Santa Clara
Policy and Procedure Manual

REVIEW OF CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS REGARDING CITY
BOARD/COMMISSIONS (cont.)
July 2002 P&P 032 Page 2 of 3
Political Practices Commission (FPPC) are not covered by this policy.

City Attorney has existing procedures to handle FPPC and Election Code issues.

2. The following options are available for resolving complaints:
♦ The City Manager can choose to handle concern/complaint directly, or consult with the Mayor.
♦ The City Manager can choose to conduct further research; provide information and discussion of alternatives with Mayor.
♦ Consult with Santa Clara University Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, or outside ethics experts.
♦ Refer the issue/complaint to the Mayor and/or City Council. ♦ Refer the concern/complaint to the Chairperson of the specific Board/Commission with the Chair reporting back to the City Manager.
♦ Refer the issue/complaint to the City Council Commission Review Committee.
♦ If legal issues are involved, the concern/complaint is referred to City Attorney.

3. Depending on nature of concern/complaint, and factual information, range of actions/options are available including any one (or combination of) these actions:
♦ No action based on unsubstantiated/Unfounded complaint; ♦ Discussion between Mayor and Commissioner; City Manager and Commissioner or discussion between Commission Chair and Commissioner;
♦ Verbal counseling by Mayor with Commissioner;
♦ Letter to Commissioner from Mayor;
♦ Refer issue to Commission Review Committee; Committee meets and reviews facts; may make advisory recommendation to Council, or refer to City Manager and City Attorney for follow-up; and City of Santa Clara
Policy and Procedure Manual

REVIEW OF CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS REGARDING CITY
BOARD/COMMISSIONS (cont.)
July 2002 P&P 032 Page 3 of 3
♦ Refer to Mayor and/or City Council.
♦ City Council may take action ranging from note and file to removal from Commission. (See attached memorandum to the Commission Review Committee from the City Attorney dated December 15, 1999.)

4. Follow-up response to complainant indicating City has taken appropriate action.

Reference: 1) Memo dated December 15, 1999 from City Attorney, “Levels of Expressions of Disapproval of a Public Official’s Actions” (attached) 2) Council-approved policy July 16, 2002

EXHIBIT C
At the July 12, 2022 Council meeting during discussion of item 11 (RTC 22-942) "Response to Councilmember Becker's Written Request regarding the recent appointment of Ron Patrick to the Planning Commission", Mr. Ron Patrick submitted a Voter Registration Certification which now forms part of this record. On Friday, July 15, 2022 Assistant City Clerk Pimentel requested clarification from the ROV on the registration date due to some inconsistencies, the ROV responded on July 20, 2022 and provided the attached revised Voter Registration Certification.

Nora Pimentel
Subject:

Attachments:

From: Nora Pimentel
FW: Voter Certification
20220715124413283.pdf
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 1:00 PM
To: Christina Rivas-Louie ([email protected]) <[email protected]> Subject: Voter Certification
Hi Christina
Can you explain to me what the attached certification means, this person was not registered to vote in the City of Santa Clara as of this May 2022. He updated his registration in May from an address in Mountain View. But this certification says original date registered and most recent date registered, is that referencing the ■■■■■■■laddress? Thanks
1 Nora Pimentel
From:

Sent:

Rose, Nicole < [email protected] >
Wednesday, July 20, 2022 10:56 AM
To:

Cc:

Subject:

Nora Pimentel
Blow, Janora; Saenz, Julia
Ronald Patrick
Attachments: Ronald Patrick Certificate.pdf
Hello and Good Morning Nora!.

My name is Nicole, I work in Voter Registration and I've been asked to help assist with your inquiry regarding Mr.

Patrick.

The certificate does Reference two dates of registration, that is correct. However, I have noticed a clerical error while looking into this candidates record that seems to be the root of the confusion you are experiencing. I have made the necessary correction and attached a new copy of the voter's certificate that accurately reflects the dates. Please accept our apologies for the confusion caused.

The 'Original Date Registered' date of 2/9/2019 is in reference to Mr. Patrick's initial voter registration here in Santa Clara County which was at his former City of Mountain View residential address.

The 'Most Recent Date Registered' date of 5/3/2022 is in reference to Mr. Patrick's updated voter registration when he updated his residential address to his current City of Santa Clara residential address.

I hope this clears things up, if you have any further questions please do not hesitate to reach out.

Thank you,
Nicole R.

