RESPONSE TO COUNCIL QUESTIONS RE: 12/8/22 AGENDA
Agenda Item 2.B: Action on a Purchase Order with One Day Installation and Repairs, Inc. for Work Related to the Fire Damage at Eddie Souza Park Building; Related Budget Amendment; and Class 1 CEQA Categorical Exemption
Council Question:
The council packet is incomplete. There is no detailed scope of work. I will probably pull this item. I’m hoping that we will improve the security cameras and add any additional smoke or fire detection technology.
Staff Response:
This is an insurance rehabilitation project to repair the fire damage only and not a redesign for the Eddie Souza Park Building. The Eddie Souza Neighborhood Park and Community Garden had/have security cameras installed and have captured vandals at least twice since the park opened. Camera video is downloaded and shared with SCPD when an issue happens. The cameras are located in the proper locations to capture video of vandals. There is no plan to change the locations or quantity. Once the facility is repaired, the cameras will be back in operation.
Council Question:
Also this may be a good chance to really fix the keypad access to the community garden as well as the door to the storage area for gardeners. Community Gardens are notorious for theft issues.
Staff Response:
The entrance to the garden to the garden has a card reader where the card is placed for entry. The community garden is a supervised recreation program. We have a Recreation Coordinator (Derek Bryant) assigned to the facility and there are written community garden program rules and protocols in place communicated to the garden members. There are periodic community garden participant meetings with the Recreation Coordinator to review garden issues and program opportunities such as irrigation, security issues, workshops, classes and our non-profit organization partners. Garden members sometimes prop gates open or don’t fully close them and they are reminded to keep them closed and locked.
Council Question:
That door was supposed to have been electrified but somehow the design got screwed up and it is now a very cumbersome roll up door that is hard for older gardeners.
Staff Response:
The roll up door will be changed to a metal door which will make it much easier to open and close.
Council Question:
We also need to upgrade the irrigation controllers for the community gardens as well as the lawn area with smarter controllers that support “cycle and soak”
Staff Response:
The Rain Bird irrigation controller was destroyed in the fire and once the facility is repaired the controller has the cycle-soak capabilities for the park including the community garden beds. Ideally a the cycle-soak can be put on a schedule a couple of times a week, given the variation of plants and gardener cultural habits which would still allow for flexibility in watering.
2 Council Question:
Why it took more than a year to just get to this stage. Our residents were not happy about this and we need to work on a faster process. Insurance company fault? Assessor fault?
Staff Response:
Staff has spent a lot of time coordinating this issue with the insurance company and contractors in an effort to get the claim accepted and the building repaired. There were many steps involved along the way with various parties and each step took time to complete. The following is a summary.
After the fire, the City’s Risk Manager contacted the insurance company and began to work on the claim. This involved the authorization to remediate the site and included removing burned and damaged material, preventing further water and mold damage, securing the property and providing temporary restrooms. Once this was completed staff then worked with the insurance company regarding the claim and the coverage for the fire.
After reviewing the incident during the claims process, the insurance company agreed that the incident was covered by insurance (less the deductible) and the insurance company planned to have their contractor make all the repairs to reopen the facility.
The insurance company’s contractor reviewed the project and then began reaching out to subcontractors to prepare estimates and schedule the project. After a period of time the contractor informed the insurance company that they could not assemble the subcontractors necessary to complete the project. The insurance company then reached out to the City to look at other options to make the repairs and authorized the City to move forward with obtaining estimates. City staff then went through a process to notify contractors and obtain proposals to make the repairs. Contractors completed site visits to assess the damage and developed proposals.
Two proposals were received that had to be evaluated by both the City and the insurance company. The insurance company had questions regarding the proposals and there was several back and forth communications and information exchanges between the contractor and insurance company. Ultimately the insurance company accepted the lowest cost proposal. That information was then assembled and agenda report 22-951 was prepared and placed on the agenda.
Agenda Item 4: Action on the Council/Board’s Comment to the October 10, 2022 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report: “Unsportsmanlike Conduct: Santa Clara City Council.”
Council Comment:
There is typo on page 13 of report:
“Because the Council/Board believes this Recommendation 5a overlaps with Recommendation 5a, and given the response to Recommendation 5a, the Council/Board finds that Recommendation 5b is unwarranted.”
5a in line one above should be 5b.
Staff Response:
The correction has been noted and will be corrected.