Agenda packet — Santa Cruz City Council, January 11, 2022

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Regular Meeting – January 11, 2022
2:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION, ZOOM
3:00 P.M. CONSENT, GENERAL BUSINESS AND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, ZOOM COVID-19 ANNOUNCEMENT: Due to the Omicron variant, in an abundance of caution, this meeting will be held via teleconference ONLY.

In order to minimize exposure to COVID-19 and to comply with the social distancing suggestion, the meeting may be viewed remotely, using any of the following sources:
 Click on Zoom link (no time delay): https://zoom.us/j/94684401344  Online at http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-council/council-meetings  Online at Watch – Community Television of Santa Cruz County  Comcast Channel 25
Or: Call any of the numbers below. If one is busy, try the next one.  1-833-548-0276 (Toll Free)
 1-833-548-0282 (Toll Free)
 1-877-853-5247 (Toll Free)
 1-669-900-9128
Enter the meeting ID number: 946 8440 1344
 When prompted for a Participant ID, press #.
 Press *9 on your phone to “raise your hand” when the Mayor calls for public comment.  It will be your turn to speak when the Mayor calls on you. Press *6 to unmute yourself.

The timer will then be set to 2 minutes.

Correspondence to be included in the agenda packet must be received by 5:00 pm on Monday, January 10th.

January 11, 2022 City Council 2
PLEASE NOTE:

Requests for extra speaking time on items other than Oral Communications must be made by 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, January 9th by emailing the Mayor and the City Clerk. Approval will be confirmed via email.
[email protected] [email protected]
The City of Santa Cruz does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. Out of consideration for people with chemical sensitivities we ask that you attend fragrance free. Upon request, the agenda can be provided in a format to accommodate special needs. Additionally, if you wish to attend this public meeting and will require assistance such as an interpreter for American Sign Language, Spanish, or other special equipment, please call the City Clerk’s Department at 420-5030 at least five days in advance so that we can arrange for such special assistance, or email [email protected]. The Cal-Relay system number: 1-800-735-2922.

Si desea asistir a esta reunión pública y necesita ayuda - como un intérprete de lenguaje de señas americano, español u otro equipo especial - favor de llamar al Departamento de la Secretaría de la Ciudad al 420-5030 al menos cinco días antes para que podamos coordinar dicha asistencia especial o envié un correo electrónico a [email protected]. El número del sistema Cal-Relay es: 1-800-735-2922.

Closed Session
2:00 PM
Closed Session

1. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) Employee Organizations:
a) Fire IAFF Local 1716
b) Fire Management Association
c) OE3 Mid-manager and Supervisor Employees
d) SEIU Local 521
e) Unrepresented
City Negotiator – Lisa Murphy

2. Conference With Legal Counsel – Liability Claims (Government Code §54956.95)
1) Claimant: Destiney Mckayla Rodgers
2) Claimant: Susan O'Hara
Claims against the City of Santa Cruz
January 11, 2022 City Council 3
City Council
3:00 PM
Call to Order
Roll Call
Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification
Additions and Deletions
Oral Communications Announcement – Community members may address the Council for two minutes or less about any matter not on the agenda. 30 minutes is allocated for Oral Communications. No extra time for groups will be granted.

City Attorney Report on Closed Session
City Manager Report

3. The City Manager will report and provide updates on the City's business and events, COVID-19 response, and homelessness.

Council Meeting Calendar

4. The City Council will review the meeting calendar attached to the agenda and revise it as necessary.

January 11, 2022 City Council 4
Consent Agenda

5. Resolution Amending Council Policy 1.3: Risk Management Policy (CA) Resolution amending Council Policy 1.3 granting the Risk Manager authority to settle liability claims, including claims that have proceeded to litigation for personal or property damages only.

6. Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
Resolution authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

7. Minutes of the December 14, 2021 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion to accept as submitted.

8. California Coastal Commission Local Coastal Program Local Assistance Grant Program - Grant Acceptance, Authorization and Appropriation (CM)
Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds from the California Coastal Commission Local Coastal Program Local Assistance Grant Program for the Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development.

9. Appointment of Representatives to External Agencies, Groups, Council Committees and Task Forces (CN)
Motion to appoint representatives to external agencies, groups, City Council committees and task forces for the 2022 calendar year.

10. Liability Claims Filed Against City of Santa Cruz (FN) Motion to reject the liability claims of a) Destiney Mckayla Rodgers and b) Susan O’Hara, based on staff recommendation.

January 11, 2022 City Council 5
Consent Agenda (continued)

11. Lease with Redtree Partners for space at 1200 Pacific Avenue for occupancy by the City’s Finance Department (FN)
Motion to:
• Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to increase appropriation for a new building lease for relocation of the Finance Department.
• Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a Lease Agreement with Redtree Partners, and any amendments thereto of a nonsubstantive nature, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, for premises located at 1200 Pacific Avenue to serve as office space for the Finance Department.

12. Accept Library Naming Rights Gift Agreements for the Branciforte and Garfield Park Branch Libraries (LB)
Motion to accept the Library Naming Rights Gift Agreements for the Branciforte and Garfield Park Branch Libraries.

13. Purchase of Six-Gallon Food Scrap Containers (PW)
Motion to award a contract for the purchase of six-gallon food scrap containers from Ecovision Environmental (Ontario, Canada) in the amount $225,000 from the Refuse Fund.

14. Trevethan Avenue Storm/Sewer Project – Phase I (c401307, c401810) – Authorization to Advertise and Award (PW)
Motion to approve the plans and specifications for the Trevethan Avenue Storm/Sewer Project – Phase I (c401307, c401810), authorize staff to advertise for bids, and award the contract. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Director of Public Works is authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.

January 11, 2022 City Council 6
Consent Agenda (continued)

15. Carbonera II Pump Station Replacement (m401601) – Notice of Completion (PW)
Motion to accept the work of S.W. Construction, Inc. (Bakersfield, CA) and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion for the Carbonera II Pump Station Replacement project (m401601).

16. Intergovernmental Agreements between the San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the City of Santa Cruz Related to the City’s Water Rights Petitions and the District’s Contractual Right to 313.4 Acre Feet per Year of Loch Lomond Water (WT)
Motion to approve two agreements between the San Lorenzo Valley Water District (District) and the City of Santa Cruz (City), the first, resolving the District’s water rights protest to the City’s proposed water rights changes and extensions, and the second committing the parties to work collaboratively together to develop an operating plan for the District to make use of its contractual right to 313.4 acre feet of water per year (afy) from Loch Lomond. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute these agreements in a form approved by the City Attorney.

17. Resolution Transferring Funds within the Water Enterprise Funds to Meet FY 2022 Financial Targets – Budget Adjustment (WT) Resolution transferring $2,000,000 to the Water Operations Fund (Fund 711), $1,300,000 to the Water 90–Day Fund (Fund 716) and $520,000 to Water – Emergency Reserve Fund (Fund 717) from the Water Rate Stabilization Fund (Fund 713).

End Consent Agenda
January 11, 2022 City Council 7
General Business

18. State of California 2021 Land Use and Housing Legislation Update (PL) Motion to accept the State of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update agenda report.

Oral Communications
Adjournment
January 11, 2022 City Council 8

INFORMATION ITEMS PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED TO CITY COUNCILMEMBERS ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 11, 2022

19. Economic Development Department: Housing Successor Annual Report FY 2021 - 12/17/21 (EDFYI 002)

20. Finance Department: Portfolio Management Report – Pooled Cash and Investments as of November 30, 2021 - 12/9/21 (FNFYI 349)

MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS
ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – JANUARY 11, 2022

21. Mayor Donna Meyers
Proclaiming Monday, December 13, 2021 as “Santa Cruz City Schools Food Service Team Day” and encouraging all citizens to join in expressing heartfelt appreciation for their hard work and dedication on behalf of the children in our community.

Proclaiming December 4, 2021 as “Nat Young Day” and encouraging all citizens to join in celebrating his achievements and wishing him good waves and much strength during the 2022 World Championship Tour.

22. Mayor Sonja Brunner
Proclaiming December 29, 2021 as “Sean Terry Retirement Day” and encouraging all his coworkers and citizens to join in expressing heartfelt appreciation for his twenty years of dedicated and exemplary service and numerous contributions to the Santa Cruz Police Department and the City of Santa Cruz and wishing him well in his retirement.

January 11, 2022 City Council 9
Advisory Body Appointments
The following positions are vacant. Council will make the appointments at the January 25, 2021 City Council meeting.

Arts Commission Two openings
Board of Building and Fire Appeals One opening
Commission for the Prevention of Violence Against
Women
One opening
Downtown Commission Two openings
Historic Preservation Commission Three openings
Parks and Recreation Commission Two openings
Planning Commission Two openings
Sister Cities Committee Three openings
Water Commission Two openings
Public Hearing
If, in the future, you wish to challenge in court any of the matters on this agenda for which a public hearing is to be conducted, you may be limited to raising only those issues which you (or someone else) raised orally at the public hearing or in written correspondence received by the City at or before the hearing.

Any person seeking to challenge a City Council decision made as a result of a proceeding in which, by law, a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and the discretion in the determination of facts is vested in the City Council, shall be required to commence that action either 60 days or 90 days following the date on which the decision becomes final as provided in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 Please refer to code of Civil Procedure 1094.6 to determine how to calculate when a decision becomes “final.” The 60-day rule applies to all public hearings conducted pursuant to the City’s Zoning Ordinance, Title 24, Santa Cruz Municipal Code. The 90-day rule applies to all other public hearings.

January 11, 2022 City Council 10
City Council Agenda Legislative History Addendum
No information was submitted.

City staff is responsible for providing the City Clerk with such documentation and information for the Legislative History Addendum. The information will be on file in the City Clerk’s Department.

The Addendum is a listing of information specific to City Council business, but which does not appear on a Council meeting agenda. Such entities would include, but not be limited to: Court decisions, Coastal Commission Appeals of City Council actions, Closed Session Agreements/Settlements, which are public record, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments, Local Agency Formation Commission.

Meeting Type
Holiday
Jewish Holiday
Regular Meeting
Special Meeting
Study Session (will be added as scheduled)
Budget Hearing
DATE Location Meeting Type
January 17
January 18 Zoom 4:00 p.m. ‐ 6:00 p.m. Study Session ‐ Open to the Public January 18 Zoom 7:00 p.m. Special Meeting ‐ Advisory Body Interviews Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public February 21
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public April 15/16
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public May 24 and 25 Council Chambers Budget Hearings
May 30
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public July 4
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public September 5
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public September 25/26
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public October 4/5
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public City Council Meeting Calendar for 2022
June 28
September 13
September 27
February 8
City Hall Closure ‐ Presidents' Day
February 22
Please note: Meeting times are not final and are likely to change City Hall Closure ‐ Martin Luther King Jr. Day
January 25
City Hall Closure ‐ Independence Day
June 14
March 8
March 22
May 10
Passover (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
April 12
April 26
May 24
City Hall Closure ‐ Memorial Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Labor Day
August 23
July 12 and 26 Meetings Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
August 9
Yom Kippur (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
Rosh Hashanah (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
October 11

4.1 Meeting Type
Holiday
Jewish Holiday
Regular Meeting
Special Meeting
Study Session (will be added as scheduled)
Budget Hearing
DATE Location Meeting Type
City Council Meeting Calendar for 2022
Please note: Meeting times are not final and are likely to change Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public November 11
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public November 24
November 25
December 18/19
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public December 25
November 22
December 13
City Hall Closure ‐ Thanksgiving Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Day After Thanksgiving Day
December 27 Meeting Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
City Hall Closure ‐ Christmas Day
Hanukkah (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
November 8
October 11
October 25
City Hall Closure ‐ Veteran's Day (observed)

4.2 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/13/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Amending Council Policy 1.3: Risk Management Policy (CA) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution amending Council Policy 1.3 granting the Risk Manager authority to settle liability claims, including claims that have proceeded to litigation for personal or property damages only.

BACKGROUND: Council Policy 1.3 – Risk Management Policy (the Policy) authorizes the Risk Manager to settle liability claims against the City in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per claim. The Policy authorizes the Risk Manager to settle liability claims against the City in an amount not to exceed $20,000 per claim with written approval of the Finance Director, and $50,000 per claim with written approval of the City Manager.

DISCUSSION: The current Policy does not explicitly grant authority to the Risk Manager to settle cases that have proceeded to litigation. Occasionally, the City is named as a defendant in litigation involving minor damages, such as a traffic collision with a City owned vehicle. The City Attorney’s office recommends revising the Policy to explicitly authorize the Risk Manager to settle matters that have proceeded to litigation involving personal or property damages without bringing the matter to the Council in closed session. This clarification to the Policy will enable the City to settle these matters in a more efficient and cost-effective manner.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Stephanie Duck
Deputy City Attorney
Submitted By:

Tony Condotti
City Attorney
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

2. COUNCIL POLICY 1.3 CLEAN.DOCX

3. COUNCIL POLICY 1.3 TRACK CHANGES.DOCX

5.1 RESOLUTION NO. NS-29,

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING COUNCIL POLICY 1.3: RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz City Council Policy 1.3 (the Policy) currently authorizes the Risk Manager to settle liability claims against the City in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per claim, for an amount not to exceed $20,000 per claim with written approval of the Finance Director, and for an amount not to exceed $50,000 per claim with written approval of the City Manager; and
WHEREAS, the Policy does not explicitly grant authority to the Risk Manager to settle cases that have proceeded to litigation; and
WHEREAS, the City is occasionally named as a defendant in litigation involving minor damages, such as a traffic collision with a City owned vehicle; and WHEREAS, granting the Risk Manager authority to settle matters of this type will enable the City to settle matters that have proceeded to litigation involving personal or property damages without bringing the matter to the Council in closed session and will therefore enable the City to settle these matters in a more efficient and cost-effective manner; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that Policy 1.3 be amended as set forth in Exhibit A.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: _________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _______________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

5.2 COUNCIL POLICY 1.3
POLICY TITLE: RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY
POLICY STATEMENT:

I. Risk management includes logical, systematic, and continuous identification of risks and exposures to loss, evaluation of the significance of these risks to Santa Cruz (frequency and severity probability; prudent loss control action to eliminate losses or minimize their effect on Santa Cruz, manage loss situations once they occur so that claimants are treated fairly and Santa Cruz assets are preserved, and employ prudent methods to fund the cost of risk).

Cost of risk is defined as:

INSURANCE PREMIUMS

SELF-ASSUMED LOSSES

LOSS OF CONTROL EXPENSES

RISK MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATION

CLAIMS RELATED LEGAL EXPENSES
All forms of insurance and self-insurance excluding employee benefits shall be included.

It is recognized that the City of Santa Cruz has ability to absorb loss without benefit of insurance, and must do so when insurance is unavailable, and should do so when losses are highly predictable and limited risk is involved.

The Risk Manager's efforts shall complement long range planning, settle and administer claims, effectuate insurance coverage, and maintain sound relationships with the public.

All functional ties (such as with legal and financial managers) necessary to carry out effective risk management are to be maintained.

Recommendation on the selection of brokers, insurance companies, and other risk management services such as safety, fire protection, engineering, and claims administration shall be the responsibility of the Risk Manager and shall be based on ability to contribute to the City of Santa Cruz's long range minimization of cost of risk.

5.3 II. ADJUSTMENT OF SELF-INSURED LIABILITY CLAIMS
A. Settlement Authority
The Risk Manager is authorized to settle liability claims as follows. The term “claim” shall include a claim that has proceeded to litigation for personal or property damages only, and shall not include a claim that has proceeded to litigation for any other causes of action including but not limited to, causes of action for injunctive relief, mandamus, or claims of alleged civil or constitutional rights violations. i. The City Risk Manager is authorized to settle liability claims against the city in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per claim.
ii. With the written approval of the Finance Director, the Risk Manager is authorized to settle liability claims in an amount not to exceed $20,000 per claim.
iii. With the written approval of the City Manager the Risk Manager is authorized to settle liability claims in an amount not to exceed $50,000 per claim.

B. Settlement Costs
For settlements of $100,000 or more that are paid by the Liability Fund, the responsible department shall reimburse the Liability Fund for ten percent (10%) of the total settlement costs, to a maximum of $100,000.

The Finance Director is authorized to create appropriations and transfer funds as needed to implement this policy.

III. INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS AND INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
To avoid responsibility for injuries or deaths caused by the acts of independent contractors and other parties over whom the City has little control, an indemnification agreement should be required of each contractor. In addition, the contractor will certify to the city that it has adequate Liability Insurance, Auto insurance when applicable, and satisfactory Workers' Compensation and/or Employer's Liability Insurance. The most common instances involving the need of these insurance coverages and agreements will occur in vendor and service contracts, and in contracts for the construction, alteration, or demolition of property. If any questions exist concerning the adequacy of limits of liability or coverages furnished by other parties, such questions should be referred to the office of the Risk Manager and City Attorney.

5.4 IV. INSURANCE REPORTS
It is important that operating management be aware of the necessity and importance of reports of values, locations, etc. required by the insurance carriers. The Risk Manager will inform city departments of reporting requirements so that instances are avoided where a delay or omitted report might jeopardize insurance coverage.

AUTHORIZATION: Council Policy Manual Update of November 17, 1998 Revised 01/2003, 05/2013, 06/2019, 01/2022

5.5 COUNCIL POLICY 1.3
POLICY TITLE: RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY
POLICY STATEMENT:

Cost of risk is defined as:

INSURANCE PREMIUMS

SELF-ASSUMED LOSSES

LOSS OF CONTROL EXPENSES

RISK MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATION

CLAIMS RELATED LEGAL EXPENSES
All forms of insurance and self-insurance excluding employee benefits shall be included.

The Risk Manager's efforts shall complement long range planning, settle and administer claims, effectuate insurance coverage, and maintain sound relationships with the public.

All functional ties (such as with legal and financial managers) necessary to carry out effective risk management are to be maintained.

5.6 II. ADJUSTMENT OF SELF-INSURED LIABILITY CLAIMS
A. Settlement Authority
The Risk Manager is authorized to settle liability claims as follows. The term “claim” shall include a claim that has proceeded to litigation for personal or property damages only, and shall not include a claim that has proceeded to litigation for any other causes of action including but not limited to, causes of action for injunctive relief, mandamus, or claims of alleged civil or constitutional rights violations. i. The City Risk Manager is authorized to settle liability claims against the city in anamount not to exceed $5,000 per claim.
ii. With the written approval of the Finance Director, the Risk Manager is authorized tosettle liability claims in an amount not to exceed $20,000 per claim. iii. With the written approval of the City Manager the Risk Manager is authorized tosettle liability claims in an amount not to exceed $50,000 per claim.

The Finance Director is authorized to create appropriations and transfer funds as needed to implement this policy.

III. INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENTS AND INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR

IV. INSURANCE REPORTS

5.7 It is important that operating management be aware of the necessity and importance of reports of values, locations, etc. required by the insurance carriers. The Risk Manager will inform city departments of reporting requirements so that instances are avoided where a delay or omitted report might jeopardize insurance coverage.

AUTHORIZATION: Council Policy Manual Update of November 17, 1998 Revised 01/2003, 05/2013, 06/2019, 01/2022

5.8 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/02/2022
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

BACKGROUND: On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom issued a proclamation of State of Emergency in response to the developing COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the continued spread of the virus, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 on March 17, 2020, which included a provision authorizing suspensions to the Ralph M. Brown Act’s (“Brown Act”) teleconferencing rules in order to facilitate virtual meetings while public health orders were in place.

On June 11, 2021, the Governor issued Executive Order N-08-21, which provided that the Brown Act teleconferencing suspensions would expire after September 30, 2021. On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 361 (“AB 361”), an urgency measure taking effect immediately, which amended the Brown Act to allow local legislative bodies to continue using teleconferencing and virtual meeting technology provided certain conditions are met.

DISCUSSION: AB 361 allows for teleconferenced meetings during a declared State of Emergency, as defined under the California Emergency Services Act, if one of the following circumstances apply: (1) State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; (2) The legislative body is meeting to determine whether, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or (3) The legislative body has determined that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person presents imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.1 The Governor’s March 4, 2020 proclamation of State of Emergency is still in effect. Measures continue to exist that impose and recommend measures to promote social distancing. The California Department of Public Health requires that all individuals wear masks in indoor public settings until January 15, 2022.2
1 Cal. Gov’t Code § 54953(e)(1)(A)-(C)
2 See CDPH, Guidance for the Use of Face Coverings (December 13, 2021), https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/guidance-for-face-coverings.aspx.

6.1 Additionally, on November 19, 2021, the Santa Cruz County Health Officer issued an order requiring all individuals in Santa Cruz County to wear face coverings in indoor settings.3 Moreover, in recent months, the highly transmissible delta and omicron variants have caused increases in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State. According to the CDC, community transmission of COVID-19 in Santa Cruz County is currently high, and the nature of the pandemic is unpredictable and transmission rates have the potential to rise quickly.