Office Specialist III I Voter Registration Division
Santa Clara County Register of Voters
1555 Berger Drive, Bldg. 2 I Sanjose, CA 95112
408.282.3096 I www.sccvote.org
Follow us @ SCCVote

VOTER'S CHOICE
Registrar of Voters
Santa Clara County m connect with us on Facebook
1 TATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA } SS.

VOTER INFORMATION
Ronald Patrick
Address:

Santa Clara, CA 95054
Township:

Precinct:

Birth Date:

Party: No Party Preference
Voter Status: Active
Most Recent Date Registered: 05/03/2022
Original Date Registered: 02/09/2019
ELECTION INFORMATION - Mo~t rccc.:nt Ji::pbyc.:d .

Total Elections Voted: 3
06/07/2022 Statewide Direct Primary
Election
09/14/2021 California Gubernatorial
Recall Election
11/03/2020 Presidential General
Election
Facsimile Signature of Voter
I do hereby certify the above to be a true and accurate copy of records on file in the office of the Santa Clara County Clerk. Certification is not valid unless the seal of Santa Clara County, California is affixed.

Deputy Registrar
Santa Clara County
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
22-870 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Vice Mayor Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Discuss working with the Water District and any other agency with Jurisdiction to Widen the San Tomas Aquino Trail. The Discussion Should also include a Discussion of the Costs of a Study to Look at all the Opportunities for Widening the Trail and Associated Costs

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

BACKGROUND
Council Policy 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda (Attachment 1) sets forth the procedure for written petitions. Any member of the public or Council may submit a written request raising any issue or item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council. Per the policy, the written request will be submitted on the agenda, in the form substantially provided by the requestor, without any staff analysis, including fiscal review, legal review and policy review. If a simple majority of the City Council supports further study of the request, then a full staff analysis shall be prepared within thirty (30) days, unless otherwise directed by the City Council.

DISCUSSION
The City Clerk’s Office received a Council Written Request on June 8, 2022 from Vice Mayor Jain requesting to place an agenda item at a future council meeting to discuss working with the Water District and any other agency with jurisdiction to widen the San Tomas Aquino trail. The discussion should also include a discussion of the costs of a study to look at all the opportunities for widening the trail and associated costs. (Attachment 2)
In the request, Vice Mayor Jain states:

The San Tomas Aquino trail is very popular as a commuter route as well as for people recreating. I ride it frequently. Often there are groups of employees walking the trail at lunchtime. It is very difficult to walk side-by-side with all the other traffic on that trail. I expect that there would be fewer collisions were the trail to be widened and it would be a more pleasurable route.

At the June 7, 2022 City Council meeting, the Council approved a housing development project by Greystar adjacent to the trail and also approved to amend the General Plan to add a Future Freedom Circle Focus Area. It seems to me that as we develop adjacent to the creek trail, we should look at any opportunity to widen the trail
I would like to have a discussion on the City Council to discuss working with the Water District and any other agency with jurisdiction to widen the trail. The discussion should also include a discussion City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-870 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022
of the costs of a study to look at all the opportunities for widening the trail and associated costs.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with considering the request to be placed on a future agenda except for staff time.

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 administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.

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 report to Council 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.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Set a future Council meeting date to take action on the Written Petition received.

2. Take no action.

3. Any other City Council Action, as determined by the City Council.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff makes no recommendation.

Reviewed by: Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Policy and Procedure 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda

2. Council Written Request dated June 8, 2022 submitted by Vice Mayor Jain City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
RESOLUTION NO. 20-8895

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARA,
CALIFORNIA TO REPEAL RESOLUTION NO. 20-8809,
AMEND COUNCIL POLICY 030 ENTITLED "ADDING AN ITEM
ON THE AGENDA," AND APPROVE THE COUNCIL ITEM

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

WHEREAS, amending the policy on adding an item on the agenda to establish a clear, effective and easily understood process for members of the City Council and the public to have items within the jurisdiction of the City Council placed on a meeting agenda; WHEREAS, the amended version of the Adding an Item on the Agenda policy expands on the current policy language by clearly stating that, when a written request is first considered, discussion should be limited to whether an item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item; and,
WHEREAS, the amended Adding an Item on the Agenda policy, attached hereto as Attachment 1, includes a Council Item Request Form for the City Council's use when requesting an item for inclusion on a Council meeting agenda and adds the procedure for written requests from members of the City Council.

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

1. That Resolution No. 20-8809 is hereby rescinded in its entirety.

2. That amended Council Policy 030 entitled "Adding an Item on the Agenda" with the Council Item Request Form, attached hereto as Attachment 1, is hereby approved and adopted, and the City Manager is directed to number (and renumber, as appropriate) the Council Policy Manual such that they are organized in a logical fashion.

II
II
II
Resolution/Amending Adding an Item on the Agenda Policy and Approving Council Item Request Form Page 1 of 2 Rev: 11 /22/17

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 27rH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:

AYES: COUNCILORS:

NOES: COUNCILORS:

ABSENT: COUNCILORS:

ABSTAINED: COUNCILORS:

Attachments incorporated by reference:

Chahal, Davis, Hardy, O'Neill, and Watanabe,
and Mayor Gillmor
None
None
None

ORA PIMENTEL, MMC

ASSISTANT CITY CLERK

CITY OF SANTA CLARA

1. Council Policy 030 entitled "Adding an Item on the Agenda" Resolution/Amending Adding an Item on the Agenda Policy and Approving Council Item Request Form Page 2 of 2 Rev: 11 /22/17
City of
Santa Clara
City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual
The Center of What's Possible

PURPOSE
POLICY

ADDING AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA
To establish a clear, effective, and easily understood process for members of the City Council and the public to have items, within the jurisdiction of the City Council, placed on the City Council agenda for consideration.

Members of the City Council:

The Mayor or any individual Councilmember may submit a written request by using the Council Item Request Form to the City Manager's Office for inclusion of an item on a City Council agenda, provided the request is received two (2) days prior to the public release of the agenda packet. At the meeting where the 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.

Referral from a Council Committee:

Council Committees may submit a written request to the City Manager's Office for inclusion of an item on a City Council agenda, provided the request is received two (2) days prior to the public release of the agenda packet. ·
Council Committees may bring forward a recommendation to the full City Council by way of the Committee minutes, which are typically prepared within three weeks following the Committee meeting.

Items Referred During a Council Meeting:

By Council action, an item may be referred to the City Manager for inclusion on a City Council agenda. If the request requires further study of the item from staff, a full analysis shall be prepared at the direction of the City Manager with at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the meeting, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. If the request requires more than thirty (30) calendar days to prepare, status updates will be provided to the City Council every sixty (60) days as an informational memo.

Revised 10/27/2020
Resolution No. 20-8895
CP 030 Page 1 of 3
City of
Santa Clara
City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual
The Center of What's Possible

PROCEDURE

FOR WRITTEN

PETITIONS

ADDING AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA
Written Petitions and Public Presentations:

Any member of the public may submit a written request raising any issue or item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council to be heard under the "Written Petition" section of the City Council's regular agenda within two (2) Council meetings after received. After the initial Written Petition is placed on the agenda, a majority vote of the City Council may add the item to a future Council meeting for action. Any member of the public may address the City Council under the "Public Presentations" section of the agenda. If the presentation includes a request of the Council, a majority vote of the City Council may refer the item to the City Manager to be properly added to a future meeting, in compliance with the Brown Act.

1. All requests to address the City Council shall be submitted in writing.

Written Petition forms are available for the petitioner's convenience on the City's website and in the City Manager's Office, City Clerk's Office, and the Mayor and Council Offices. Alternatively, an email may be submitted to [email protected].

2. Once the Written Petition is received by the City Clerk's Office, it should immediately be forwarded to the City Manager for placement on an agenda within two (2) Council meetings after receipt of the original request from the City Clerk's Office. All written material (request and any support material) will be submitted on the agenda in the form substantially provided by the requester without any staff analysis, including fiscal review, legal review and policy review, until the City Council has had the opportunity to provide direction to the City Manager.

3. At the meeting where the item is first considered, if a majority of the City Council supports further study of the item, then a full staff analysis shall be prepared within thirty (30) days, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. Discussion should be limited to whether an item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item.

Revised 10/27/2020
Resolution No. 20-8895
CP 030 Page 2 of 3
City of
Santa Clara
City of Santa Clara
Council Policy Manual
The Center of What's Possible

PROCEDURE

FOR WRITTEN

REQUESTS

FROM CITY

COUNCIL

ADDING AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA

1. Members of the City Council shall use the Council Item Request Form to submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda.

2. Once the Council Item Request Form is received by the City Clerk's Office, it should immediately be forwarded to the City Manager for placement on an agenda within two (2) Council meetings after receipt of the original request from the City Clerk's Office. All written material (Council Item Request Form and any support material) will be submitted on the agenda in the form substantially provided by the requester without any staff analysis, including fiscal review, legal review and policy review, until the City Council has had the opportunity to provide direction to the City Manager.