As such, holding meetings in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees due to the continued spread of COVID-19.

To continue teleconferenced meetings under AB 361, the City Council will need to declare every thirty (30) days that it has reconsidered the circumstances of the State of Emergency and either (1) the State of Emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person; or (2) State or local health officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.4
This declaration is needed for any use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361, including for two City meeting models: (1) A City Council hybrid model that uses the City Council Chambers as an in person venue along with teleconference attendance; and (2) Continued use of teleconferencing for City Council and Brown Act City boards, commissions and committees.

At its regular meeting of October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29,877, authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue using teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361. At its regular meetings of November 9, 2021, November 23, and December 14, 2021 the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-29,886, NS-29,894, and NS29,900, further authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue using teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361.

This Resolution would re-authorize the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue to use teleconferenced meetings for an additional thirty (30) days from the date of its adoption.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Mary-Haley Ousley
Deputy City Attorney
Submitted By:

Tony Condotti
City Attorney
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX
3 See Order of the Santa Cruz County Health Officer (November 19, 2021), https://www.santacruzhealth.org/Portals/7/pdfs/Coronavirus/MaskingOrder111921.pdf. 4 Cal. Gov’t Code § 54953(e)(3).

6.2 RESOLUTION NO. NSA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA AUTHORIZING THE

CONTINUED USE OF TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 361
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency, as defined under the California Emergency Services Act, due to the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, due to the threat of COVID-19, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20, which suspended certain requirements of Government Code section 54950 et seq., the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”), in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or electronically without a physical meeting place; and
WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which stated that the provision suspending requirements of the Brown Act in Executive Order N-29-20 would remain in effect through September 30, 2021, at which point the suspensions would expire; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 361 into law, an urgency measure effective upon adoption, amending the Brown Act to allow legislative bodies to continue to meet remotely during a proclaimed State of Emergency, and either state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, or the legislative body determines that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees;
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29, 877, finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to conduct remote teleconference meetings; and
WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS-29, 886, finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to conduct remote teleconference meetings; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS29,894, finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to conduct remote teleconference meetings; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. NS29,900, finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to conduct remote teleconference meetings; and

6.3 2
WHEREAS, as a condition of authorizing the continued use of teleconferenced meetings, the City Council must, every 30 days, reconsider the circumstances of the State of Emergency that exists in the City and the City Council has done so; and WHEREAS, the State of Emergency proclaimed by the Governor on March 4, 2020, remains in effect; and
WHEREAS, on November 29, 2021, the Santa Cruz County Health Officer issued an order requiring all individuals in Santa Cruz County to wear face coverings in indoor settings, and the California Department of Public Health also requires that individuals wear face coverings indoors; and
WHEREAS, in recent months, the highly contagious delta and omicron variants have caused an increase in positive cases and hospitalizations locally and throughout the State of California; and
WHEREAS, according to the CDC’s “Community Transmission” metric, which provides a four-tiered system that measures the level of community transmission in each county, Santa Cruz County was just recently reported as having “high” Community Transmission, and as seen in recent months, transmission rates of the virus may rise quickly; and
WHEREAS, due to the continued impact of the delta variant and the emerging omicron variant, the City continues to be concerned about the health and safety of attendees at public meetings should they be held in person and in a shared indoor public meeting space, as such, the City Council desires to take the actions necessary to comply with AB 361 and to continue to hold its meetings remotely.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz (City Council) as follows:

A. The City Council hereby acknowledges that the Governor’s State of Emergency proclamation issued on March 4, 2020 remains in effect; and
B. The City Council finds that due to the emergence of the delta and omicron variants and the continued threat of COVID-19, holding in person meetings for the City Council, City Commissions, and City Committees continues to present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

C. The legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution, including continuing to conduct open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.

D. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) thirty days from the adoption of this Resolution, or (ii) such time the City

6.4 3
Council adopts a subsequent resolution in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz may continue teleconferencing without compliance with the Brown Act’s prior rules regarding teleconferencing.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

6.5 MINUTES ARE UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED BY COUNCIL
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
December 14, 2021
9:00 AM
Mayor Meyers opened the City Council Closed Session at 9:01 a.m. in a public meeting via Zoom, for the purpose of announcing the agenda, and receiving public testimony.

Roll Call

Present: Councilmembers Watkins (via Zoom), Kalantari-Johnson (via Zoom), Brown (via Zoom), Cummings (via Zoom), Golder (via Zoom); Vice Mayor Brunner (arrived at 9:06 a.m. via Zoom); Mayor Meyers (via Zoom).

Absent: None.

Staff: Interim City Manager R. Menard (via Zoom), Assistant City Manager L.

Schmidt (via Zoom), City Attorney T. Condotti (via Zoom), Director of Economic Development B. Lipscomb (via Zoom), Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homelessness Response L. Butler (via Zoom), Human Resources Director L. Murphy (via Zoom), Interim Finance Director B. Magee (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush (via Zoom).

Public Comment
Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period at 9:02 a.m. There were no speakers. Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period at 9:03 a.m.

7.1 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5901
Closed Session

2. Conference With Legal Counsel – Liability Claims (Government Code §54956.95) Claimant: Rebecca Barraza
Claim against the City of Santa Cruz

3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation – (1 potential case to be discussed)

4. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(2))
Significant exposure to litigation (2 potential cases to be discussed) At this time, the meeting was closed to the public. (See page 5903 for a report on Closed Session.)

7.2 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5902
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
December 14, 2021
12:00 PM
Call to Order – Mayor Meyers called the meeting to order at 12:12 p.m. via Zoom.

Roll Call

Present: Councilmembers Watkins (arrived at 12:32 p.m. via Zoom), KalantariJohnson (via Zoom), Brown (via Zoom), Cummings (via Zoom), Golder (via Zoom); Vice Mayor Brunner (via Zoom); Mayor Meyers (via Zoom).

Absent: None.

Staff: Interim City Manager R. Menard (via Zoom), Assistant City Manager L.

Schmidt (via Zoom), City Attorney T. Condotti (via Zoom), Interim Finance Director B. Magee (via Zoom), Director of Economic Development B. Lipscomb (via Zoom), Interim Library Director E.

Howard (via Zoom), Interim Water Director H. Luckenbach (via Zoom), Information Technology Director K. Morgan (via Zoom), Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homelessness Response L. Butler (via Zoom), Human Resources Director L. Murphy (via Zoom), Director of Public Works M. Dettle (via Zoom), Interim Fire Chief R. Oatey (via Zoom), Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot (via Zoom), Watershed Compliance Manager C. Berry (via Zoom), Principal Planner S. Haschert (via Zoom), Senior Planner R. Bane (via Zoom), Recreation Supervisor R. Acosta (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush (via Zoom).

Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification – None.

Additions and Deletions – None.

Oral Communications Announcement - The Mayor provided a brief announcement about Oral Communications.

7.3 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5903
City Attorney Report on Closed Session
Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) Employee Organizations:
a) Fire IAFF Local 1716
b) Fire Management Association
c) OE3 Mid-manager and Supervisor Employees
d) SEIU Local 521
e) Unrepresented
City Negotiator – Lisa Murphy
Council received a status report from the City Negotiator, and took no reportable action.

Conference With Legal Counsel – Liability Claims (Government Code §54956.95) Claimant: Rebecca Barraza
Claim against the City of Santa Cruz
Council received a status report, took up under agenda item 17, and took no reportable action.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation – (1 potential case to be discussed) Council received a status report and took no reportable action.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(2))
Significant exposure to litigation (2 potential cases to be discussed) Council received a status report and took no reportable action.

7.4 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5904
City Manager Report

5. The City Manager Provided a Report and Updates on the City’s Business, COVID19 Response, and Events.

Interim Fire Chief R. Oatey was called on to provide an update on COVID-19.

Interim City Manager R. Menard announced the new Library Director, thanking the Interim Library Director E. Howard and made outgoing remarks as the Interim City Manager.

Consent Agenda
Councilmember Watkins made a comment on item 11.

City Clerk Administrator B. Bush responded to Councilmember Cummings’ question regarding item 11.

Mayor Meyers made a comment on item 13.

Interim City Manager R. Menard responded to Councilmember Cummings’ question regarding item 14.

Councilmember Brown made a comment on items 16 and 18.

Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot responded to Councilmember Brown’s question regarding item 20.

Mayor Meyers spoke regarding item 20.

Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period. The following people spoke via teleconference:

Unidentified person made a comment on item 6.

Unidentified person made a comment on item 7.

Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Golder, to approve the Consent Agenda.

7.5 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5905
Consent Agenda (continued)
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Brown, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Staff Assignment:

Direct staff and the City Attorney’s Office to provide an FYI on how impact fees are developed and determine whether a transit impact fee can be developed.

6. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the COVID19 Pandemic by Sixty (60) Days (CA) Resolution No. NS-29,898 was adopted extending by sixty days the Declaration of Emergency in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.

7. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire by Sixty (60) Days (CA)
Resolution No. NS-29,899 was adopted extending by sixty days the Local Emergency Declaration in connection with the CZU August Lightning Complex Fire.

8. Resolution Authorizing the City to Continue Teleconferenced Public Meetings Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 (CA)
Resolution No. NS-29,900 was adopted authorizing legislative bodies of the City of Santa Cruz to continue the use of teleconferenced meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

9. Minutes of the November 23, 2021 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion carried to approve as submitted.

10. Minutes of the November 30, 2021 City Council Closed Personnel Session/Study Session (CC)
Motion carried to approve as submitted.

7.6 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5906
Consent Agenda (continued)

11. Certification of the November 2, 2021 Election (CC) Resolution No. NS-29,901 was adopted confirming and approving the canvass of ballots and returns for the City of Santa Cruz Election held on November 2, 2021, and declaring that Measure A (Santa Cruz Children’s Fund Act of 2021) passed by a majority vote of the electorate of the City of Santa Cruz, thus amending the City’s Charter.

12. Approval of Advisory Body Bylaws (CC)
Motion carried to approve the proposed amendments to the bylaws for the City’s Advisory Bodies.

13. Green Economy Resolution (CM)
Resolution No. NS-29,902 was adopted to take action for a just transition to a green economy.

14. Appointment of Representatives to the Santa Cruz County Homeless Action Partnership, the Santa Cruz County Continuum of Care Governing Entity (CN) Motion carried to appoint incoming Vice Mayor Martine Watkins and Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homeless Response Lee Butler to be the City of Santa Cruz’s representatives on the newly restructured Santa Cruz County Homeless Action Partnership.

15. FY 2021 Year-End Budget Adjustment (FN)
Resolution No. NS-29,903 was adopted amending the FY 2021 budget where annual expenditures need adjustments in various funds.

16. FY 2021 Annual Report for Traffic Impact Fee, Childcare Impact Fee, and Public Safety Impact Fee (FN/PL)
Motion carried to accept and approve the attached FY 2021 Impact Fee Annual Report.

7.7 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5907
Consent Agenda (continued)

17. Liability Claim Filed Against City of Santa Cruz (FN) Motion carried to reject the liability claim of a) Rebecca Barraza, based on staff recommendation.

18. Resolution Amending the City of Santa Cruz Personnel Complement and Classification and Compensation Plans and the FY 2022 Budget:

Implementation of California State Minimum Wage Law for 2022 – All Departments (HR)
Resolution No. NS-29,904 was adopted amending the City of Santa Cruz Personnel Complement and Classification and Compensation Plans and the FY 2022 Budget by implementing the California State Minimum Wage Law for 2022 by adjusting the salary ranges of affected temporary unclassified positions in addition to those within their classification series and others to keep internal pay parity.

19. Microsoft Enterprise Agreement for Office 365 Product Licenses and Support Services (IT)
Motion carried authorizing the City Manager to execute and join a competitively procured contract with Dell Marketing L.P., of Round Rock, TX, for delivering Microsoft Office 365 (O365) product licenses and support services for up to 950 subscribers across multiple fiscal years. Agreement would utilize the same terms and conditions afforded to the County of Riverside, California under Licensing Solution Provider Agreement Number PSA-0001524 and Riverside County Master Microsoft Enterprise Agreement No. 8084445.

20. Save the Waves Coalition Partnership Agreement (PR) Resolution No. NS-29,905 was adopted authorizing the Director of Parks and Recreation to enter into an agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Save the Waves Coalition.

21. 2021 Surface Seal Project (c400810) – Notice of Completion (PW) Motion carried to accept the work of Pavement Coatings Co. (Sacramento, CA) as completed per plans and specifications and authorizing the filing of a Notice of Completion for the 2021 Surface Seal Project (c400810).

7.8 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5908
Consent Agenda (continued)

22. Construction of 6-inch Recycled Water Pipeline (WT) Motion carried to:
 Authorize the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with Soquel Creek Water District for reimbursement of the construction of a 6-inch recycled water line in conjunction with the Pure Water Soquel Treatment Facilities Project.
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,906 transferring $1,000,000 within the Water Department Capital Investment Program and amending the FY 2022 budget for project c701606, Newell Creek Dam Inlet/Outlet Replacement, and project c701611, Recycled Water Project.

23. Design Services for Beltz Well 12, HDR Inc, Contract Amendment – Budget Adjustment (WT)
Motion carried to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,907 amending the FY 2022 budget to transfer $1,800,000 within the Water Department's CIP from the Water Management Reserve to a new project for Beltz Well 12 Ammonia Removal.  Authorize the City Manager to execute contract amendment 2022-1.3 in the amount of $204,839 with HDR, Inc. for design services for additional treatment processes at Beltz Well 12 in a form to be approved by the City Attorney and authorizing the Water Director to execute amendments within the approved project budget.

End Consent Agenda

7.9 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5909
General Business

24. Santa Cruz Water Rights Project – Final Environmental Impact Report and Project Approval (WT)
Interim Water Director H. Luckenbach introduced the item.

Watershed Compliance Manager C. Berry gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period. There were no speakers.

Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Watkins moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to:
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,908 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Santa Cruz Water Rights Project.
 Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,909 approving the Santa Cruz Water Rights Project, adopting a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program, and adopting CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Brown, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

7.10 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5910
General Business (continued)

25. 831 Water Street: CP20-0121 (APN 009-212-30, -31, -38) – A Public Oversight Meeting to Assess Compliance with the City's Objective Standards Criteria and Accompanying Density Bonus Request for an Affordable Housing Project Proposed Pursuant to SB 35 (Planning and Zoning: Affordable Housing:

Streamlined Approval Process). The Proposed Project Includes Demolition of Existing Commercial Buildings and Construction of a Five-story Mixed-use Building and a Four-story Residential Building Consisting of Approximately 5,012 Square Feet of Ground Floor Commercial and 140 Residential Units (with 50% of the Base Units as Affordable per SB35) with Shared Underground Parking. (Owner: Novin Development Corp.) (PL)
Senior Planner R. Bane gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development and Homelessness Response L. Butler responded to Councilmember questions.

City Attorney T. Condotti responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Janine Roth
Lira Filippini
831 Responsible Development
Ryan Meckel
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Logan Haug
Unidentified person
James Rodriguez
Logan Jackson
Laura Wilson
Tim Willoughby
Unidentified person
Andrew Barber
Zennon Ulyate-Crow
Joseph Thompson
Michelaina Johnson
Emily
Brian DiGiorgio
Unidentified person
Candace Brown

7.11 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5911
General Business (continued)

25. 831 Water Street (PL) (continued)
SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE (continued):

Michael Wool
Eva Chen
Bodie
Christian Artega
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to:
 Remain the decision-making body for 831 Water St. and SB 35 projects.  Deny the 831 Water Street application based on the following substantive and procedural reasons:
 Condition #13(c) violates the City’s inclusionary requirements.  The project does not meet the slope requirements.
 The constant revisions to the project, without the submission of a new application, confuse the public and make it difficult, if not impossible, for the Council to be sure what they are deciding on.
 The Council and the public were not provided the final drawings showing the project and, particularly, the distribution of the affordable units throughout the project.
 In determining whether the project meets all of the City’s objective standards, the Council and public should have been provided the project plans on the agenda, as was done previously.
 As argued at the Council’s last meeting, rescinding the previous denial of the project and not requiring the applicant to re-submit the application violated good public practice and sets a negative precedent.

7.12 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5912
General Business (continued)

25. 831 Water Street (PL) (continued)
ACTION: The motion failed with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Brown, Cummings.

NOES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

MOTION: Vice Mayor Brunner moved, seconded by Mayor Meyers, to review the objective standards table and density bonus information prepared by staff and refer the project to staff to complete a formal response letter to the SB 35 application, including an objective standards consistency determination and determination of the granting of a Density Bonus.

AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by
Councilmember Brown, to amend the motion to eliminate the following from 13(c) from the Conditions of Approval:
“...unless the applicant provides substantial evidence that, for the project to be eligible for a state or local funding program, it is necessary that the units not be distributed throughout the project.” FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Brown requested the following amendments:

1. The applicant must provide the location of density bonus units with the site plan, as required so that the density bonus application is deemed complete.

2. To ensure a thorough evaluation of SB 35 eligibility under 65913.4, section “(b)(4) A project shall not be eligible for the streamlined, ministerial process described in subdivision (c) if any of the following apply:
(A) There is a tribal cultural resource that is on a national, state, tribal, or local historic register list located on the site of the project.” For SB 35 eligibility, the City must ascertain whether there is a tribal resource on the subject property, it is important to see written correspondence to “all” Most Likely Descendants on the list-asking them whether this site is listed on their register. And evaluating their answers to that specific question. The correspondence should make explicitly clear that the site is at the center of the Villa de Branciforte.

7.13 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5913
General Business (continued)

25. 831 Water Street (PL) (continued)
Councilmember Brown withdrew item 1 of her amendment. Vice Mayor Brunner did not accept item 2.

Principal Planner S. Haschert responded to Councilmember questions.

ACTION: Councilmember Cummings’ amendment was not accepted with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Brown, Cummings.

NOES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Councilmembers Watkins and Kalantari-Johnson stated their “no” vote on the amendment is because they missed the discussion due to technological issues.

Mayor Meyers stated for the record her no vote on the amendment is because she feels it is counter to the Housing and Community Development State Law.

ACTION: The original motion carried with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Kalantari-Johnson, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: Councilmembers Watkins, Brown, Cummings.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

26. Library Mixed-Use Project Updated Site Program and Design (ED) Director of Economic Development B. Lipscomb gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Abe Jayson, Principal of Jayson Architecture, and Katie Stuart, Architect and Associate with Jayson Architecture, gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

7.14 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5914
General Business (continued)

26. Library Mixed-Use Project Updated Site Program and Design (ED) (continued) SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Kyle Kelley
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Jim Mekis
Lira Filippini
Elizabeth [unintelligible last name]
Don lane
Joseph Thompson
Zennon Ulyate-Crow
Casey Beyer
Emily
Unidentified person
Cynthia Mathews
Eva
Ryan Meckel
Matt Farrell
Unidentified person
Judi Grunstra
Henry Hooker
Zachary Davis
Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Watkins moved, seconded by Mayor Meyers, to approve the updated site program and design for the Library Mixed-Use Project to include the following changes:
 Increase in affordable housing units from a minimum of 50 to a minimum range of between 100-125 units;
 Decrease in the parking count from 400 to 310 parking stalls;  Expand program to include an onsite daycare facility;  Library design changes to include a two-story Library facing Cedar and Lincoln Streets with a green roof and adjacent roof deck and other design elements as presented by the Master Library Architect, and direct staff to return to Council with a preliminary Library cost model based on the updated Library design and site program changes.

7.15 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5915
General Business (continued)

26. Library Mixed-Use Project Updated Site Program and Design (ED) FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cummings requested to amend the motion as follows:

1. Change the language from “approve” to “accept.”

2. Direct staff to bring back a preliminary cost model which includes sources and uses of funds, including but not limited to Measure S funding.

3. Direct staff to work with Jayson Architecture to ensure the program and design is in compliance with the requirements of the City Council’s Heritage Trees resolution, Resolution No. NS-23,710 and to fully evaluate with a certified arborist and developer whether any of the heritage trees can be included in the final project and make every effort to include the trees where feasible.

Councilmember Cummings withdrew #2. Councilmember Watkins and Mayor Meyers accepted #1 of the amendment and did not accept #3.

ACTION: The motion as amended carried with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: Councilmember Brown.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

27. Children and Youth Bill of Rights and Support for the Newly Formed Youth Action Network (CN)
Councilmembers Kalantari Johnson, Anushka Shah, student at UC Santa Cruz, Recreation Supervisor R. Acosta, Amanda Gamban, Coordinator of the Youth Action Network, and Councilmember Watkins gave a presentation.

Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

David Brody
Nora Hochman
Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period.

7.16 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5916
General Business (continued)

27. Children and Youth Bill of Rights and Support for the Newly Formed Youth Action Network (CN)
MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Cummings, to:

1. Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,910 supporting the newly formed Youth Action Network.

2. Adopt and promote the Children and Youth Bill of Rights.

3. Direct the Mayor to appoint a Councilmember and staff person to participate in the Youth Action Network.

4. Set aside $2,000 annually for youth participation and leadership development stipends.

5. Develop metrics aligned with Health in All Policies to measure success.

6. Direct staff to return with an annual presentation outlining the “State of Youth in Santa Cruz.”
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Councilmember Cummings requested to amend #4 of the motion to, “Recommend setting aside $2,000 from the Cannabis Children’s Fund annually for youth participation and leadership development stipends.” Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson accepted.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Brown, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

7.17 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5917
Oral Communications
At 6:58 p.m. Mayor Meyers opened Oral Communications for members of the public who wished to speak regarding items not listed on the City Council agenda.

Unidentified person spoke regarding HUD, AMBAG, and other regional authorities.

Unidentified person spoke regarding the minutes template that was visible on screen and asking why a pre-populated vote was onscreen before the vote was taken.

Unidentified person spoke regarding a family being removed from their RV and the flooding and evacuations at the Benchlands.

Unidentified person spoke in response to a previous comment from a member of the public about the “radical agenda affirmatively furthering fair housing” and Monterey Bay Area Government’s “RHNA methodology.”
Unidentified person spoke regarding the flooding that happened at the Benchlands encampments.

At 7:07 p.m. Mayor Meyers closed Oral Communications.

Council took a break at 7:08 p.m. and returned at 7:40 p.m.

General Business

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program
Interim City Manager R. Menard, and Homelessness Response Manager L.

Imwalle gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.

Deputy City Manager and Director of Planning and Community Development, and Homelessness Response L. Butler and Interim Finance Director B. Magee responded to Councilmember questions.

Mayor Meyers opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.

SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE:

Serg Kagno
Unidentified person
Unidentified person
Unidentified person

7.18 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5918
General Business (continued)

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued) SPEAKING VIA TELECONFERENCE (continued):

Unidentified person
Mayor Meyers closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Watkins, to:

1. Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,911 authorizing the City Manager to accept and appropriate $14 million from the State General Fund for use in addressing homelessness and to accept a report on the process being used to develop recommendations for how these one-time funds will be used.

2. Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,912 amending FY 2022 Budget to appropriate $4,243,659 of American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) funds for Homeless Response Programs.

3. Receive recommendations regarding Council-directed homeless response programs and services, including but not limited to lease and sub-lease information regarding the National Guard Armory, and relocate individuals from Benchlands to other locations.

4. Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a six-month contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with the Salvation Army for shelter management at the Armory in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000.

5. Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,913 supporting the County of Santa Cruz’s grant application to the California Homeless Coordinating and Funding Council (HCFC) for funding through the Encampment Resolution Funding Program and directing staff to collaborate with the County on implementation of the work outlined in the grant.

After discussion, Mayor Meyers separated the items.

7.19 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5919
General Business (continued)

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued)

28.1 Resolution to Accept a $14-million Appropriation to the City of Santa Cruz from the State General Fund for use in Addressing Homelessness and Description of the Process for Developing Recommendations on how These One-time Funds Will Be Used (CM)
MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Watkins, to adopt Resolution No. NS-29,911 authorizing the City Manager to accept and appropriate $14 million from the State General Fund for use in addressing homelessness and to accept a report on the process being used to develop recommendations for how these one-time funds will be used.

ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Brown, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

28.2 FY 2022 Budget Appropriation of ARPA Funds (FN)
MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Watkins, to adopt Resolution No. NS-29,912 amending FY 2022 Budget to appropriate $4,243,659 of American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) funds for Homeless Response Programs.

MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Watkins to call the question.

ACTION: The motion to call the question carried with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: Councilmembers Brown, Cummings.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

7.20 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5920
General Business (continued)

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued)

28.2 FY 2022 Budget Appropriation of ARPA Funds (FN)
ACTION: The original motion carried with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: Councilmember Brown, Cummings.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Councilmember Cummings stated for the record that it was stated earlier that Council could take the time they needed to discuss this and his intention was to try to reach consensus, and that has been the problem with this process the whole time.

1. Receive recommendations regarding Council-directed homeless response programs and services, including but not limited to lease and sub-lease information regarding the National Guard Armory, and relocate individuals from Benchlands to other locations.

2. Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a six-month contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with the Salvation Army for shelter management at the Armory in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000.

3. Adopt Resolution No. NS-29,913 supporting the County of Santa Cruz’s grant application to the California Homeless Coordinating and Funding Council (HCFC) for funding through the Encampment Resolution Funding Program and directing staff to collaborate with the County on implementation of the work outlined in the grant.

7.21 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5921
General Business (continued)

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued)

28.3 Homelessness Response Programming Updates, Lease with the National Guard and Contract for Services with the Salvation Army for Shelter Operations at the National Guard Armory, and Support of Grant Application for Homeless Encampment Resolution Funding in Collaboration with the County of Santa Cruz (CM)
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by
Councilmember Cummings, to amend part 2 of the motion: Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a six-month contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with the Salvation Army for shelter management at the Armory in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000 with specific language in the contract that unemployment insurance will be provided to Salvation Army workers, if provided for by State law.

Human Resources Director L. Murphy responded to Councilmember questions.

After discussion, the amendment was reworded as follows:

AMENDMENT: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by
Councilmember Cummings, to amend part 2 of the motion: Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a six-month contract, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with the Salvation Army for shelter management at the Armory in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000 with specific language that the contract shall include a requirement that employees are eligible for unemployment insurance benefits if provided for by State or Federal Law.

ACTION: The motion to amend was accepted unanimously with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Brown, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

7.22 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5922
General Business (continued)

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued)

AYES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Brown, Cummings, Golder; Vice Mayor Brunner; Mayor Meyers.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued) MOTION: Councilmember Cummings moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to direct staff to bring back an item for future discussion in early 2022 that would outline a process for creating a plan to address homelessness which would include identifying goals, priorities, implementation strategies, and would include housed and unhoused community members and stakeholder engagement.

ACTION: The motion failed with the following vote.

AYES: Councilmembers Brown, Cummings; Vice Mayor Brunner.

NOES: Councilmembers Watkins, Kalantari-Johnson, Golder; Mayor Meyers.

ABSENT: None.

DISQUALIFIED: None.

Councilmember Watkins stated for the record she is voting no because Council has a number of plans already in place.

Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson stated for the record her no vote is for the same reason as Councilmember Watkins and because the youth homeless demonstration program was a year-long strategic plan.

7.23 December 14, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5923
General Business (continued)

28. Implementation of Homelessness Response Program (continued) Councilmember Brown stated for the record she is voting yes because the vast majority of recommendations and priorities that have been set in those planning processes that did engage the community have been ignored by this Council.

Councilmember Cummings stated for the record it is important that Council is taking these plans and identifying goals and implementation of what has been outlined in these plans is not how homelessness has been addressed thus far.

Presentations

29. Remarks by Outgoing Mayor
Mayor Meyers made outgoing remarks.

30. Swearing in and Remarks by Incoming Vice Mayor and Mayor City Clerk Administrator B. Bush swore in Vice Mayor Martine Watkins and Mayor Sonja Brunner. Vice Mayor Watkins and Mayor Brunner spoke.

Adjournment - The City Council adjourned at 10:32 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted:

Julia Wood, Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Attest:

Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
Approved:

Donna Meyers, Mayor

7.24 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/23/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
SUBJECT: California Coastal Commission Local Coastal Program Local Assistance Grant Program - Grant Acceptance, Authorization and Appropriation (CM) RECOMMENDATION: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for, accept, and appropriate funds from the California Coastal Commission Local Coastal Program Local Assistance Grant Program for the Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development.

BACKGROUND: In 1972, California voters adopted Proposition 20 creating the California Coastal Act and Coastal Commission (Commission). The Commission was given the mandate of implementing Coastal Act policies by preparing a comprehensive plan for the California coastline and reviewing locally-approved projects within a coastal zone of approximately 1,000 yards along the coastline. In 1976, the Coastal Act was revised with specific provisions that coastal permit processing authority be transferred from the Commission to local government upon the adoption of a Coastal Land Use and Implementation Plan. The Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) must contain planning policies and land use designations relating to the coastal zone and Coastal Act. The Coastal Implementation Plan (IP) must contain regulations and programs necessary to carry out the Coastal Land Use Plan. Together the Coastal Implementation Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan form the Local Coastal Program (LCP).

In 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger issued an Executive Order (S-13-08) directing state agencies to consider sea level rise as part of planning projects and to support the preparation of the National Research Council report on sea level rise. Additionally, on April 29, 2015, Governor Brown issued an Executive Order (B-30-15) to establish a new greenhouse gas emission reduction target and called for further action on adaptation. The Coastal Act directs the Coastal Commission and local governments to use the best available science in coastal land use planning and development. While there is no requirement that local governments update their LCP, updates are encouraged to occur as necessary to address changes in conditions, best available science or policy priorities. It should further consider impacts to all coastal resources (access, recreation, habitat, etc.) over various time scales. The Commission encourages LCP updates to adhere to the best practices of setting proactive adaptation policies consistent with the Coastal Act to protect resources, and using scenario-based planning and a precautionary approach for hazard evaluation and adaptation planning.

Recognizing funding and capacity constraints of local governments in undertaking this work, the Commission's LCP Local Assistance Grant Program provides funds to support local

8.1 governments in completing or updating LCP consistent with the California Coastal Act, with special emphasis on planning for sea-level rise and climate change. The Commission has awarded six rounds of LCP Local Assistance grants. The Commission has released funds for Round 7 grant funding designed to assist local governments in assessing impacts and planning for coastal resiliency, including adapting to the impacts of climate change and sea level rise, and which contain an LCP planning component. Funding is provided by the Budget Act of 2021 which provides up to $31 million to support the Coastal Commissions’ LCP Local Assistance Grant Program which awards grants to local governments to support coastal resiliency and updates to Local Coastal Programs (LCPs). The outcome of the LCP assistance grant project must include adoption of a new or amended LCP.

DISCUSSION: The City first adopted the Land Use Plan of the LCP in January 1981. The Local Coastal Implementation Program was adopted in November 1982 and was substantially revised and rewritten in 1992, when it was incorporated into the 1990-2005 General Plan as the General Plan/Local Coastal Program, 1990-2005.

The City is currently in the process of updating the LCP to become a stand-alone document, to more closely conform to the format of the Coastal Act, and to update the LCP policies and Implementation Plan (formerly referred to as Implementation Program) to remove obsolete and completed policies and programs. Having an adopted LCP along with the Implementing Regulations by the Commission gives the City the necessary policy basis and regulations to continue issuance of coastal permits under its jurisdiction.

The process will also add new information and updated policies and programs drawing from the two year Resilient Coast Santa Cruz initiative, including those related to coastal hazards as a new Beaches and Bluffs chapter. This amendment is currently out for public review and it is anticipated that this amendment will be approved by California Coastal Commission at the end of calendar year 2022.

As a next step to the City’s coastal resilience work, staff propose to develop a smart coastal change monitoring program with federal, state and nonprofit partners for incorporation into its LCP through a targeted amendment. As part of program development, the project team will assess the technical and financial feasibility of options to measure shoreline change (cliffs, caves, bluffs, riprap, beach areas) at specified frequencies, across seasons and for the City’s entire coastline. Financial sustainability will inform choices of technologies, deployment plans, partnership engagements, and long-term management of the smart coastal network. The City led team will pursue options for ongoing monitoring of effects of storms on coastal structures, beaches and cliff stability, e.g., using stationary cameras to measure short to medium-term storm flooding (USGS n.d.a) and sensors to measure extreme waves (Alliance for Coastal Technologies 2007); and community science in monitoring coastline geophysical changes, including shoreline mapping via smartphone images (e.g., CoastSnap, Harley et al 2019). The team will also consider other statewide and national geophysical data systems, such as the Central and Northern California Ocean Observing System (CeNCOOS 2020), to draw on its technology and seek integration of monitoring and data management and analysis systems.

8.2 practical improvements in peoples’ lives. Developing a PAR approach will ensure the City’s coastal adaptation pathways are co-produced by experts and members of its most vulnerable communities and generate shared solutions that are truly collaborative and adaptive.

Throughout the scientific assessments and community engagement, the team will seek to integrate policy and implementation concerns relative to the City’s LCP requirements and effective implementation of the coastal adaptation pathways identified in relevant coastal hazard planning and LCP documents. This step will seek to closely marry the attributes and methods of the monitoring program with the discrete policy requirements of the LCP. One final work product will be the identification of potential targeted LCP amendment(s) for incorporating the monitoring program into the City’s LCPThe goal of the project is to develop, codify and initiate deployment of a coastal change monitoring program in order to implement the City’s adaptation pathways approach to coastal management in the face of climate change. The work program proposed for Coastal Commission LCP Local Assistance Grant Round 7 funds consists of three integrated objectives:

Objective 1. Develop City-Wide Smart Monitoring of Geophysical Triggers Objective 2. Integrate Social Triggers through Engagement and Communication with Frontline Communities
Objective 3. Integrate of Trigger Monitoring and methods with LCP policy direction, implementation mechanisms, and programs:

In addition to operationalizing the City’s Health in All Policies ordinance by focused attention on sustainability and equity and the resultant improvement in public safety, this project’s completion has the potential to be transformative and may serve as a proto-type for implementation of coastal adaptation pathways in other places along California’s coast and beyond. The total proposed project cost is estimated to be $227,100. The City is seeking $180,100 from the Coastal Commission LCP Local Assistance Grant Round 7 funds. Although no matching funds are required, the City will provide in-kind services in the form of staff time to manage the overall award as well as to carry out specific aspects of the project. The grant proposal was due on December 22, 2021 and staff did not decide to pursue grant funds until after the December 14, 2021 final City Council meeting of the year. Thus staff are coming to City Council with the proposal after submission. The Commission expects to award grants in March 2022 with the project kickoff proposed for July 1, 2022 and project completion by December 31, 2024.

FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this recommendation will not result in an immediate fiscal impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Tiffany Wise-West
Sustainability & Climate
Action Manager
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. RESOLUTION.DOCX

2. PROPOSAL.PDF

8.3 1
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMISSION’S LCP

LOCAL ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM PROPOSAL
WHEREAS, the Budget Act of 2021 provides up to $31 million to support the Coastal Commission’s LCP Local Assistance Grant Program which awards grants to local governments to support coastal resiliency and updates to Local Coastal Programs (LCPs); and WHEREAS, the California Coastal Commission, under the authority of the California Coastal Act, may provide financial assistance to support coastal planning and has approved a grant program to provide such financial assistance for LCP planning; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the grant program is to develop new or updated LCPs in conformance with the California Coastal Act and to promote coastal resiliency and address the effects of climate change; and WHEREAS, grant proposals submitted under this grant program must complete Local Coastal Program (LCP) planning work with special emphasis on coastal resiliency and addressing the effects of climate change and sea-level rise; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz has an effectively certified LCP; and WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz desires to pursue a project that would result in the completion and submittal for certification by the California Coastal Commission of an Amendment to the LCP in part; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz desires to pursue a project that would result in the completion and submittal for certification by the California Coastal Commission of an LCP and desires to assume permit issuing authority; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz commits to and agrees to fully support a planning effort intended to amend a certified LCP pursuant to the provisions of the California Coastal Act, with full public participation and coordination with the Coastal Commission staff.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz hereby:

1. Directs the City of Santa Cruz staff to submit the grant application package attached hereto as Attachment 1 to the California Coastal Commission to provide financial and planning assistance, under authority of the California Coastal Act, in the amount of $180,100 to fund the project more particularly described in the grant application package.

2. Authorizes the City Manager of the City of Santa Cruz to apply for, accept, and execute in the name of the City of Santa Cruz, all necessary applications, contracts and agreements and amendments thereto and appropriate funds from California Coastal Commission to procure and implement and any project approved through approval of the grant application.

8.4 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of January, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________________
Sonja Brunner, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

8.5 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 1

APPLICATION FORM

APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant name (agency): City of Santa Cruz
Address: 809 Center Street Room 9/10
Primary Contact name: Dr. Tiffany Wise-West, PE Title: Sustainability & Climate Action Mgr Telephone: 831-420-5433 Fax: 831-420-5011
Email: [email protected]
Federal Tax ID#: 94-6000427
Person authorized to sign grant agreement, amendments, and Request for Funds:

Name: Matt Huffaker Title: City Manager
Telephone: 831-420-5010 Email: [email protected]

PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development LCP/LCP Segment: City of Santa Cruz Local Coastal Program Project Location
City/Geographic area: Santa Cruz, CA
County: Santa Cruz County
Project Timeline
Start date: 07/01/2022 End date: 12/15/2024
Signature: Date: 12/22/2021

8.6 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Santa Cruz proposes to develop a smart coastal change monitoring program for incorporation into its LCP through a targeted amendment. The coastal change monitoring program will explore and integrate social and geophysical triggers for guiding the City’s implementation of priority coastal adaptation pathways. The program will be developed with a cross disciplinary team through scientific assessment of existing and potential environmental and social data and methods; community engagement and communication focused on social vulnerability and equity; and integration of science and community concerns with the City’s LCP policy and implementation framework related to coastal adaptation. The goal of the project is to develop, codify and initiate deployment of a coastal change monitoring program in order to implement the City’s adaptation pathways approach to coastal management in the face of climate change. The work program consists of three integrated objectives:

Objective 1. Develop City-Wide Smart Monitoring of Geophysical Triggers: Diverse sensors and observational platforms, owned and operated by various entities, currently monitor geophysical changes along the Santa Cruz coastline in a piecemeal way. Existing platforms need to be coordinated, new locations must be outfitted with observational and/or sensor technology, and community science initiatives should be leveraged to design a coastal-change monitoring network for the City’s entire coastline that can alert decision-makers of the need for action.

Objective 2. Integrate Social Triggers through Engagement and Communication with Frontline Communities: The City developed geophysical triggers for its coastal adaptation pathways through prior work funded by CA Coastal Commission and CalTrans, but it needs more capacity to deepen frontline community involvement in order to develop and meaningfully integrate social indicators and values into the overall plan and coastal change monitoring protocols. In addition, the city has pioneered using bilingual virtual reality, gamification, and other innovative public engagement modalities in its climate adaptation work. But limited understanding exists about the efficacy of these strategies to foster community awareness, engagement, and equity in addressing coastal change.

Objective 3. Integrate of Trigger Monitoring and methods with LCP policy direction, implementation mechanisms, and programs: The City’s public review draft of an LCP update addressing coastal resilience and sea-level rise is currently out for public review and will be submitted to CA Coastal Commission along with the recently adopted West Cliff Drive and Adaptation Plan for approval. Effective implementation of the LCP, and thus the Coastal Act, may be premised on close linkages between the monitoring of geophysical and social changes, thresholds, and triggers for action with the requirements of the LCP.

These objectives will be met through answering such questions as: 1. What configuration of sensor and observational technologies can form a smart coastal network to provide data-driven preparedness to coastal change over the full stretch of a heterogeneous urban coastline? 2.

What social triggers should be monitored as part of the City’s adaptation pathways approach, and how can they be integrated with geophysical triggers to help city officials make decisions

8.7 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 3 that enhance the resilience of its frontline communities? 3. What communication tools and approaches are most useful for working with diverse and underrepresented frontline communities on desirable coastal risk solutions, in a way that fosters strong community engagement, long-term visioning, and equity? 4. How should monitoring triggers, methods and programs be designed to optimize LCP implementation, consistent with the Coastal Act? The City of Santa Cruz will lead the scientific, social, and LCP policy assessment tasks with assistance from the community and community organizations, residents, and the scientific and university communities, including primary project partners, the Coastal Science and Policy Program at University of California Santa Cruz (CSP @ UCSC) and the Ocean and Coastal Policy Center at University of California Santa Barbara (OCPC @ UCSB).

As part of program development, the project team will assess the technical and financial feasibility of options to measure shoreline change (cliffs, caves, bluffs, riprap, beach areas) at specified frequencies, across seasons and for the City’s entire coastline. Financial sustainability will inform choices of technologies, deployment plans, partnership engagements, and longterm management of the smart coastal network. The City led team will pursue options for ongoing monitoring of effects of storms on coastal structures, beaches and cliff stability, e.g., using stationary cameras to measure short to medium-term storm flooding (USGS n.d.a) and sensors to measure extreme waves (Alliance for Coastal Technologies 2007); and community science in monitoring coastline geophysical changes, including shoreline mapping via smartphone images (e.g., CoastSnap, Harley et al 2019). The team will also consider other statewide and national geophysical data systems, such as the Central and Northern California Ocean Observing System (CeNCOOS 2020), to draw on its technology and seek integration of monitoring and data management and analysis systems.