Attachments: Council Item Request Form
Revised 10/27/2020
Resolution No. 20-8895
CP 030 Page 3 of 3
City of
Santa Clara The Center of What's Possible

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 -------------------- Contact E-mail ___________________________ _ Contact Phone _ ____ ______________________ _
Today's Date ____________________________ _

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

Reference: Council Policy 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda Resolution No. 20-8895
City of
Santa Clara
The Center of Whot's Possible

COUNCIL ITEM REQUEST FOR

RECEIVED
JUN;: -- 8 2022
City Clerk's Office
City of Santa Clara
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 foraction.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Requesting Member of City Council : Suds Jain
Contact E-mail_ [email protected]_
Contact Phone 408-499-2955 _______ _
Today's Date_G/8/2022

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:

The San Tomas Aquino trail is very popular as a commute route as well as for people recreating. I ride it frequently. Often there are groups of employees walking the trail at lunchtime. It is very difficult to walk side-by-side with all the other traffic on that trail. I expect that there would be fewer collisions were the trail to be widened and it would be a more pleasurable route.

At the June 7, 2022 City Council meeting, the Council approved a housing development project by Greystar adjacent to the trail and also approved to amend the General Plan to add a Future Freedom Circle Focus Area. It seems to me that as we develop adjacent to the creek trail, we should look at any opportunity to widen the trail
I would like to have a discussion on the City Council to discuss working with the Water District and any other agency with jurisdiction to widen the trail. The discussion should also include a discussion of the costs of a study to look at all the opportunities for widening the trail and associated costs.

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
22-871 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022

REPORT TO COUNCIL

SUBJECT
Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Vice Mayor Jain Requesting to Place an Agenda Item at a Future Council Meeting to Discuss Allocating up to $150K to create a Neighborhood Stadium Relations Committee using funds from the SCSA budget (not the City of Santa Clara’s General Fund)

COUNCIL PILLAR
Enhance Community Engagement and Transparency

DISCUSSION
The City Clerk’s Office received a Council Written Request on June 15, 2022 from Vice Mayor Jain requesting to place an agenda item at a future council meeting to discuss allocating up to $150K to create a Neighborhood Stadium Relations Committee using funds from the SCSA budget (not the City of Santa Clara General Fund)
(Attachment 2).

In the request, Vice Mayor Jain states:

The Council Policy 030 states: “Members of the City Council shall use the Council item Request form to submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future city council agenda.” While the 030 policy doesn’t explicitly cover Stadium Authority agendas there seems to be no other mechanism for Authority members to add agenda items to Stadium Authority meetings so I’m taking the liberty of using this form to do so.

On November 24, 2021, I submitted a 030 request to consider the creation of a Stadium Relations Committee similar to the NURC committee. And during CIP budget discussions I ask a question about the cost of implementing such a Stadium Relations Committee. This is the reply I received from Staff.
“The estimated cost of the Stadium Neighborhood committee is premised on the Measure J requirement that all costs associated with the Stadium not be borne by the General Fund. Therefore, City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
22-871 Agenda Date: 8/16/2022
the cost of this committee would be a Stadium Authority cost to the extent it works on stadium-related issues. The high-level cost estimate of $156k was solely based on the presumed key staff involved and an estimate of the hours required to support the committee (e.g., agenda preparation, reports, meeting time and follow up) with staff from the City Manager’s Office, Police Department, Fire Department and Public Works Department. The estimate for other committees would be different based upon staff involved in those committees. There is currently not a separate accounting of the costs associated with Council committees as these are budgeted in the various departments. The cost for these committees can also be looked at as an assignment of resources or staff capacity. If staff resources were not used for committees, they could be re-deployed to support other areas. The number of Councilmembers on a Council committee does not markedly impact the costs associated with the implementation of a Council committee but rather the scope and breadth of the committee agendas and the follow up required.”
I’m now asking for a discussion to be agendized to allocate up to $150K to create a Neighborhood Stadium Relations Committee using funds from the SCSA budget (not the City of Santa Clara’s general fund).

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with considering the request to be placed on a future agenda except for staff time.

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 report to Council 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.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Set a future Council meeting date to take action on the Written Petition received.

2. Take no action.

3. Any other City Council Action, as determined by the City Council.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff makes no recommendation.

Reviewed by: Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
Approved by: Rajeev Batra, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS

1. Policy and Procedure 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda

2. Council Written Request submitted by Vice Mayor Jain dated June 8, 2022 City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/11/2022
powered by Legistar™
RESOLUTION NO. 20-8895