The research team also will invite members from Santa Cruz frontline communities to join the project team in a compensated role to collaboratively develop a participatory action research (PAR) design that identifies key social triggers and ways to monitor them. PAR invites nonexpert stakeholders to participate actively in all aspects of the research process and aims to make practical improvements in people’s lives. Developing a PAR approach will ensure the City’s coastal adaptation pathways are co-produced by experts and members of its most vulnerable communities and generate shared solutions that are truly collaborative and adaptive.

Throughout the scientific assessments and community engagement, the team will seek to integrate policy and implementation concerns relative to the City’s LCP requirements and effective implementation of the coastal adaptation pathways identified in relevant coastal hazard planning and LCP documents. This step will seek to closely marry the attributes and methods of the monitoring program with the discrete policy requirements of the LCP. One final work product will be the identification of potential targeted LCP amendment(s) for incorporating the monitoring program into the City’s LCP. The program may serve as a prototype for implementation of coastal adaptation pathways in other places along California’s coast and beyond.

8.8 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 4 TASKS
Task 1 - Project Management & Grant Administration
Task Description: The City will manage workflows, project team deliverable production, time keeping and accounting, fiscal management, and coordination with California Coastal Commission staff for review, tracking, invoicing, and reporting. This task will also include reflective evaluation after each task’s completion to refine and ensure efficient and equitable process and outcomes. Evaluation summaries will be included in quarterly reports at the completion of each task. As an in kind labor match to the project, Dr. Tiffany Wise-West, Sustainability and Climate Action Manager for the City will provide efficient and experienced leadership on all grant related activities in order to achieve the overall project goal and objectives. A climate analyst from Dr. Wise-West’s team, to be compensated from project funds as noted in the budget, will act as the project coordinator, handling logistics, report preparation and other coordination. City staff will also participate in an in-person conference, e.g., California Adaptation Forum or other relevant fora.

Task 1 Deliverables: The City will develop grant reports and hold coordination meetings with California Coastal Commission on a minimum every 3 month basis. Conference slide deck.

Task 2 - Assessment of Coastal Change Monitoring Systems Task Description: The City will assess the technical and financial feasibility of existing and new options to measure shoreline change (cliffs, caves, bluffs, riprap, beach areas) at specified frequencies, across seasons, and for the City’s entire coastline. The project team will identify the optimal choice(s) of technologies, and develop deployment plans and partnership agreements for sustainable long-term management of the smart coastal network. Staff from agencies with mutual priorities (CSP @ UCSC, US Geological Society, California State Parks) will participate in this assessment noted in the budget as in kind match under consultant costs. Dr.

Charles Lester of the OCPC @ UCSB, through a subaward in a consultant role, will review existing and proposed LCP policies and ordinances related to shoreline management and map policy instruments and potential monitoring frameworks. Completion of Task 2 and its subtasks will enable achievement of the project’s first of three objectives.

Subtask 2.1: Evaluation of Existing Geophysical Triggers and Monitoring Technology - The City of Santa Cruz is no stranger to a changing coastline, and its effective response has transformed it into a national leader in climate adaptation planning; the City has gone on to develop adaptation pathways for its coastline on a local scale. Each beach and bluff segment pathway presents a step-wise sequence of adaptation strategies that will be implemented when triggers (i.e. beach width, cost of flood damage/repairs, coastal access impediment, wave overtopping) reach certain thresholds. Significant work has already been done with CAP @ UCSC and other project partners to develop these pathways, triggers, and thresholds.

However, existing plans need clear specification of triggers and thresholds to monitor, identification of appropriate data for monitoring, and definition of methods to detect threshold

8.9 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 5 exceedance and response. In order to identify when thresholds are exceeded, a coastal monitoring network tailored to local triggers and thresholds is necessary. To fill these gaps in existing adaptation plans and in the existing coastal monitoring network, the City, with CAP @ UCSC and other partners, conducted a review of existing adaptation plans and held a series of meetings with local data collectors and providers. The partners developed an inventory of existing observational data available, linked these data sources to pathway triggers and thresholds, and identified existing resources and gaps for data collection and processing. In this subtask, the City and its partners will revise and refine the current inventory of data sets, triggers and thresholds, integrating Dr. Lester’s findings on legal and policy requirements, and in the following subtask, consider other new technologies and policies in developing an optimal and smart coastal change monitoring system (e.g., Waves N See, Coast Snap). Moreover, Dr.

Lester will assess the adequacy for implementing existing and proposed LCP requirements and addressing identified shoreline monitoring targets and methodologies.

Subtask 2.2: Evaluate Existing and New Community Science Data Collection Sources- The City will evaluate community science options in monitoring coastline geophysical changes, with an eye toward potential coastal interpretation workforce development opportunities post project.

Together with partners, the City explored ways to both monitor and encourage interest and learning about sea-level rise and coastal change. The partnership evaluated and selected CoastSnap (https://www.coastsnap.com/), an open-source, low-cost, and equitable community science monitoring tool as a pilot at two beaches to meet mutual objectives. CoastSnap consists of a network of camera cradles and tools where community users can crowdsource images of coastal features, enabling local governments, researchers, and scientists to monitor coastal change. Each CoastSnap station consists of a cradle for stable photo-based photography and signs for instruction and engagement. Stationary cell phone cradles enable standardized community-sourced observations of coastal changes in beach and bluff environments. Images are collected and analyzed and users can access displays of shoreline change measurements and trends. The use of these tools can improve understanding and managing our dynamic coastline. If funded, the City’s CoastSnap pilot program would be a new community science education, outreach, and engagement effort targeting front-line vulnerable communities that builds on over a decade of cutting-edge coastal climate adaptation work by the City and its partners. The City applied for the Coastal Commission’s Whale Tails Grant Program in September 2021 to fund this pilot program at a minimum of two key priority locations.

The project team will also evaluate other viable community science options in this subtask as well for implementation:
- Integration of apps such as iNaturalist which allows users to observe and report changes in local plant health and density;
- Partnering with local non-profits such as those that conduct volunteer beach clean-ups on a regular basis can provide an opportunity to track changes on the coast by adding particular monitoring questions to the survey. The local non-profit Save Our Shores (SOS) has a marine debris app that can be potentially modified to add coastal checkpoints.

8.10 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 6 - Verizon has multiple cameras programmed to monitor traffic and parking. An initiative between nonprofit Save the Waves and West Cliff Neighbors are interested in positioning new cameras that monitor surf conditions but also may be leveraged for the coastal change monitoring program (e.g., wave height, flooding, cliff erosion). Save the Waves also has a coastal erosion mapping app that could be leveraged. - Modification of the City’s own Community Request for Service Portal (CRSP) where community members can make reports on different issues including graffiti, encampment, sewer spill, etc.;
- Formalizing internal monitoring and workflows by the City and primarily Department of Public Works staff the annual and post-event monitoring conducted in order to ensure relevant data/information is reported back to the Resilient Coast Initiative. Repair needs, frequency, and total costs would be easily tracked over time.

Subtask 2.3: Evaluate Existing and New Statewide & National Geophysical Data Systems - The team will consider other statewide and national geophysical data systems and seek integration of monitoring and data portal systems. The use of statewide and/or national data systems may provide critical information such as offshore wave and swell conditions for nearshore forecasts of waves and swell height and periods, which are critical for understanding how changing oceanographic conditions affect coastal erosion and for alerting City staff to pending threshold exceedence.

For example, the Central and Northern California Ocean Observing System has deployed buoy sensor technology that may be leveraged to forecast wave run up and overtopping. Further, the US Geological Survey currently maintains a camera that is installed on the top of the Dream Inn for live footage and snapshots of the Santa Cruz Municipal Wharf and Cowells Beach every thirty minutes. The City has already determined that more standardized qualitative data from imagery is needed to be coupled with quantitative data on erosion rates and events to better inform planning for sea-level rise. This can also inform future storm waves and erosion modeling. The team will evaluate the benefits of expanding this technology across the coast for monitoring purposes.

Task 2 Deliverables: The City will produce a draft report of recommended existing and potentially new monitoring technology, data sources, community science efforts with geophysical triggers. Report will also include deployment plans and draft sets of partnership agreements. Report will include a translated executive summary for use in Task 3. The City and project team will secure the review of Coastal Commission staff prior to moving to Task 3.

Task 3 - Equitable Community Engagement Focused on Frontline Groups Task Description: The project team will recruit frontline groups for compensated roles to develop and integrate social adaptation triggers using effective communication tools and approaches that are most useful for working with diverse and underrepresented frontline communities, fostering strong community engagement, long-term visioning, and equity. The project team will translate key engagement pieces to support this Task. CSP @ UCSC and OCCP

8.11 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 7 @ UCSB will assist with this work. Completion of Task 3 and its subtasks will enable achievement of project objective 2 of 3.

Subtask 1: Recruit Frontline Community Groups for Co-Development of Social Triggers and Monitoring Strategies- The team will identify the Santa Cruz frontline communities best positioned to collaboratively develop social triggers and monitoring techniques. While designing a living Engagement Plan for the Resilient Coast initiative, the City of Santa Cruz conducted a robust public outreach campaign that resulted in over 1,500 touch points with community members and stakeholders at over 50 meetings. The range of tools utilized were all accessible from the Initiative’s website www.cityofsantacruz.com/ResilientCoast. This outreach program generated important information about community needs and concerns around climate vulnerability and adaptation strategies. The project team will seek to deepen relationships with potential partners from the Resilient Coast initiative including:
- Shared Adventures representing differently abled people; - Amah Mutsun Land Trust who steward unceded land of the Awaswas speaking Uypi Tribe now known as Santa Cruz;
- Fisher people.
- Meals on wheels representing elderly and those differently abled; - Nueva Vista Community Center represents the Beach Flats and Lower Ocean frontline neighborhoods
- London Nelson Teen Center youth
- Santa Cruz Diversity Center
- UCSC resource centers representing LGBTQ+, indigenous and BIPOC - Homeless Garden Project group of people living with homelessness The City and its partners will design a recruitment package, including specific project details, commitment, expectations, timeline and compensation, to utilize when recruiting frontline groups to join the project leadership team. The City will also conduct training of frontline partners on the geophysical triggers as preparatory work. The City, through prior attempts to fund this project, includes a number of letters of support and interest from frontline groups to participate in these roles. Due to the timing and capacity constraints of potential frontline partners during the proposal drafting, we are relying on prior letters to demonstrate support and commitment to the project. We are targeting a minimum of three frontline individuals joining the project team in compensated roles.

Subtask 2: Development of PAR Social Trigger Strategy - The team will work with recruited members from Santa Cruz frontline communities (and the groups they represent) to collaboratively develop a participatory action research (PAR) design that identifies key social triggers and ways to monitor them. PAR invites non-expert stakeholders to participate actively in all aspects of the research process and aims to make practical improvements in people’s lives. Developing a PAR approach will ensure the City’s coastal adaptation pathways are coproduced by experts and members of its most vulnerable communities and generate shared solutions that are truly collaborative and adaptive.

8.12 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 8 The team will identify and assess which social triggers should be monitored as part of the City’s adaptation pathways approach, and how they can be integrated with the aforementioned geophysical triggers to help the City make informed and equitable decisions that enhance the resilience of its frontline communities. Early work completed by the City and its partners included preliminary social triggers for consideration, among others not yet identified:
- Percentage of families and businesses near localized vulnerable areas like West Cliff Drive sea caves, cliffs, and flooding areas, who invest a certain percentage of their income and revenue towards flood repair.
- Devaluation of properties as the risk of flooding and erosion increases, increasing residents’' concerns for their homes and sources of livelihood. Issues regarding reselling coastal properties (i.e. businesses and houses) should also be considered. - Changes in Santa Cruz County population density due to voluntary or preventive redistribution.
- A decrease in beach width and increase in wave height in popular beaches for visitors and residents will result in an increased risk of water accidents and drowning. Triggers for this social threshold could include an increased number of drownings per year, an increased number of lifeguard rescue activities, and an annual decrease of swimmers in the areas.
- Public access to facilities (e.g., parking, bathrooms, showers, wheelchair ramps) Task 3 Deliverables: The project team will develop and deliver a recruitment package. Via a PAR approach, the project team will (a) refine the geophysical triggers report based on Coastal Commission and frontline group feedback, and (b) co-create a draft set of social triggers with frontline group partners, moving beyond traditional power dynamics that often shape climate policy. The draft plan of social triggers and monitoring techniques to be considered for integration into the LCP, and will be reviewed by a broader set of community stakeholders via a public meeting (drawing on the City’s extensive coastal resilience contact list) and the Coastal Commission staff prior to moving onto Task 4.

Task 4 - Finalize/Integrate Triggers with City’s LCP Policy & Implementation Framework Task Description: The City will utilize trigger development and feedback solicited in Tasks 2 and 3 to finalize the geophysical and social triggers and thresholds project for integration into a targeted LCP Amendment. City staff will conduct a public process to adopt a targeted LCP amendment. Completion of Task 4 and its subtasks will enable achievement of project objective 3 of 3.

Subtask 1: LCP Policy assessment. The City’s Advanced Planning Division will lead the LCP policy assessment tasks with assistance from the community organizations, residents, and the scientific and university community. The team will evaluate how monitoring triggers, methods, and programs should be designed to optimize LCP implementation, consistent with the recent LCP amendment (in progress) and the CA Coastal Act. Using the scientific assessments and community engagement results, the team will seek to integrate policy and implementation concerns relative to the City’s LCP requirements and effective implementation of the coastal

8.13 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 9 adaptation pathways identified in relevant coastal hazard planning and LCP documents. This step will seek to closely marry the attributes and methods of the monitoring program with the discrete policy requirements of the LCP.

Subtask 2: Targeted LCP Amendment Development and Adoption. Dr. Lester will support city and state regulatory engagement and develop LCP policy recommendations potentially including land use plan monitoring, monitoring ordinances and implementation mechanisms and practices. The City’s Advanced Planning Division will lead the LCP policy development including California Coastal Commission review of administrative draft, public hearings with relevant commissions and City Council on the public review draft, and submission of a draft LCP amendment to California Coastal Commission for review and approval.

Task 4 Deliverables: The City and Coastal Commission will meet at least once during Task 4 Subtask 1 to ensure consistency in approach of mindful integration of developed geophysical and social triggers and monitoring strategies in the City’s LCP update development. The City will subsequently produce an administrative draft LCP amendment for Coastal Commission staff review with coastal resilience monitoring program, a public draft LCP amendment for commission and City Council consideration and a draft LCP amendment submitted to California Coastal Commission for approval.

SCHEDULE
Task 1. Project Management July 1, 2022 – December 15, 2024 Outcome/Deliverables:
a. Quarterly Grant Reports…
b. Quarterly CCC Coordination
Meetings
a. Oct 15, 2022; Jan 15, 2023; Apr 15,
2023; July 15, 2023; Oct 15, 2023;
Jan 15, 2024; Apr 15, 2024; July 15,
2024
b. Oct 15, 2022; Jan 15, 2023; Apr 15,
2023; July 15, 2023; Oct 15, 2023;
Jan 15, 2024; Apr 15, 2024; July 15,
2024; Oct 15, 2024
Task 2. Assessment of Coastal Change
Monitoring Systems August 1, 2022- June 1, 2023

2.1 Evaluation of Existing Geophysical
Triggers and Monitoring Technology August 1, 2022 – December 1, 2022

2.2 Evaluate Existing and New
Community Science Data Collection
Sources
Sept 15, 2022 – January 15, 2023

2.3 Evaluate Existing and New
Statewide & National Geophysical Data
Systems
Nov 1, 2022 – March 1, 2023
Outcome/Deliverables
a. Draft Geophysical Triggers
recommendation report with
a. June 1, 2023 (CCC review between
June 1 and Sept 1, 2023)

8.14 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 10 deployment plan and draft
partnership agreements for CCC
review
Task 3. Equitable Community
Engagement Focused on Frontline
Groups (overlaps in timing with T2)
September 1, 2022 - October 1, 2023

3.1 Recruit Frontline Community
Groups for Co-Development of Social
Triggers and Monitoring Strategies
Sept 1, 2022 – March 1, 2023

3.2 Development of PAR Social Trigger
Strategy March 1, 2023 – July 1, 2023
Outcome/Deliverables
a. Frontline Group Recruitment
package
b. Frontline Group Training
c. Finalized geophysical triggers
recommendation report
d. Draft set of social triggers for
CCC review
e. Public engagement / meeting
a. October 15, 2022
b. March 15, 2023
c. September 1, 2023
d. September 1, 2023
e. October 1, 2023
Task 4 - Finalize and Integrate Triggers
with City’s LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
October 15, 2023 – December 15, 2024

4.1 LCP Policy assessment October 15, 2023 – February 15, 2024

4.2 Targeted LCP Amendment
Development and Adoption. February 15, 2024 – December 15, 2024 Outcome/Deliverables
a. Approach Consistency Meeting
with CCC during Subtask 4.1
b. Administrative draft LCP
Amendment for CCC review
during Subtask 4.2
c. Public draft LCP Amendment for
commissions and City Council
adoption
d. Public draft LCP Amendment
submitted to CCC for approval
a. January 15, 2024
b. April 1, 2024
c. August 1, 2024
d. December 15, 2024

8.15 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 11

BENCHMARK SCHEDULE

ACTIVITY COMPLETION DATE
Recruitment of compensated frontline community
group representatives to project team March 1, 2023
Draft Geophysical Triggers recommendation report
with deployment plan and draft partnership
agreements reviewed by CCC
September 1, 2023
Draft set of social triggers reviewed by CCC December 1, 2023 City team + CCC targeted LCP Amendment
recommendations consistency meeting January 15, 2024
Administrative draft LCP Amendment reviewed by
CCC August 1, 2024
LCP Amendment adopted by City Council and
submitted to CCC for approval December 31, 2024

8.16 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 12 BUDGET
Funding Request: $180,100 Total Project Cost: $227,100
City of Santa Cruz, CA CCC Grant Total Match/Other
Funds
Total (LCP Grant
Funds + Match/
Other Funds)
LABOR COSTS1
County/City Staff Labor
Task 1 – Project Management 14,000 6,000 20,000
Task 2 – Assessment of
Coastal Change Monitoring
Systems
4,000 4,000 8,000
Task 3 – Equitable
Community Engagement
Focused on Frontline Groups
9,000 9,000 18,000
Task 4 - Finalize and
Integrate Triggers with City’s
LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
4,000 18,000 22,000
Total Labor Costs 31,000 37,000 68,000

DIRECT COSTS
County/City Staff Project Supplies
Miscellaneous Meeting
Supplies (live and virtual
tools)
3,000 3,000
Virtual and Print ads 1,200 1,200
Total 4,200 4,200
County/City Staff Travel In State2
Mileage 400 400
Hotel, etc. 2,000 2,000
Total 2,400 2,400
Consultants3/Partners
Ocean and Coastal Policy
Center at UC Santa Barbara
(OCPC), Dr. Charles Lester

1 Amount requested should include total for salary and benefits. 2 Travel reimbursement rates are the same as similarly situated state employees. 3 All consultants must be selected pursuant to a bidding and procurement process that complies with all applicable laws.

8.17 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 13 City of Santa Cruz, CA CCC Grant Total Match/Other
Funds
Total (LCP Grant
Funds + Match/
Other Funds)
Task 1 – Project Management 0 0
Task 2 – Assessment of
Coastal Change Monitoring
Systems
20,000 20,000
Task 3 – Equitable
Community Engagement
Focused on Frontline Groups
20,000 20,000
Task 4 - Finalize and
Integrate Triggers with City’s
LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
65,500 65,500
Consultant Subtotal 105,500 105,500
Frontline Community
Advisors (TBD)
Compensation
Task 1 – Project Management 0 0
Task 2 – Assessment of
Coastal Change Monitoring
Systems
4,500 4,500
Task 3 – Equitable
Community Engagement
Focused on Frontline Groups
12,000 12,00
Task 4 - Finalize and
Integrate Triggers with City’s
LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
4,500 4,500
Consultant Subtotal 21,000 21,000
Translation (TBD)
Task 1 – Project Management
Task 2 – Assessment of
Coastal Change Monitoring
Systems
4,000 4,000
Task 3 – Equitable
Community Engagement
Focused on Frontline Groups
6,000 6,000
Task 4 - Finalize and
Integrate Triggers with City’s
LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
2,000 2,000
Consultant Subtotal 12,000 12,000

8.18 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 14 City of Santa Cruz, CA CCC Grant Total Match/Other
Funds
Total (LCP Grant
Funds + Match/
Other Funds)
Designer (TBD)
Task 1 – Project Management
Task 2 – Assessment of
Coastal Change Monitoring
Systems
Task 3 – Equitable
Community Engagement
Focused on Frontline Groups
3,000 3,000
Task 4 - Finalize and
Integrate Triggers with City’s
LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
1,000 1,000
Consultant Subtotal 4,000 4,000
USGS, CA State Parks, UCSC
Coastal Science & Policy
Grad Program
Time committed
to program
development
Task 1 – Project Management
Task 2 – Assessment of
Coastal Change Monitoring
Systems
3,000 3,000
Task 3 – Equitable
Community Engagement
Focused on Frontline Groups
5,000 5,000
Task 4 - Finalize and
Integrate Triggers with City’s
LCP Policy and
Implementation Framework
2,000 2,000
Consultant Subtotal 10,000 10,000
Consultants Total 142,500 10,000 152,500
Total Direct Costs 149,100 10,000 159,100
OVERHEAD/INDIRECT COSTS4
Total County/City Staff
Overhead/Indirect Costs
TOTAL PROJECT COST $180,100 $47,000 $227,100

4 Indirect costs include, for example, a pro rata share of rent, utilities, and salaries for certain positions indirectly supporting the proposed project but not directly staffing it. Amount requested for indirect costs should be capped at 10% of amount requested for “Total Labor.”

8.19 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 15

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
● Resilient Coast Santa Cruz Monitoring Network Preliminary Recommendations – completed by CSP @ UCSC and City depicting recommendations by beach or bluff segment
● Westcliff Drive Adaptation and Management Plan – adopted in April 2021 by City Council
● Resilient Coast - LCP Public Engagement Synthesis - This document outlines the strategy results of relevant public engagement work recently conducted that highlight the concerns and needs of under-represented communities in Santa Cruz.

MAPS
3 BEACHES AND 4 SEGMENTS OF WEST CLIFF DRIVE INCLUDED IN PROPOSAL SCOPE

8.20 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 16

EXAMPLE SEA LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY MAPPING FOR MAIN BEACH (COMPLETE FOR ALL

BEACHES AND WEST CLIFF DRIVE SEGMENTS WITHIN PROPOSED PROJECT SCOPE) BEACH FLATS/LOWER OCEAN FRONTLINE NEIGHBORHOODS – FOCUS OF ENGAGEMENT

8.21 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 17

EXAMPLE ADAPTATION PATHWAY APPROACH FOR MAIN BEACH (COMPLETE FOR ALL

BEACHES AND WEST CLIFF DRIVE SEGMENTS WITHIN PROPOSED PROJECT SCOPE)

LETTERS OF SUPPORT
Note that letters of support are from a prior unsuccessful grant proposal to the National Science Foundation to fund this work. Due to the timing of the grant proposal due date around the holidays and limited capacity of our partners, we are submitting these letters to demonstrate commitment to this project.

8.22 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 18

8.23 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 19

8.24 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 20

8.25 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 21

8.26 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 22

8.27 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 23

8.28 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 24

8.29 Santa Cruz Coastal Adaptation Monitoring Program Development 25 RESOLUTION FROM APPLICANT’S GOVERNING BODY
 Signed LCP Grant Application Form (.pdf)
 Project Proposal (.doc): Project Description, Task Descriptions, Schedule, Budget, and Supplemental Information
 Signed Resolution (.pdf)  forthcoming to be adopted at January 25, 2022 City Council meeting
 All documents combined into a single PDF file (.pdf)

8.30 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/02/2022
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: City Council
SUBJECT: Appointment of Representatives to External Agencies, Groups, Council Committees and Task Forces (CN)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to appoint representatives to external agencies, groups, City Council committees and task forces for the 2022 calendar year.

BACKGROUND: Each year, the Mayor presents a list of proposed appointments to represent the City of Santa Cruz (City) on a variety of boards, committees and groups both internally and externally. The nominations are presented for City Council review and official appointment.

DISCUSSION: Council will review and approve Mayor Brunner’s nominations as presented in the 2022 Council Membership List attachment.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared By:

Bonnie Bush
City Clerk
Submitted By:

Sonja Brunner
Mayor
ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2022 COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP LIST.DOCX

9.1 Council Membership in City Groups and Outside Agencies (2022) DRAFT UNTIL APPROVED BY COUNCIL Councilmembers may provide direction, request additional information or that a topic raised be agendized for future Council action. The Presiding Officer may request oral updates from Council Ad Hoc Committees.

City Council Standing Committees Councilmember

Assigned Staff
Community Programs Watkins, Brown, Kalantari-Johnson Tiffany Wise-West Public Safety Watkins, Golder, Cummings Sara De Leon
City Council Ad Hoc Committees Councilmember Assigned Staff Council Ad Hoc Revenue Committee Cummings, Watkins, Brunner Laura Schmidt Oversized Vehicles Ordinance Ad Hoc Committee Golder, Kalantari-Johnson, Brunner Brian Borguno Charter Amendment Committee Meyers, Golder, Watkins Casey Hemard Health in All Policies Committee Brunner, Kalantari-Johnson, Watkins Tiffany Wise-West External Governmental Agencies/ Intergovernmental
Coordinating Committees Councilmember Assigned Staff
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
(AMBAG)
Cummings, Brown (alternate) Lee Butler
City–Santa Cruz City Schools Committee Watkins, Golder, Kalantari-Johnson Tony Elliot City Select Committee Brunner Rosemary Menard
Library Financing Authority Brunner, Watkins (alternate) Rosemary Menard Homelessness 2x2 Committee Watkins, Brunner Lee Butler
Monterey Bay Air Resources District (City Nominee) Brown Tiffany Wise-West Central Coast Community Energy Policy Board
Central Coast Community Energy Operations Board
Transportation, Communication & Public Works
Policy Committee (Monterey Bay
Division)
Meyers, Brunner (alternate)
Mark Dettle, Tiffany Wise-West (alternate)
Mark Dettle
Santa Cruz County Integrated Waste Management Local
Task Force
Golder, Cummings (alternate)
Bob Nelson, Leslie
O’Malley (staff
alternate)
Santa Cruz County Consolidated Redevelopment
Successor Agency Oversight Board
Meyers Bonnie Lipscomb
Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Board (METRO) Meyers, Kalantari-Johnson Claire Gallogly Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation
Commission (RTC)
Brown, Golder (alternate) Nathan Nguyen
Claire Gallogly
(alternate)
Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Agency Councilmember Meyers, Water Commissioner David Baskin, Water Commissioner Doug Engfer (alternate)
Rosemary Menard

9.2 External Governmental Agencies/ Intergovernmental
Coordinating Committees Councilmember Assigned Staff
Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency Water Commissioner Doug Engfer, Former Water Commissioner David Baskin (citizen alternate)
Rosemary Menard
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
(Santa Cruz holds the City Seat through May 2022)
Cummings Rosemary Menard
Joint Powers Authorities/City Groups Staff Appointments Agency Contact Information Santa Cruz County Animal Services
Authority
Laura Schmidt, Bernie Escalante Santa Cruz County Animal Services Authority 2200 7th Avenue
Santa Cruz, CA 95062
https://www.scanimalshelter.org/
Santa Cruz Public Libraries Rosemary Menard Santa Cruz Public Libraries 117 Union Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
https://www.santacruzpl.org/
Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 Laura Schmidt Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 495 Upper Park Rd.

Santa Cruz, CA 95065
(831) 471-1000
External Community Organizations Councilmember/Staff Agency Contact Information Area Agency on Aging (AAA) Advisory
Council
Brown, Brunner (Council alternate), Rita
Hester (citizen alternate)
Seniors Council, Clay Kempf
234 Santa Cruz Ave.

Aptos, CA 95003
Phone: (831) 688-0400
Climate Action Task Force Cummings, Dr. Tiffany Wise-West (staff) Dr. Tiffany Wise-West [email protected]
Cowell Working Group Meyers, Tony Elliot (staff) CWG Facilitated by Save the Waves Criminal Justice Council Cummings, Kalantari-Johnson (alternate), Bernie Escalante
Criminal Justice Council of Santa Cruz County
[email protected]
Downtown Management Corporation Meyers, Cummings, Bonnie Lipscomb (staff) Downtown Management Corporation [email protected]
337 Locust Street,
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Santa Cruz County Youth Action Network
Kalantari-Johnson
[email protected]
United Way of Santa Cruz County
4450 Capitola Rd, Ste 106
Capitola, CA 95010
Santa Cruz Community Farmers’ Market Watkins, Brunner (alternate) Bonnie Lipscomb (staff)
Mr. Nesh Dillon Executive Director SCCFM
P.O. Box 8189
Santa Cruz, CA 95061
Visit Santa Cruz County Watkins, Brunner, Bonnie Lipscomb (staff) Visit Santa Cruz County 303 Water Street, Suite 100
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
800-833-3494 or 831-425-1234
Community Action Board (CAB) Kalantari-Johnson, Eve Bertram, UCSC Professor (alternate)
Community Action Board of Santa Cruz
County, Inc.
406 Main St. STE 207
Watsonville, CA 95076
831-763-2147

9.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/13/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: Liability Claims Filed Against City of Santa Cruz (FN) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to reject the liability claims of a) Destiney Mckayla Rodgers and b) Susan O’Hara based on staff recommendation.

BACKGROUND: None.

DISCUSSION: Claims to be rejected:
a. Claimant: Destiney Mckayla Rodgers
Date of occurrence: 6/27/2021
Date of claim: 11/19/2021
Amount of claim: $25,000+
Claimant seeks compensation for damages allegedly caused by unsafe road conditions.

Represented by legal counsel
b. Claimant: Susan O’Hara
Date of occurrence: August 2019-September 2021
Date of claim: 11/23/2021
Amount of claim: $1,200,000
Claimant seeks compensation for damages allegedly caused by a poor work environment.

Represented by legal counsel
FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact.

Prepared By:

Ross Brandon
Risk and Safety Manager
Submitted By:

Bobby Magee
Interim Finance Director
Approved By:

Rosemary Menard
Interim City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

None.

10.1 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 01/06/2022
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: Lease with Redtree Partners for space at 1200 Pacific Avenue for occupancy by the City’s Finance Department (FN)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
• Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2022 budget to increase appropriation for a new building lease for relocation of the Finance Department.
• Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a Lease Agreement with Redtree Partners, and any amendments thereto of a non-substantive nature, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, for premises located at 1200 Pacific Avenue to serve as office space for the Finance Department.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, as part of a general evaluation and reorganization of City space, the Finance Department (Department) moved from City Hall into space rented from Ecology Action at 877 Cedar Street. It was anticipated that the move would be interim until a remodeling process at City Hall allowed the Department to move back in. However, given additional space needs for City staff, it was not feasible for the Department to do so, and the occupancy of the Cedar Street premises continued.

In November 2019 Ecology Action provided the Department a Notice to Vacate by March 1, 2020. A search of available space in the vicinity of downtown Santa Cruz was conducted and it was determined that the Department would temporarily move into the City-owned building at 333 Front Street (the “NIAC” building), which had been purchased with housing funds in 2017.

The property is planned for affordable housing as part of the redevelopment of the METRO Pacific Station site, and Economic Development oversees the property as part of its opportunity site portfolio. The Pacific Station South Project is expected to break ground in early 2023.

Extensive construction next to the NIAC building is already underway, and the NIAC building is current scheduled to be demolished sometime in late 2022 or early 2023 to make way for the new development. As such, the Finance Department will again be required to relocate.

DISCUSSION: Over the past several weeks, a search of available space has been undertaken, using the following parameters: near City Hall, a minimum of approximately 5,000 square feet in one office space or immediately adjacent spaces, offices for some staff, conference room(s), early availability, and financial feasibility. While these parameters are key considerations, equally important is the proximity to City Hall, the ability to occupy the space within a short

11.1 period of time, and the ability to integrate the City’s information technology (IT) infrastructure into the building.

Nine potential space configurations which could accommodate the City’s needs, in five different buildings in the downtown area, were evaluated based on the above considerations. The spaces at both 1101 Pacific Avenue (University Town Center) and 1115-1119 Pacific Avenue (the Logos Bookstore building) were large enough, but would involve extensive buildout costs, and would likely require nearly a full year to complete. The Leonard Building located at 113 Cooper St. was another location that was considered but the space was broken into office and mezzanine and the office space was too small to accommodate the entire Department. The property at 720 Front Street (formerly occupied by Santa Cruz County Bank), a stand-alone building located at Front and Cooper Streets which has been recently remodeled, met most of the required criteria.

However, the requested rent was based on retail use and was thus significantly over market rate for office space. Three separate space configurations at 1200 Pacific Avenue had adequate space but only one of the layout options – combining Suites 270 and 290 – was configured for the maximum operational efficiency.

A team of City staff from Economic Development, Finance, Information Technology, and the City Manager’s Office evaluated the merits of each available space against the City’s needs.

After review and site visits, the team agreed that combining Suites 270 and 290 at 1200 Pacific is the best fit for the Department and is the recommended location. The site is the closest available space to City Hall, requires minimal buildout, which the owner will implement, and includes all characteristics of a modern and efficient office. It meets the needs for staff offices and conference rooms, and the rent is within market rates. Occupancy will not be feasible until IT infrastructure and security measures are completed, furniture and cubicle structures have been installed, and some renovation of the existing area is completed. This is a process that is expected to take at least three months. The lease will not require rent payment to begin until after the improvements have been made and the space is ready for occupancy. In addition to rent, NNN (triple net lease) expenses (shared building costs) of $0.66 per square foot per month will be paid. Costs for the space will be less than the NNN’s for the currently leased larger NIAC building.

Key Lease Terms:
• Size: 5,131 square feet
• Rent: $1.55 per square foot, Monthly Expense of $7.953; Annual Expense of $95,437. • Term: Seven years, with an option held by the City to extend an additional two years at the City’s sole discretion.

FISCAL IMPACT: The Finance Department is currently paying monthly rent (excluding NNN costs) of $19,398 at the NIAC building, for an annual cost of $232,777. Rent at 1200 Pacific Avenue, which is a smaller space but still adequate for the Department’s needs, will be $7,953 per month for a total of $95,437 per year, resulting in an annual savings to the General Fund of approximately $137,340.

Prepared By:

Bobby Magee
Interim Finance Director
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

11.2 City of Santa Cruz

BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
3XUSRVH

ACCOUNT REVENUE EDEN ACCOUNT TITLE

TOTALREVENUE

ACCOUNT EXPENDITURE EDENACCOUNT TITLE

TOTAL EXPENDITURE
NET: $

REQUESTED BY

DEPARTMENT HEAD

APPROVAL

BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('

FINANCE DIRECTOR

APPROVAL

CITYMANAGER

APPROVAL
&0)18VH2QO\

5HVR

%$5HI

352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
)LVFDO<HDU

'DWH

&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
Clear Form
2022
01/03/2022
Increase appropriation for the new building lease for relocation of the Finance Department. 0 101-14-11-1241-52261 Equipment, building and land rentals 95,437 95,437
-95,437
Lupita
Alamos
Digitally signed by Lupita Alamos
DN: cn=Lupita Alamos, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected]
om, c=US
Date: 2022.01.03 16:41:32 -08'00'
Bobby
Magee
Digitally signed by Bobby Magee
DN: cn=Bobby Magee, o=City of Santa Cruz,
ou=Finance, [email protected],
c=US
Date: 2022.01.04 06:16:51 -08'00'
Bobby
Magee
Digitally signed by Bobby Magee
DN: cn=Bobby Magee, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2022.01.04 06:17:07 -08'00'

11.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/14/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Library
SUBJECT: Accept Library Naming Rights Gift Agreements for the Branciforte and Garfield Park Branch Libraries (LB)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the Library Naming Rights Gift Agreements for the Branciforte and Garfield Park Branch Libraries.

BACKGROUND: Recognizing the serious civic challenge of an aging system, county voters in 2016 passed Measure S, a major bond measure to fund critical repairs and upgrades “to support a steady increase in library usage and bring all 10 branches up to 21st century standards.” While this made it possible to begin work on important vision-inspired upgrades, including facility repairs, renovations, and replacements, it did not fully cover the cost of certain essential branch amenities, services, and resources.

Separate capital campaigns for two branches, Capitola and Felton, complemented Measure S funding to help underwrite and complete celebrated new branch facilities. At four other branches, Boulder Creek, La Selva Beach, Live Oak, and Scotts Valley, major renovations are now underway or completed, funded by Measure S together with additional, charitable support.

Now, Measure S-funded major renovations and capital improvements are beginning at three branches—Aptos, Branciforte, and Garfield Park—that will transform these facilities. But important elements of these renovations that their communities seek are beyond the scope of Measure S. Additional funding is therefore required to close the gap between Measure S and community aspirations—to realize the full promise of excellence in library capabilities and character that these communities envision.

DISCUSSION: The Friends of the Santa Cruz Library have fundraised to enhance the Measure S library building projects. Donors who have gifted funds for particular building projects will in exchange receive naming rights within the facility listed below.

Branciforte
$10,000 for the reading nook “Engfer Family Reading Nook- Read, Rest Breathe”, in the Branciforte Branch Library.
$20,000 for the homework study room as the “New Leaf Community Markets”, Branciforte Branch Library.

12.1 Garfield Park
$50,000 for the adult area “In Honor of Carolyn Miller”, in the Garfield Park Branch Library. $20,000 for the fireplace area “In Honor of Mike Rotkin”, in the Garfield Park Branch Library.

These naming rights will remain in place for the normal life of the Branciforte and Garfield Park Library Branch buildings, or twenty (20) years, whichever is less, and are subject to the JPA (Joint Powers Authority) Board Policy #403, adopted in March 2017.

FISCAL IMPACT: The amount fundraised for these two branches, totaling $100,000, are earmarked for the Garfield Park and Branciforte Branch Libraries as outlined above. The monies will be used to enhance the Measure S funded projects and will be managed by the Library in consultation with the City of Santa Cruz.

Prepared By:

Kira Henifin
Principal Management
Analyst
Submitted By:

Eric Howard
Interim Director of Libraries
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. LIBRARY NAMING POLICY #403.DOCX

2. VARIOUS GIFT AGREEMENTS.PDF

12.2 1
Library Naming Policy JPAB Policy # 403
Adopted: 3/2/2017
Revised: xx/xx/xxxx
Five-year Review Schedule: 2022

1. Purpose
This policy establishes the authority and process for philanthropic naming or re-naming of Santa Cruz Public Libraries interior and exterior spaces and features, major programs, and collections associated with specific branches. Philanthropic naming opportunities provide the Library with funds to meet strategic objectives.

2. Library Names
The Santa Cruz Public Libraries (the Library) name each branch according to their geographic location in the county, in order to identify each branch with either the neighborhood where it is located or the neighborhood that it primarily serves. This practice allows library users to easily determine the general location of a library facility they want to visit. Member jurisdictions may determine it appropriate to allow the Library building to be included in a naming policy.

3. Naming Criteria
Santa Cruz Public Libraries interior and exterior spaces and features, major programs, and a collection associated with a specific branch may be named in honor of an individual, family, or entity. Naming or re-naming rights is the purview of the local jurisdictions (City of Capitola, City of Scotts Valley, City of Santa Cruz, and County of Santa Cruz) subject to review by the Library Joint Powers Authority Board (JPAB) consistent with this policy.

Naming opportunity is provided only to those that exemplify the attributes of integrity, civic leadership, and deep commitment to the Library and community, specifically where:
a) the proposed honoree reflects the spirit, values, and mission of the Library in support of free and equal access to information for all.
b) an individual has provided extraordinary service and support to the Library system. c) an individual donor has made a significant monetary contribution to the Library. d) an entity’s financial sponsorship has allowed the Library to significantly advance the provision of programs, services, or collections.

4. Naming Process
Each jurisdiction shall develop, propose, and maintain a list of Naming Opportunities.

The JPAB shall review each jurisdiction’s naming plan to ensure that residents have a unified library experience as they visit branches across jurisdictions, and that the plan is consistent with this policy.

12.3 2
The JPAB shall review each jurisdiction’s naming policy to ensure the plan:
a) is appropriately consistent with other approved naming plans. b) does not overly commercialize the library space.
c) includes clear time limits outlined below.
d) reserves the right to reject any naming proposal or donation from any individual, family, or entity.

Naming rights shall not extend beyond the normal life of any interior or exterior space or feature, major program, or collection associated with a specific branch, or twenty (20) years, whichever is less. In the event that a named Library interior or exterior space or feature, major program, or collection is significantly altered within (a) 75% of the expected lifespan, or (b) a timeframe agreed upon in the naming rights contract, the JPA jurisdiction will carry the name forward in a similar capacity. A jurisdiction’s naming plan may include longer timelines for significant donations, subject to approval by the JPAB.

Naming rights contracts shall be reviewed and approved by the appropriate JPA jurisdiction and reported to the JPAB.

5. Naming Revocation
Any naming opportunity authorized by a JPAB jurisdiction can be revoked only by a vote of that body.

If an individual, family, or entity for whom a naming commitment has been made violates the standards defined in section three (3. Naming Criteria) of this policy, the JPAB may recommend the removal of the individual, family, or entity’s name from the naming opportunity, interior or exterior space or feature, major program, or collection associated with a specific branch.

Before taking such action, the JPAB jurisdiction shall undertake due diligence, including consultation with counsel, as to any legal ramifications that the jurisdiction may expect under any pre-existing agreement(s) related to naming opportunities or in regard to any other matter that may have legal bearing upon a proposed change in name.

Where unforeseen circumstances make it impossible for a donor to complete a monetary donation commitment after associated name placement has occurred, the JPAB shall make reasonable efforts to work with the donor to create a plan for completion of the commitment. However, in certain circumstances it may be necessary and in the best interests of the Library to remove the donor’s name choice from the naming opportunity.

12.4 12.5

12.6 12.7

12.8 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Roo Ra <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 4:18 PM
To: City Council; Sandy Brown; Justin Cummings; Martine Watkins; Shebreh KalantariJohnson; Sonja Brunner; Renee Golder; Donna Meyers Subject: 1/11/22 Consent Item 12
In the advent of the Internet, the prime directive of the local library changed from informational research to community programs that primarily target children and teens. With this in mind... and that long-standing, papier-mâché, life-sized (baby) dragon at the Garfeld Branch...

Deconstructing the $100,000 total in "naming right" purchases for... 2 decades (?!):
 $41.67/mo for the "The Engfer Family Reading Nook – Read, Rest, Breathe" at the Branciforte Branch  $83.33/mo for the "The Mike Rotkin Fireplace", "represented by Carol Fuller" at the Garfield Branch (ditto for "The New Leaf Community Markets' Homework Study Room" at the Branciforte Branch – visualize those paper tokens dropping into the box labeled "Friends of the Santa Cruz Public Libraries")
 $208.33/mo for the "In Honor of Carolyn Miller" (Martha Dexter's mother and UCSC librarian 30 years ago) in the adult area at the Garfield Branch

Just about (or far less) than the typical monthly Comcast cable bill, depending on assets.

Why not the "Joby Aviation Fireplace" or the "Amazon Reading Nook"? No doubt, these selections were influenced by the Rotkin, Fuller and Dexter repeated public support for moving the Downtown Branch to Lot 4. ["extraordinary service" per "Naming Criteria" in the Library Naming Policy aka JPAB Policy #403, adopted 3/2/17]
Can this community not find 417 people to donate $1.00/mo for 20 years to prevent this? P.S.

No objection to selling the name-carving of bricks that patrons walk across as they enter the library.

12.9 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/22/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Purchase of Six Gallon Food Scrap Containers (PW) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to award a contract for the purchase of six gallon food scrap containers from Ecovision Environmental (Ontario, Canada) in the amount $225,000 from the Refuse Fund.

BACKGROUND: In September of 2016, Governor Brown signed into law State Senate Bill No. 1383 (“SB 1383”). SB 1383 establishes statewide targets to reduce the amount of organic waste disposed of in landfills as well as goals in recovering edible food before such food is disposed of in landfills. The California Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery (“CalRecycle”) finalized the regulations to achieve the goals of SB 1383 in November of 2020.

One of the most significant requirements in this regulation is to provide food scrap collection to all residents.

DISCUSSION: Over the last year the Public Works Resource Recovery Division conducted several pilot food scrap collection and drop off projects assessing the best method of providing this service citywide. In order to fully utilize the new food scrap processing equipment at the Dimeo facility, it was determined that a separated collection system would minimize contamination of the material and provide a clean feedstock for co-digestion and energy utilization at the City of Santa Cruz’s (City) Wastewater Treatment Facility. In order to reduce the potential of customer contamination from too large of a collection container, a six gallon locking container was selected. This size container is optimal in terms of weekly capacity, ease of collection at the curb, locking ability to keep out animals and the small size allows placement at the curb without interfering with the other three collection carts. Purchasing these containers will allow staff to distribute and begin weekly residential food scrap collection starting this spring 2022, in accordance with State regulations.

Staff has only been able to identify one manufacturer for a container this size. It meets the requirements of durability, easy to use locking mechanism, and projected delivery date. Since this is a one of a kind purchase of food scrap containers, Section 3.08.150 of the Purchasing Ordinance allows the Purchasing Manager to award a contract without competition when there is only one source for the required item/service. Staff requests that City Council authorize the purchase of these food scrap containers to Ecovision Environmental of Ontario, Canada in the amount of $225,000.

13.1 FISCAL IMPACT: The full purchase price of these food scrap containers, including sales tax, is $225,000. This purchase is for 22,400 containers at approximately $10.00 each. This amount is currently budgeted in the FY 2022 Refuse Fund budget. These funds are only available for use in Refuse Fund activities and cannot be used for General Fund activities, therefore, there is no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Bob Nelson
Resource Recovery
Operations Manager
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

None.

13.2 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Ron Pomerantz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 10:58 AM
To: City Council
Subject: Agenda item #13: Purchase of Six-Gallon Food Scrap Containers (PW) Re.

Good morning Mayor and Council members.

I write you regarding Consent Item #13: Purchase of Six-Gallon Food Scrap Containers (PW). Collection of organic waste has been many many years in the making and I fully support this program but we must get it right. Rather than reinventing the wheel, did Public Works investigate what other jurisdictions are doing to collect organic waste? Could we merge our order with other statewide collection services for a better price? A major concern for me is the type of plastic used in the 6-gallon containers you are being asked to approve? Is this a virgin petroleum product? I looked on-line and couldn’t get an answer. We should definitely not contribute to the use of climate change petroleum as our Climate Action Plan requires. Ecovision sells products that use compostable bags which not only eliminate the use of petroleum-based plastics but the burden and nuisance of cleaning the 6-gallon plastic boxes is eliminated. This will help encourage our residents to participate in the upcoming important food scrap collection system.

Please do not approve this $1/4 million purchase without further investigation. Please have the Transportation and Public Works Commission review this item before your approval.

Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.

Ron Pomerantz
Ps. Having slogged through a recent Board of Supervisors on-line agenda, I more fully appreciate the clarity and ease of navigating the City's on-line agenda.

13.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/22/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Trevethan Avenue Storm/Sewer Project – Phase I (c401307, c401810) – Authorization to Advertise and Award (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the plans and specifications for the Trevethan Avenue Storm/Sewer Project – Phase I (c401307, c401810), authorize staff to advertise for bids, and award the contract. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute the contract in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Director of Public Works is authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.

BACKGROUND: Trevethan Avenue is lacking storm drain infrastructure from Soquel Avenue to Highway 1 and frequently floods. Currently, 46 acres of rainfall runoff drain along Trevethan Avenue to catch basins on Soquel Avenue. In addition, the existing 6-inch diameter sanitary sewer has deteriorated. The sewer pipe has reached the end of its service life and needs to be replaced.

DISCUSSION: The Trevethan Ave Storm/Sewer Project will include the installation of a new 30-inch diameter storm drain pipe, new 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer, and replacing cracked pavement at the intersection of Trevethan and Melrose. New storm drain infrastructure will be installed from Soquel Ave up to Melrose Ave and the sewer pipe will be replaced up to East Gate Avenue. Numerous public requests have been received requesting that storm drain infrastructure to be installed. The improvement will reduce flooding, provide more capacity for the sewer system, and improve existing street conditions. Plans and specifications can be found online at www.cityofsantacruz.com/publicworkprojects.

FISCAL IMPACT: The project is estimated to cost $700,000 and is funded in two FY 2022 Capital Investment Program (CIP) projects (c401307 - Trevethan Storm Drain Project, c401810 - Trevethan Avenue Sewer). There is no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Cina Seyedkazemi
Engineering Technician
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. LOCATION MAP.PDF

14.1 Location Map
Trevethan Ave Storm/Sewer Project - Phase I
December 9, 2021
N

PROJECT AREA
Prepared By: Cina Seyedkazemi

14.2 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/22/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Carbonera II Pump Station Replacement (m401601) – Notice of Completion (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the work of S.W. Construction, Inc. (Bakersfield, CA) and authorize the filing of the Notice of Completion for the Carbonera II Pump Station Replacement project (m401601).

BACKGROUND: At its February 25, 2020 meeting, City Council approved the authorization to advertise this project and authorized the City Manager to execute the contract. On May 14, 2020 the project was awarded to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, S.W.

Construction, Inc. and construction began on May 12, 2021. The existing equipment was abandoned underground or removed from the site. New pumps, standby equipment and controls were constructed per project specifications and plans.

DISCUSSION: The work for this project is now complete. The project has been inspected by staff and found to be completed in accordance with the project specifications.

FISCAL IMPACT: The total project cost was $735,890.91. This project was funded by the Wastewater Fund Capital Investment Project (CIP) Carbonera II Pump Station Replacement (m401601). There is no impact to the General Fund.

Prepared By:

Ryan Haley
Assistant Engineer II
Submitted By:

Mark R. Dettle
Director of Public Works
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. NOTICE OF COMPLETION.DOCX

15.1 Notice of Completion Carbonera II Sewer Pump Station Replacement (Space above for Recorder’s use only)
This instrument is being recorded for the benefit of the City of Santa Cruz.

No recording fee is required pursuant to Government Code § 27383.

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
(CA Civil Code Sections 8102 and 9204)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

The undersigned is an authorized representative of the owner of the interest or estate stated below.

1. The Owner’s Name and Address. The Project owner is the City of Santa Cruz, a municipal corporation (the “City”). The City’s mailing address is 809 Center Street, Santa Cruz, California 95060. The City of Santa Cruz has the following interest in the subject Property described below: City Property

2. Project Title and Number. The full name of the work of improvement/public works project (the “Project”) which is the subject of this Notice of Completion is: Carbonera II Pump Station Replacement project m401601

3. Nature of Work Performed on the Property or Materials Furnished for the City. The Project consisted of work described as: Retrofit an existing outdated sewer lift station with new modern submersible pumps. Integrate the controls and emergency standby operations to the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system of the Wastewater Treatment Facility.

4. The general site location description or address (the “Property”) of the public improvement is located:

Within a city owned parcel adjacent to the residence at 202 Carbonera Drive.

5. Name and Address of Contractor. The Contractor on the Project is: S.W. Construction Inc. 4301 Grissom St. Suite D, Bakersfield, CA 93313.

6. Date of Completion. The Project on the Property was completed on: November 8, 2021

7. The filing of this Notice of Completion was authorized by the Santa Cruz City Council Minute Order on Tuesday, December 14, 2021
RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

City of Santa Cruz, Public Works
Attn: Ryan Haley
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City Clerk’s Department
809 Center Street, Room 9
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

15.2 Notice of Completion Carbonera II Sewer Pump Station Replacement DATE: ___________________
Mark Dettle
Director of Public Works, City of Santa Cruz

VERIFICATION FOR THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
I have read the foregoing Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof, and I certify that the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated upon my information or belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on ____________________at Santa Cruz, CA
Ryan Haley
Assistant Engineer II, City of Santa Cruz

15.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/17/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Agreements between the San Lorenzo Valley Water District and the City of Santa Cruz Related to the City’s Water Rights Petitions and the District’s Contractual Right to 313.4 Acre Feet per Year of Loch Lomond Water (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve two agreements between the San Lorenzo Valley Water District (District) and the City of Santa Cruz (City), the first, resolving the District’s water rights protest to the City’s proposed water rights changes and extensions, and the second committing the parties to work collaboratively together to develop an operating plan for the District to make use of its contractual right to 313.4 acre feet of water per year (afy) from Loch Lomond. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute these agreements in a form approved by the City Attorney.

BACKGROUND: As part of the development of the City’s Newell Creek Dam and Loch Lomond Reservoir facilities in the late 1950s, the City acquired lands from the District that were needed for the project. As part of the associated agreements, the City committed to providing the District with access to a quantity of stored water in Loch Lomond Reservoir. The volume of water involved in this commitment was disputed over the years. In a 1981 decision, the Santa Cruz County Superior Court decided that the commitment involved 12.5% of the reservoir’s annual safe yield, not to exceed 500 afy. The City has calculated this commitment as involving 313.4 afy, or roughly 88 million gallons annually. The District took this water for a period of time, but stopped taking it when the federal Surface Water Treatment Rule went into effect in the late 1980s. That rule made it less expensive for the District to replace this surface water source with local groundwater than to build and operate a treatment plant capable of treating water from Loch Lomond.

Through the years, the District has considered how to use its contractual right to Loch Lomond water. In the last decade, a number of District water supply assessments have identified Loch Lomond water as a resource that could play a critical role in helping the District meet customer demand during drought conditions, as well as become an important part of the District’s plan for conjunctive use of its surface and groundwater resources.

The District no longer has facilities in place to access Loch Lomond water. In the next year, the District plans to complete an assessment of how it might best bring this resource into its system.

The Santa Cruz Water Department (Department) has an interest in working collaboratively with the District in the development and evaluation of various options for delivering the 313.4 afy of

16.1 contract water to the District. The options include the City potentially delivering treated water from the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant to the District.

Simultaneously with the District’s exploration of its options for accessing its Loch Lomond water, the City has been advancing changes to its water rights. These changes are necessary to adapt those rights to important regulations that protect the salmon and steelhead in local streams and to best support the Department’s 21st century operation. On December 14, 2021, the City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Department’s proposed water rights changes and approved potential implementation of the proposed changes based on anticipated approvals by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board).

The State Board publicly noticed the City’s proposed water rights changes in February 2021 and set a deadline for interested parties to file protests of those changes in mid-March 2021. As the City and the District both depend on water resources from the San Lorenzo River and its tributaries, it wasn’t surprising that the District protested the City’s proposed water rights changes. Two main issues were raised by the District in its protest. First, the District sought to affirm its contractual right to 313.4 afy of Loch Lomond water under any hydrological conditions. Second, the District sought to formally establish that the City’s commitment to increased bypass flows at the San Lorenzo Big Trees gage in Felton is not binding on a District water right that also depends on minimum river flows at that same gage.

DISCUSSION: The State Board encourages parties that have proposed water rights changes, and parties that have protested those changes, to make their best effort to work out their differences. If an agreement is not possible, the State Board eventually will hold a hearing to evaluate the proposed changes and the protests to them. A State Board hearing is similar to a court trial.

The City and the District have sought to avoid the need for a hearing. Over the past nine months, the City and the District have been working together to develop an agreement that resolves the issues the District raised in its protest. The final agreement is included as an attachment to this staff report. Additionally, given the importance of the 313.4 afy of Loch Lomond water to the District’s planning for future water supply, a second agreement, also attached, commits the City and the District to work collaboratively together to develop an operating plan for the District to make use of this water resource. The goal is to work together to analyze options and develop an operating plan that meets the needs of both the District and the Water Department. The San Lorenzo Valley Water District Board of Directors voted unanimously in support of both agreements at their December 7, 2021 meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

Prepared / Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. AGREEMENT RESOLVING WATER RIGHTS PROTEST.PDF

2. WATER SUPPLY COLLABORATION AGREEMENT.PDF

16.2 {00260153.1} -1- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM

WATER RIGHTS PROTEST RESOLUTION AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AND

SAN LORENZO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
This Water Rights Protest Resolution Agreement is made by and between the City of Santa Cruz, a California charter city (the “City”), and San Lorenzo Valley Water District, a California public agency (“SLVWD”), effective January __, 2022. This Agreement refers to the City and SLVWD jointly as the “Parties” or individually as a “Party.” Recitals
A. The City and SLVWD are both solely dependent on local water supplies and both divert water from the San Lorenzo River’s watershed. In the 1950s and 1960s, the City and SLVWD executed a series of agreements that supported the City’s construction of Newell Creek Dam, which impounds the waters of Newell Creek in the Newell Reservoir (also known as Loch Lomond or the Loch Lomond Reservoir). The City stores and uses water from that reservoir under water-right License 9847.

B. In a March 16, 1981 Judgment in San Lorenzo Valley Water District v. City of Santa Cruz, Case No. 62590 (the “1981 Judgment”), the Santa Cruz County Superior Court determined that SLVWD holds contract rights to use 12.5% of safe annual yield of Newell Creek Dam and Reservoir, which is estimated by the City to represent 313.4 acre-feet per year (the “Newell Creek Supply”).

C. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to modify, supersede, or replace any portion of the 1981 Judgment that adjudicated the agreements from the 1950s and 1960s between the Parties that establish and define SLVWD’s contract rights to the Newell Creek Supply.

D. The City has spent many years developing, with federal and state fisheries agencies, bypass-flow requirements for its diversions from Newell Creek, the San Lorenzo River and the northern Santa Cruz County streams from which the City diverts. As a result of that work, the City is pursuing its Santa Cruz Water Rights Project, which includes proposed changes to the City’s water-right permits and licenses. Those permits and licenses are: Licenses 1553 and 7200 for the City’s diversions from the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street; License 9847 for Newell Creek; and Permits 16123 and 16601 for the City’s diversions from the river at Felton. The City has filed petitions with the State Water Resources Control Board (the “State Board”) to make changes to those licenses and permits, and to extend the time for the City to reach maximum authorized use under Permits 16123 and 16601 (collectively, the “Pending Petitions”).

E. SLVWD has protested the Pending Petitions in order to protect SLVWD’s contract rights to the Newell Creek Supply, other water rights and the public interest in maintaining adequate local water supplies while protecting fisheries, and with a view toward facilitating conjunctive use of water supplies to enhance fisheries within the San

16.3 {00260153.1} -2- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM
Lorenzo River watershed. SLVWD’s proposed conjunctive use plan, which is undergoing environmental review, anticipates utilizing the Newell Creek Supply for such purposes.

SLVWD believes that utilization of the Newell Creek Supply is an important element of conjunctive use in the upper watershed. The method and operational parameters of such utilization have not been finalized.

F. The City and SLVWD both desire to continue their collaborative work to improve their respective individual water supplies; to better integrate regional water supplies and support conjunctive use; and to resolve SLVWD’s protests of the Pending Petitions without engaging in adverse administrative proceedings or litigation.

Terms
For good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is expressly acknowledged hereby, the Parties mutually agree as follows:

1. Resolution of SLVWD Water-Right Protests. SLVWD will withdraw its protest of the Pending Petitions and will not assert any further objection to approval of the Pending Petitions by the State Board if the State Board adopts the terms stated in Sections

1.1 and 1.2 in doing so.

1.1. License 9847. As a term in License 9847, the following: “Since its issuance, this license has authorized use in areas in ‘the San Lorenzo Basin.’ This license’s minimum streamflow requirements, and its limitations on the City’s deliveries to other entities under Hydrologic Conditions 4 and 5, do not preclude the City from delivering to San Lorenzo Valley Water District under this license and an existing contract between that District and the City up to 313.4 acre-feet of water per year from reservoir storage at any rate and at any time. The City and the District will collaborate to determine mutually agreeable operational terms for delivering the District’s contract supply. The City understands that the District seeks to better integrate the surface-water and groundwater supplies that serve the District’s different service areas.”

1.2. Permits 16123 and 16601. As a term in both Permit 16123 and Permit 16601, the following: “The City of Santa Cruz acknowledges that the minimum Felton bypass flows stated in this permit are not a binding precedent for Term 13 in San Lorenzo Valley Water District’s Permit 20123.”

1.3. Transmittal to the State Board. To facilitate the State Board’s approval of the Pending Petitions, the City may transmit a copy of this Agreement to the State Board after this Agreement’s execution. The City will copy SLVWD on that transmittal to the State Board.

2. Duration of Agreement. This Agreement’s Sections 1, 1.1 and 1.2 will continue in effect throughout the life of the City’s License 9847 and Permits 16123 and 16601.

16.4 {00260153.1} -3- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM

3. Further Assurances. Upon a Party’s reasonable request, the other Party will provide the State Board or any other third party any reasonably necessary written or oral assurances concerning that other Party’s commitments under this Agreement.

4. No Commitment of Resources and Environmental Review. This Agreement does not irretrievably or irreversibly commit either Party to any course of action, including any change in water system operations or the construction of any physical facility or other project, that would foreseeably result in any adverse impact on the environment in the absence of compliance, if necessary, with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

5. Notices. A notice to a Party under this Agreement will be given in writing according to the following, subject to either Party changing the following by a written notice to the other Party:

City of Santa Cruz
Rosemary Menard
Water Director
City of Santa Cruz Water Department
212 Locust Street, Suite A
Santa Cruz, California 95060
[email protected]
(831) 420-5200
San Lorenzo Valley Water District
Rick Rogers
General Manager
San Lorenzo Valley Water District
13060 Highway 9
Boulder Creek, California 95006
[email protected]
(831) 338-2153
Notices sent by U.S. mail, first-class with postage prepaid, are deemed delivered five days after their deposit with the U.S. Postal Service. Notices sent by e-mail, with receipt confirmed, either by auto-reply or by the recipient, are deemed delivered on the business day after their transmission.

6. Interpretation. This Agreement’s section headings are for informational purposes only and will not inform interpretation of this Agreement’s operative terms. Each Party has had the opportunity to review and revise this Agreement, so no rule or principle disfavoring a contract’s drafter will apply to this Agreement.

7. Integration. This Agreement incorporates and supersedes the Parties’ prior representations and negotiations concerning its subject matter and is the Parties’ final statement of their agreement concerning that subject matter.

8. Signatures. Each person who signs this Agreement represents that he or she has the authority to bind the Party with which he or she is associated to this Agreement’s terms. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and with PDF or other electronic signatures.

WHEREFORE, the Parties execute this Agreement as of the date first written above.

16.5 {00260153.1} -4- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
By: __________________________________
Matt Huffaker
City Manager

SAN LORENZO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By: _______________________________________
Rick Rogers
General Manager

16.6 {00260153.1} -1- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM

WATER-SUPPLY COLLABORATION AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AND

SAN LORENZO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
This Water-Supply Collaboration Agreement is made by and between the City of Santa Cruz, a California charter city (the “City”), and San Lorenzo Valley Water District, a California public agency (“SLVWD”), effective January __, 2022. This Agreement refers to the City and SLVWD jointly as the “Parties” and individually as a “Party.” Recitals
A. The City and SLVWD are both solely dependent on local water supplies and both divert water from the San Lorenzo River’s watershed. In the 1950s and 1960s, the City and SLVWD executed a series of agreements that supported the City’s construction of Newell Creek Dam, which impounds the waters of Newell Creek in the Newell Reservoir (also known as Loch Lomond or the Loch Lomond Reservoir). The City stores and uses water from that reservoir under water-right License 9847.

D. The Parties agree that SLVWD’s contract rights allow SLVWD to take its allotment of water from the City’s Newell Creek Reservoir at any rate and at any time.

E. The City has spent many years developing, with federal and state fisheries agencies, bypass-flow requirements for its diversions from Newell Creek, the San Lorenzo River and the northern Santa Cruz County streams from which the City diverts. As a result of that work, the City is pursuing its Santa Cruz Water Rights Project, which includes proposed changes to the City’s water-right permits and licenses. Those permits and licenses are: Licenses 1553 and 7200 for the City’s diversions from the San Lorenzo River at Tait Street; License 9847 for Newell Creek; and Permits 16123 and 16601 for the City’s diversions from the river at Felton. The City filed petitions with the State Water Resources Control Board (the “State Board”) to make changes to those licenses and permits, and to extend the time for the City to reach maximum authorized use under Permits 16123 and 16601 (collectively, the “Petitions”).

16.7 {00260153.1} -2- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM
F. SLVWD protested the Petitions in order to protect SLVWD’s contract rights to the Newell Creek Supply, other water rights and the public interest in maintaining adequate local water supplies while protecting fisheries, and with a view toward facilitating conjunctive use of water supplies to enhance fisheries within the San Lorenzo River watershed. SLVWD’s proposed conjunctive use plan, which is undergoing environmental review, anticipates utilizing the Newell Creek Supply for such purposes. SLVWD believes that utilization of the Newell Creek Supply is an important element of conjunctive use in the upper watershed.

G. The City and SLVWD entered into a Water Rights Protest Resolution Agreement, dated December __, 2021, which provides for SLVWD withdraw its protest of the Petitions on certain terms and conditions, including without limitation a commitment of the Parties to collaborate to determine mutually agreeable operational terms for delivering the District’s Newell Creek Supply.

H. SLVWD currently does not have facilities that would enable it to take the Newell Creek Supply and is considering whether to take that Supply either as raw water that SLVWD would treat itself or as treated water that SLVWD would purchase from the City. As a practical matter, SLVWD and the City will need to work together to develop an operational plan that would enable SLVWD to take the Newell Creek Supply using existing or future facilities and in light of normal construction, operational and maintenance needs.

I. The City and SLVWD both desire to continue their collaborative work to improve their respective individual water supplies and to better integrate regional water supplies and support conjunctive use.

Terms
For good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is expressly acknowledged hereby, the Parties mutually agree as follows:

1. Commitment to Collaborate on Use of Newell Creek Supply. The Parties will collaborate in developing the operational terms under which SLVWD would be able to take the Newell Creek Supply, consistent with the 1981 Judgment and SLVWD’s contract rights.

That collaboration will include, without limitation, SLVWD communicating with the City regarding SLVWD’s analysis of whether to take the Newell Creek Supply as raw water or as treated water and the City reasonably participating in that analysis. The City’s participation will include the City providing SLVWD, at SLVWD’s reasonable request, reasonably available, existing and non-confidential information about the City’s Newell Creek pipeline and its Graham Hill water treatment plant. At either Party’s reasonable request, the Parties will meet at least twice a year to discuss and determine how and when SLVWD would take the Newell Creek Supply. The Parties will use reasonable best efforts to execute, by January 1, 2025, an operational agreement under which SLVWD could take its Newell Creek Supply through the City’s facilities.

16.8 {00260153.1} -3- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM

2. Duration of Agreement. All sections of this Agreement will continue in effect until superseded by a further related agreement between the Parties, which would include, without limitation, an agreement between the Parties stating the operational plan for providing SLVWD with access to its contractually guaranteed Newell Creek water.

3. No Commitment of Resources and Environmental Review. This Agreement does not irretrievably or irreversibly commit either Party to any course of action, including any change in water system operations or the construction of any physical facility or other project, that would foreseeably result in any adverse impact on the environment in the absence of compliance, if necessary, with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

4. Notices. A notice to a Party under this Agreement will be given in writing according to the following, subject to either Party changing the following by a written notice to the other Party:

5. Interpretation. This Agreement’s section headings are for informational purposes only and will not inform interpretation of this Agreement’s operative terms. Each Party has had the opportunity to review and revise this Agreement, so no rule or principle disfavoring a contract’s drafter will apply to this Agreement.

6. Integration. This Agreement incorporates and supersedes the Parties’ prior representations and negotiations concerning its subject matter and is the Parties’ final statement of their agreement concerning that subject matter.

7. Signatures. Each person who signs this Agreement represents that he or she has the authority to bind the Party with which he or she is associated to this Agreement’s terms. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and with PDF or other electronic signatures.

WHEREFORE, the Parties execute this Agreement as of the date first written above.

16.9 {00260153.1} -4- 11/22/2021 2:54 PM

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
By: __________________________________
Matt Huffaker
City Manager

SAN LORENZO VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By: _______________________________________
Rick Rogers
General Manager

16.10 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/17/2021
AGENDA OF: 01/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Water
SUBJECT: Resolution Transferring Funds within the Water Enterprise Funds to Meet FY 2022 Financial Targets – Budget Adjustment (WT)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution transferring $2,000,000 to the Water Operations Fund (Fund 711), $1,300,000 to the Water 90–Day Fund (Fund 716) and $520,000 to Water – Emergency Reserve Fund (Fund 717) from the Water Rate Stabilization Fund (Fund 713).

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the Water Department and the City took a number of important steps to ensure the long-term financial viability of the utility while funding major reinvestments of the water system’s infrastructure: the City Council 1) adopted the Department’s Long Range Financial Plan (LRFP) in June 2016 which provides the justification and framework for Water Department reserve funds, and 2) adopted by resolution the updated Water Department Financial Reserve Policy (City Council Policy 34.4) in December 2016 to “establish and maintain reserve funds for the Water Enterprise Fund as one part of a comprehensive program of prudent financial discipline designed to ensure a stable operating environment…” In September 2021, the City Council adopted an updated LRFP.

Both the LRFP and the City Council Policy set a course for financial management of the utility and specifically established the purpose, goal, target funding level, use, and replenishment of the following Water Enterprise Funds:
• Rate Stabilization Fund (Fund 713)
• 90-Day Cash Reserve (Fund 716) (along with the Water Operations Fund (Fund 711), the combined balance equals 180 days cash reserve)
• Emergency Reserve Fund (Fund 717)
These funds provide an emergency reserve, rate stabilization reserve, and enable the Department to meet the financial goals of 180 days cash and a 1.5 debt-service coverage ratio which collectively positions the Department to take advantage of more competitive borrowing rates which will reduce the cost to our rate payers.

DISCUSSION: New financial targets for the Water Enterprise are established each fiscal year based on the Adopted Budget. For FY 2022, the targets for each fund are:
• 711 - Water Operations: $8,158,360
• 713 - Rate Stabilization: $10,000,000

17.1 • 716 - 90 Day Reserve: $8,158,360
• 717 - Emergency Reserve: $3,000,000
Due to a number of factors including the coronavirus pandemic and continued conservation by water customers, water rate revenues were approximately $1.1 million less than projected in the FY 2021 Adopted Budget and continue to trend lower in FY 2022.

As stated in the Water Department Financial Reserve Policy 34.4, the Rate Stabilization Fund is available to “provide a buffer for the financial impacts to the Department’s Operating and Maintenance Budget that may result from uncontrollable factors such as cooler than normal temperatures, wet weather events, an economic downturn, or greater than projected customer conservation behaviors or activities.”
The Water Department recommends transferring $2 million to the Water Operations Fund (Fund 711), $1.3 million to the Water 90–Day Fund (Fund 716), and $520,000 to the Emergency Reserve Fund (Fund 717) from the Water Rate Stabilization Fund (Fund 713) based upon unaudited FY 2021 amounts. This action will reduce the balance in the Rate Stabilization Fund below the $10 million target; therefore, the $1.00 per CCF Rate Stabilization charge will remain in effect on customers’ utility bills.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no General Fund impact from these actions. The recommended transfers are between the Water Department’s Enterprise Funds and are necessary to meet the Department’s financial targets.

Prepared By:

David Baum
Water Chief Financial
Submitted By:

Rosemary Menard
Water Director
Approved By:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF

17.2 City of Santa Cruz

BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
3XUSRVH

ACCOUNT REVENUE EDEN ACCOUNT TITLE

TOTALREVENUE

ACCOUNT EXPENDITURE EDENACCOUNT TITLE

TOTAL EXPENDITURE
NET: $

REQUESTED BY

DEPARTMENT HEAD

APPROVAL

BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('

FINANCE DIRECTOR

APPROVAL

CITYMANAGER

APPROVAL
&0)18VH2QO\

5HVR

%$5HI

352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
)LVFDO<HDU

'DWH

&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
711-00-00-49190 2,000,000
716-00-00-000-49190 1,300,000
717-00-00-0000-49190 520,000
713-00-00-0000-59162 1,300,000
713-00-00-0000-59163 520,000
0 713-00-00-0000-59112 2,000,000
Other Transfers in
Other Transfers in
Other Transfers in
To Water Fund
To Water Operating Reserve Fund
To Water Emergency Reserve Fund
2022
12/13/21
A transfer of funds from Fund 713 (Water Rate Stabilization) to Funds 711 (Water Operating), 716 (Water 90 Day Operating Reserve) and 717 (Water Emergency Reserve) is needed to achieve the financial targets set forth in SCWD's Long Range Financial Plan.

David
Baum
Digitally signed by David Baum
DN: cn=David Baum, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Water
Department,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2021.12.17 12:12:33 -08'00'
Heidi
Luckenbach
Digitally signed by Heidi Luckenbach
DN: cn=Heidi Luckenbach, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=City of Santa Cruz,
email=hluckenbach@cityofsantacruz
.com, c=US
Date: 2021.12.20 10:25:28 -08'00'
Tracy
Cole
Digitally signed by Tracy Cole
DN: cn=Tracy Cole, o=City of Santa
Cruz, ou=Finance Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2021.12.22 12:07:15 -08'00'
Bobby
Magee
Digitally signed by Bobby Magee
DN: cn=Bobby Magee, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected]
m, c=US
Date: 2022.01.03 11:12:02 -08'00'
3,820,000
Clear Form
3,820,000

17.3 City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: December 17, 2021
AGENDA OF: 1/11/2022
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Community Development
SUBJECT: State of California 2021 Land Use and Housing Legislation Update (PL) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to accept the State of California 2021 land use and housing legislation update agenda report.

BACKGROUND: One of the recommendations in the Housing Blueprint Subcommittee report accepted in 2018 was to provide updates to the City Council regarding housing-related State legislation. As one component of this, staff scheduled a special Council meeting to offer a viewing of a California League of Cities webinar in November, 2019. A Study Session item on November 4, 2020 provided an overview of housing legislation passed between 2018 through 2020. The California Legislature passed many relevant bills in 2021, and staff forwarded the Council a link to a free legislative update webinar hosted by the Institute for Local Government and various other partners that was held in early November 2021. This report serves as a guide to some key pieces of legislation from 2021 that impact the City’s land use and housing decisions.

DISCUSSION: The land use and housing-related bills listed below are those that are most likely to have direct implications for the City. The key legal changes that each bill established are noted. The bills are presented by year and use the standard abbreviations “AB” for Assembly Bill and “SB” for Senate Bill to describe the part of the State Legislature in which the bill was created. Again, the legislation highlighted below is considered most essential to housing and planning activities and includes commonly used bills. More esoteric bills or legislation that is less relevant to the City of Santa Cruz have been omitted.

Housing Project Approvals and Fees
SB 8 – Extension of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019
This bill extends the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) by five years from January 1, 2025, to January 1, 2030. This continues SB 330’s many changes geared towards the streamlining and permitting of housing including the prohibition on enacting a development policy or standard that would reduce the intensity of land use, imposing design review standards that are not objective, or limiting the amount of housing produced through moratoriums, caps, or delay of approvals. The “no net loss” and affordable unit replacement provisions in SB 330 relating to a housing development project demolishing a residential unit also continue to apply.

18.1 Notably, SB 8 clarifies the definition of a “housing development project” as any housing project one unit or great. Under SB 330, this definition was understood to be a project consisting of two units or more. SB 8 makes the definition one unit or more so a single-family house or even construction of an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is now considered a housing development project.

AB 602 – Development Fee Determination by Area
January 1, 2022, when a local agency seeks to adopt new development impact fees, it must first conduct a nexus study. Fees that are determined based on the nexus study must be now proportional to the square footage of the proposed units, as opposed to a per-unit fee. AB 602’s goal is to remove any cost burden on developing smaller units to make them more feasible to build.

AB 1174 – SB 35 Clarification and Timelines
This bill would clarify the requirements that must be met for an approved SB 35 development to be valid indefinitely. Before this bill, if a jurisdiction received a modification application, it could apply objective planning standards adopted after the development application was first submitted to the requested modification in certain instances. This bill would instead state that the objective building standards in place when the original application is submitted shall be applied to all modification applications that are submitted prior to the first building permit application unless the developer agrees to a change in objective standards.

Current State law says that if SB 35 requirements are met, the approved development is valid indefinitely. However, this bill allows for an approved development to be valid for three years from the date of the final judgment upholding the development’s approval if litigation is filed challenging that approval.

Housing Production
SB 9 – Two Units and Lot Splits in Single-Family Zones
SB 9 is called the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act. This bill allows homeowners in single-family zones to subdivide their property into roughly two equal lots (60/40 split maximum) and build two units on each of the two lots. Rear and side setbacks shall be four feet and no parking may be required if the parcel is within a half-mile walking distance from quality transit or within one block of car share. The City’s other development standards may still apply so long as they do not preclude any of the four units from being at least 800 square feet in area. See the SB 9 Guide attachment for more detail on the legislation and the City’s current SB 9 project application process.

SB 9 requires that the homeowner sign an affidavit stating their intent to live at the property for at least three years from the date of the approval of the lot split. The newly created SB 9 lot could be sold individually, and new SB 9 units could be rented or sold as condos too, thus seeking to increase housing market diversity through what will likely be smaller units and/or smaller lots. Short-term rental is not permitted with SB 9 projects - only rental terms of longer than 30 days are allowed. Only one set of SB 9 actions can take place, so a lot created through an SB 9 lot split could not undergo an additional lot split using SB 9. Also, the maximum number of units allowed is two per lot, so accessory dwelling units (ADUs) cannot be added to SB 9 lots unless they are the second unit on either of the newly-created properties.

18.2 The City may only deny an SB 9 project if it makes a written finding that the project would create a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the environment without a feasible way to mitigate such impact. Projects that meet the SB 9 requirements must be approved ministerially by the City and are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SB 9 does not supersede the Coastal Act, but the City is not required to hold a public hearing for a Coastal Development Permit.

SB 10 – Option to Permit up to Ten Units per Parcel without CEQA This bill creates the ability for local governments to adopt a resolution and/or pass an ordinance prior to January 1, 2029 to change the general plan and/or to zone any parcel (regardless of the size) for up to ten residential units if the parcel is within a half-mile of high-quality transit or is in an urban infill site. An urban infill site is defined a site with at least 75 percent of the perimeter (not counting streets) adjoining parcels that are developed with urban uses (which means much of Santa Cruz). SB 10 prohibits using the bill to reduce the current density on any parcel. Passing an SB 10 ordinance would be exempt from CEQA, giving the City the ability to up-zone property for housing without the litigation risks or increased implementation times associated with the CEQA process. Notably, subsequent development projects utilizing the upto-ten unit allowances would be subject to CEQA, though some could qualify for exemptions.

AB 345 – Sale of ADUs Built by Non-Profits
This bill requires local agencies to allow an accessory dwelling unit to be sold or conveyed separately from the primary residence to a qualified buyer if the property was built or developed by a qualified nonprofit corporation (e.g., Habitat for Humanity) and that the property is held pursuant to a recorded tenancy in common agreement. Existing law requires that tenancy in common agreement to, among other things, allocate to each qualified buyer an undivided, unequal interest in the property based on the size of the dwelling each qualified buyer occupies.

SB 478 – Minimum Floor Area Ratios up to 10 Units
This bill would prohibit the City from imposing a floor area ratio (FAR) standard of less than 1.0 on a housing development project that consists of three to seven units, or less than 1.25 on a housing development project that consists of eight to ten units. A lot size minimum or a lot coverage requirement that physically precludes a housing development project from achieving these FARs would not be permitted.

Affordable Housing
AB 491 – Inclusionary Unit Distribution
This bill requires that a mixed-income multifamily development provide the same access to common entrances, common areas, and amenities to occupants of affordable housing units in the building as is provided to market-rate housing occupants. The bill also prohibits isolating affordable housing units to a specific floor or area of a specific floor of the building.

Given that financing is often more difficult for mixed income development, AB 491 also references code stating that residential developments or emergency shelters receiving federal or state funding are entitled reductions or waivers to development requirements. These reductions or waivers could include this bill’s unit distribution requirement.

18.3 SB 728 – Non-Profits can Purchase For-Sale Inclusionary Units State Density Bonus Law previously required inclusionary units to be initially occupied by a person or family of the required income. This bill now allows a qualified non-profit housing organization to purchase such a unit and bring it under their management.

Homelessness
AB 362 – Shelter Health and Safety
This bill requires that if a jurisdiction receives a complaint from an occupant of a homeless shelter alleging that the homeless shelter is substandard, the jurisdiction must inspect the homeless shelter. If a violation is determined, the owner or operator of the homeless shelter has within 10 business days of the inspection to correct the violation. If the violation constitutes an imminent threat to occupant health and safety, the violation must be rectified immediately.

AB 816 – Housing Trust Fund Priority for Homelessness
The State’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) currently receives money from the Federal Housing Trust Fund to increase the supply of rental housing for very low and extremely low income families, including homeless families. This bill would require HCD to prioritize this funding for projects that serve people experience homelessness.

Student and Age-Related Housing
SB 290 – Density Bonus for Low Income Student Housing
One development concession or incentive is now granted to student housing projects that provide at least 20% of units to low-income students.

SB 591 – Transitional Youth in Senior Housing
This bill establishes “intergenerational housing” which allows for qualifying development to allow caregivers and transition age youth (age 18-24) to occupy up to 20% of senior housing.

Tenant Protections
SB 60 – Larger Fines for Illegal Short-Term Rentals
This bill allows the City to increase fines for illegal short-term rentals and for short-term rentals that do not meet safety codes. For instance, the State limit was $100 for the first violation but the maximum fine for the first violation can now be up to $1,500.

AB 978 – Mobile Home Rent Cap and Eviction Protections
AB 978 prohibits a mobile home park manager from increasing a tenant’s rent by more than 3% plus the percentage change in cost of living, or 5%, whichever is lower. This bill is in effect until January 1, 2030.

18.4 Housing Element Requirements
AB 215 – Public Engagement
Under AB 215, a local agency must allow a public comment period of at least 30 days for the first draft revision of the Housing Element. If comments are received, the agency shall take at least ten additional business days to consider and incorporate comments into the draft revision before submitting the Housing Element update to the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development.

AB 787 – Conversion of Market-Rate to Affordable Housing This bill allows a jurisdiction’s annual Housing Element Report to count units towards the moderate-income Regional Housing Needs Allocation if the units in an existing multi-family building were converted to deed-restricted rental housing for moderate-income households.

These units are allowed to count towards up to 25% of the jurisdiction’s moderate-income Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

AB 1304 – Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
The State defines “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” as taking meaningful actions to overcome patterns of segregation and foster including communities free from barrier that restrict access to opportunity. It is the duty of all public agencies to address significant disparities in housing needs and access as well as developing integrated and balanced living patterns. While Affirmatively Further Fair Housing requirements existed in State law already, AB 1304 adds requirements within the Housing Element process specifically so that local agencies show how their housing policies and Housing Element update help to affirmatively further fair housing.

CEQA: This legislative update is not considered a project under CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of these bills varies, and many impacts are unknown given their indirect impact on the development of housing.

Submitted by:

Matt VanHua
Principal Planner
Reviewed by:

Lee Butler
Deputy City Manager
Approved by:

Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. SB 9 Guide

18.5 ZONING / PERMIT PROCESSING
831/420-5100 • FAX 831/420-5434

COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
831/420-5180 • FAX 831/420-5101

INSPECTION SERVICES
831/420-5120 • FAX 831/420-5434

PLANNING ADMINISTRATION
831/420-5110 • FAX 831/420-5101

PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
809 Center Street • Room 206 • Santa Cruz, CA 95060 • www.cityofsantacruz.com Lee Butler, Director
SB 9 Guide – Duplexes and Land Divisions
January 5, 2022
SB 9 is part of the Senate’s “Building Opportunities for All” housing package that was created to address the severe housing shortage in California. SB 9 was signed by Governor Newsom and chaptered by the Secretary of State. This bill went into effect on January 1, 2022. PLEASE NOTE that this is a new process that is subject to further interpretation by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and code amendments are expected in early 2022. When code amendments and/or additional guidance are published, the City will update criteria and procedures accordingly, therefore, the information in this guide is subject to change under State law.

SB 9 makes two changes to State law:
 It allows homeowners in most areas around the state (those zoned for single-family) to divide their property into two lots, thereby increasing opportunities for homeownership in their neighborhood; and
 It allows two homes to be built on each of those lots, with the effect of allowing four homes in areas that previously only allowed one home.

What does SB 9 allow?
SB 9 allows for a proposed housing development, including a minor land division to divide one lot into two, containing no more than two residential units on a single lot within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially if it meets the below criteria. The term ”ministerial” means that no discretionary review is required, i.e. no use permits, design permits, or tentative map approval. (See below for more details on the term “discretionary.”) Therefore, SB 9 projects must only obtain non-discretionary permits such as those that are required through the Building, Fire, Water, and Public Works Departments, and comply with nondiscretionary requirements.

What is a Housing Development?
A housing development is a project that includes no more than two units on a single parcel. This can include the construction of two new units, the legalization of two existing units, or the construction of one new unit to one existing unit. There are also some exceptions for an ADU to be considered as the third unit on one parcel – see below.

18.6 Can I split my parcel and propose two housing developments on each new parcel under SB 9? Yes, under SB 9, you can split your parcel (assuming it is in an R-1 or R-S Zoning District) into two parcels and create a housing development on each lot with a ministerial, non-discretionary permitting process. However, the project will need to meet the qualifying criteria for both a housing development and a lot split as described below.

How do I submit an application for a SB 9 Lot Split and/or Housing Development? First, you’ll want to review the qualifying criteria below to confirm that the project meets all of the requirements. If you have questions, feel free to speak with a Planner during public counter hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:30 am -11:30 am, or via phone (831-420-5416), or email [email protected].

If you’ve determined that your project is eligible, you’ll need to contact the Building Department for information on the Building Permit Process. If your project includes a lot split, please also contact the Public Works Department for information on submitting a parcel map for review and recordation.
 Building Department (831) 420-5110 or [email protected]  Public Works (831) 420-5160 or [email protected] Qualifying Criteria for a Housing Development or Lot Split:
□ The development must occur on a legal lot.
□ The development or lot split is not located on a site that is any of the following:
□ Either prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance, as defined pursuant to United States Department of Agriculture land inventory and monitoring criteria, as modified for California, and designated on the maps prepared by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Department of Conservation, or land zoned or designated for agricultural protection or preservation by a local ballot measure that was approved by the voters of that jurisdiction. □ Wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2 (June 21, 1993).
□ Within a very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 51178, or within a high or very high fire hazard severity zone as indicated on maps adopted by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 4202 of the Public Resources Code. This subparagraph does not apply to sites excluded from the specified hazard zones by a local agency, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 51179, or sites that have adopted fire hazard mitigation measures pursuant to existing building standards or state fire mitigation measures applicable to the development.
□ A hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Section 65962.5 or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code, unless the State Department of Public Health, State Water Resources Control Board, or Department of Toxic Substances Control has cleared the site for residential use or residential mixed uses.

18.7 □ Within a delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law (Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and by any local building department under Chapter

12.2 (commencing with Section 8875) of Division 1 of Title 2. □ Within a special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in any official maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. If a development proponent is able to satisfy all applicable federal qualifying criteria in order to provide that the site satisfies this subparagraph and is otherwise eligible for streamlined approval under this section, a local government shall not deny the application on the basis that the development proponent did not comply with any additional permit requirement, standard, or action adopted by that local government that is applicable to that site. A development may be located on a site described in this subparagraph if either of the following are met:
□ The site has been subject to a Letter of Map Revision prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and issued to the local jurisdiction. □ The site meets Federal Emergency Management Agency requirements necessary to meet minimum flood plain management criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program pursuant to Part 59 (commencing with Section 59.1) and Part 60 (commencing with Section 60.1) of Subchapter B of Chapter I of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
□ Within a regulatory floodway as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in any official maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, unless the development has received a no-rise certification in accordance with Section 60.3(d)(3) of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations. If a development proponent is able to satisfy all applicable federal qualifying criteria in order to provide that the site satisfies this subparagraph and is otherwise eligible for streamlined approval under this section, a local government shall not deny the application on the basis that the development proponent did not comply with any additional permit requirement, standard, or action adopted by that local government that is applicable to that site.
□ Lands identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan pursuant to the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 2800) of Division 3 of the Fish and Game Code), habitat conservation plan pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.), or other adopted natural resource protection plan.
□ Habitat for protected species identified as candidate, sensitive, or species of special status by state or federal agencies, fully protected species, or species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et

18.8 seq.), the California Endangered Species Act (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3 of the Fish and Game Code), or the Native Plant Protection Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 1900) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code).
□ Lands under conservation easement.

Qualifying Criteria for a Housing Development:
 The lot is located within an urbanized area or urban cluster, or within a city that has an urbanized area or urban cluster. All parcels within the City of Santa Cruz comply with this requirement.
□ The project does not involve the demolition or alteration of housing occupied by a tenant in the past three years or any affordable housing, rent-controlled housing, or housing that was withdrawn from rent within the last 15 years through the Ellis Act.  During review of your application, City staff will confirm that the unit is not registered with the Rental Inspection Program and will confirm that an Affordable Housing Agreement is not recorded on the property.  Additionally, the property owner will be required to sign an affidavit confirming that the housing to be demolished is not rent restricted under any local, State or Federal agreements and that the housing has not been rented within the last three years.
 If it is found that an existing housing unit meets any of the above criteria or the property owner is unwilling to sign the above described statement, the unit will not be permitted to be demolished or altered.
□ The project does not involve demolition of more than 50 percent of the existing exterior walls of an existing dwelling if the site was rented in the last 3 years.  Plans submitted for building permit issuance shall include details showing the extent of demolition, including calculations and dimensions. On walls to remain, the wall studs, existing window/door openings, existing window and door headers, and existing top and bottom wall plates shall be preserved in place and shall not be removed and reconstructed with the same or similar materials, or reinforced through techniques such as sistering, regardless of the state of decay or non-compliance with building code requirements.
□ The site is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark, or historic property or district.
 Please complete the following steps to determine if your property is a within a local historic district or a local historic resource:

1. Visit vw8.cityofsantacruz.com/public/

2. Type the parcel address in the Search by Address field on the right side menu

3. Scroll down the results list to “Zoning Overlay – Historic”. If it says “yes” next to this category then the parcel is located within a historic district.

4. Scroll down the results list to “Historic Building Volume/Page”. If there are numbers listed after this category then the parcel is listed in the city’s historic building survey.

18.9 Land Division Criteria
□ A project utilizing an SB 9 lot split may include a maximum of four units between the two lots.
o One or both lots may remain vacant; however, one lot cannot be constructed with all four units which would render the other vacant lot unbuildable. o If a housing unit is demolished then the demolition will be subject to replacement housing requirements of SB 330 which includes the construction of a replacement housing unit. If it is determined that the house to be demolished is occupied by a low income household, then the replacement unit may be required to be a restricted affordable units.
o The maximum number of units per SB 9 parcel is two units and one ADU. See below section on Accessory Dwelling Units.
□ SB 9 units may be mapped and sold as condominiums; however, an ADU may not be mapped as a separate condominium parcel. (Note that there are some exceptions to this requirement under State law for non-profit developers.) □ The lot to be divided must be zoned R-S (Residential Suburban) or R-1 (Single-Family Residence)
□ The lot to be divided was not created through a prior SB 9 land division. □ The property owner must occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the approval of the SB 9 land division unless the applicant is a community land trust or a qualified nonprofit corporation. As part of the parcel map review process, city staff will require that the property owner sign an affidavit to assure compliance with this requirement.
□ Neither the owner nor anyone acting in concert with the owner may have previously subdivided an adjacent parcel through an SB 9 land division. As part of the parcel map review process, city staff will require that the property owner sign an affidavit to assure compliance with this requirement.
□ Each new lot must be a minimum of 1,200 gross square feet. □ The land division must result in two new lots of approximately equal size with a maximum 60/40 split.
□ The land division must not involve the demolition or alteration of housing occupied by a tenant in the past three years or any affordable housing, rent-controlled housing, housing that was withdrawn from rent within the last 15 years through the Ellis Act.  During review of your application, City staff will confirm that the unit is not registered with the Rental Inspection Program and will confirm that an Affordable Housing Agreement is not recorded on the property.  Additionally, the property owner will be required to sign an affidavit confirming that the housing to be demolished is not rent restricted under any local, State or Federal agreements and that the housing has not been rented within the last three years.
 If it is found that an existing housing unit meets any of the above criteria or the property owner is unwilling to sign the above described statement, the unit will not be permitted to be demolished or altered.

18.10 □ The site is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark, or historic property or district.
 Please complete the following steps to determine if your property is a within a local historic district or a local historic resource:

1. Visit vw8.cityofsantacruz.com/public/

2. Type the parcel address in the Search by Address field on the right side menu

3. Scroll down the results list to “Zoning Overlay – Historic”. If it says “yes” next to this category then the parcel is located within a historic district.

4. Scroll down the results list to “Historic Building Volume/Page”. If there are numbers listed after this category then the parcel is listed in the city’s historic building survey.

Site and Design Standards
 The City may only impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards on an eligible two-unit development project.  Despite any objective standards in place, the maximum required interior side and rear yard setbacks shall be four feet.
 No setbacks are required for existing structure or new structures that are constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.  The terms “objective zoning standards,” “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances.  Objective standards must not physically preclude the construction of two units of at least 800 square feet.
o This does not include a property owner’s preference for a specific location on the lot. If there is a question about the buildability of an 800 square foot unit in a location that meets objective standards, the applicant shall be required to provide evidence of such determination including obtaining concurrence from any other department, division, agency, or professional, as necessary. o A new lot created by an SB 9 land division shall comply with the objective standards in the Subdivision Ordinance so long as such standards do not preclude a land subdivision that meets the lot requirements above and allows for a project of two lots with two units on each lot of at least 800 square feet per unit.
 The city shall not require corrections of non-conformities as a part of the SB 9 process.

Non-conformities are features that were legally constructed prior to the current ordinance and that have become non-conforming due to subsequent ordinance

18.11 amendments. Unpermitted features may be required to be resolved as a part of the building permit or parcel map process.

Parking
 One off-street parking space per unit is required unless the project site is located within ½-mile walking distance of a quality transit corridor or a major transit stop; or a car share vehicle is located within one block of the parcel, in which case no off-street parking is required and existing off-street parking may be removed and not replaced.

These criteria are defined below and are also mapped on the City’s SantaCruzMap system.
 A quality transit corridor is defined as a fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. These areas are mapped on the City’s GIS in the “Major Transit Stops/Buffers” and “Car Share Locations/Buffers” layers.
 Major transit stop definition:
 An existing rail or bus rapid transit station.
 The intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
 Car share definition: the City defines one block as 500 feet.  These regulations apply inside and outside of the Coastal Zone until such time that a code amendment is approved with differing requirements.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s)
 ADU’s are permitted as part of an eligible housing development and must comply with the regulations in the zoning ordinance and State law with the following exceptions:
 A maximum of four units total are allowed in a housing development project that utilizes an SB 9 lot split. ADU’s count towards the total of four units and may only be constructed on a lot with at least one main dwelling unit. An ADU may be permitted on a lot with a duplex as long as there are only four units total in the development.
 Note that if an ADU is created and utilizes the more relaxed standards of the ADU ordinance, it will not be able to be converted to a non-ADU housing unit in the future unless it is reconstructed to meet the objective zoning standards for a non-ADU unit.  An existing ADU can be converted to a dwelling unit as part of a SB 9 duplex development if it meets the qualifying criteria including restrictions on demolition, alteration, and tenancy, and if the structure can meet the objective site development standards for the zone district and as required under SB 9.

18.12 Short-Term Rentals
 Housing units created or retained as part of an SB 9 development, through duplexes or lot split, shall not be used as short-term rentals. Rental of any SB 9 unit must be for a term longer than 30 days.

Project Denial Findings
 If a project meets applicable objective standards (unless deviation is necessary in order to allow for two units per lot of 800 square feet each), an SB 9 housing development project may be denied if the building official makes a written finding, based on a preponderance of evidence in the record, that the project would have a specific, adverse impact upon health and safety or the environment for which there is no satisfactory mitigation.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
 An SB 9 housing development project requires ministerial review and is therefore not a project under CEQA.

Coastal Act
 SB 9 housing development projects that are located within the Coastal Zone are subject to the regulations in the Coastal Act. Such projects, if not eligible for an exemption or exclusion, shall obtain approval of an administrative Coastal Permit (no public hearing, staff review only) prior to building permit issuance or parcel map recordation.

Dedications and Off-Site Improvements
 No dedications or off-site improvements shall be required with an SB 9 project.

Permit Processing
 SB 9 Housing Projects do not require discretionary permits unless they are located within the Coastal Zone and are not eligible for an exemption or exclusion.  If no Coastal Permit is required, Planning Staff will review SB 9 projects as part of the building permit application process or the Public Works Parcel Map process. Planning staff may ask for additional information as part of the review to ensure compliance with objective standards and State law requirements.
 Fees: The applicant should contact the Building Department to obtain a fee estimate. If the project includes a land division, the applicant should also contact the Public Works Department for a fee estimate of parcel map review and recordation.  Building Department (831) 420-5110 or [email protected]  Public Works (831) 420-5160 or [email protected]

18.13 1
Rosemary Balsley
From: Garrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:42 AM
To: City Council
Subject: 1.11.21 Agenda Item # 18 Land Use Update

1.11.21 Agenda Item # 18 Land Use Update
Dear Council,
I think it would be appropriate to hold a minute of silence at the meeting to mark the death of single family housing at the hands of Newsom and state power hungry local control politicians.

I would mention culprit and reason for the "housing crisis" is the doings and policies of the government, state and local.

The "housing crisis" (isn't everything a crisis justifying any government overreach?) is actually a lack of affordability caused by the government. The government role in producing this is a) Inflation of asset prices due to the debt balloon money printing of the Federal government. Most of this damage was done in the last 20 years as half the national debt of all time was created then. Housing prices along with stocks, commodities like food /gas directly followed this money creation.

Only the uneducated think the problem is "greedy landlords" or developers who only want to build to serve rich customers. Developers would build anything that sells to those who would buy. There is plenty of open land in this country.
b) the Federal , Sate, and local immigration policies which import poverty, especially illegal alien immigration open door / sanctuary city/state which introduce rapidly so many people into locations in a short time, and also people with no money or means to acquire much. They lower the low wage worker wages and occupy considerable low income housing. c) It's not like medium or high density developments can't meet housing needs for those who can't afford low density.

They could. Why even have any density zoning designations anyway? Gee, there must be reasons, but none of those come up here as if they no longer exist.
d) It's not like more single family housing cannot be built. It could, it's back to affordability.

There is no assurance that the affordability of dense housing will be less per sq foot. If they are expensive to build, they will be expensive to buy and rent. SB 9 doesn't address this.

The good news is my 2500 sq ft backyard is going to worth a lot more one way or another with this as single family houses with big backyard become scarce. Yippie!
The bad news is it will be buried in a block of 4 plexes. Already most houses have another structure on it already. Fortunately I have the only house on my block surrounded on 4 sides by houses without ADU's. Who knows for how long, but it's real nice that way. Low density and real quiet except for the minions of landscapers with leaf blowers, and plenty of street parking.

The policies which forbid changing zoning to less dense zoning obviously have the effect of endlessly increasing density. Quality of life will suffer overall as all housing becomes dense.

There should always be areas where people can choose a low density home choice if they can afford it, but over time this choice will be taken away from the public. It's a really big county.

No parking needed if within 1/2 mile of transit.. HAHAHAHA stupid. 1200 sq ft lots HAHAHA

18.14 2
It's not that either of these is necessarily so bad if that's all one can afford, but for those who CAN afford, I disagree communities of like minded people cannot find a low density community to live in if they should so choose, or park a car.

I recall in a recent prior meeting someone who lived in a 10 plex apartment was seething mad at their neighbor on an SFR lot with "only" 4 occupants. Mad with... jealousy?
Yep, Santa Cruz is loaded with jealous, economically ignorant, ideologically impaired, life dissatisfied, blame everyone except themselves disgruntled, who are clueless as to how to achieve what they really want, may not even know what they want , and look to the government who is actually the cause of this now also their problem to solve it for them. Sad.

We talked before about Agenda 21. SB 9 is very, very Agenda 21.

California is the #1 state by population, the 3'rd largest state by area, and 11'th in housing density. There are 38 less dense states despite it's large size.

So again, a moment of silence is in order for the death of single family housing at the hands of greasy Gavin Newsom.

Every day in every way, one wonders why not a move to Florida or Texas? Garrett Philipp - Westside

18.15 State of California 2021
Land Use and Housing
Legislation Update
City Council
City of Santa Cruz
January 11, 2022

18.16 SB 9
 California Housing Opportunity and More
Efficiency (HOME) Act
 No State guidance yet
 Information and process guide attachment
 Two primary residential units on a singlefamily lot to be approved ministerially  Urban Lot splits on a single-family lot to be
approved ministerially18.17
SB 9
 Objective standards apply…to a point
 Side and rear setbacks: four feet
 No parking if near transit or car share
 SB 9 projects not subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
 SB 9 does not supersede the Coastal Act
but do not require a Coastal Development
Permit

18.18 SB 9 Next Steps
 Revise City’s SB 9 guide as needed
 Research potential ordinance amendments
related to SB 9 development
 Receive official guidance from the State
 Develop draft ordinance amendments for
further consideration18.19
Housing Project Approvals
 SB 8 – Extension of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019
 Five year extension from 1/1/25 to 1/1/30
 Continues no net loss and replacement
requirements for housing development projects
 Housing development project one unit or greater
 AB 602 – Development fee determination by area
 AB 1174 – SB 35 clarification and timelines
 Standards at first submittal apply despite a
modification application
 Application valid indefinitely but only valid three
years if litigation is filed challenging the project 18.20 Housing Production
 SB 10 – Option to permit up to ten units without
CEQA
 Urban infill sites near transit
 Only for upzoning property
 AB 345 – Sale of ADUs built by non-profits
 SB 478 – Minimum floor area ratios up to 10 units
 Prohibits local agencies from imposing an FAR of
less than 1.0 on housing projects of three to seven
units, FAR of less than 1.25 on projects of eight to
ten units
 Minimum lot size or lot coverage standard that
precludes these FARs is not permitted 18.21
Affordable Housing
 AB 491 – Inclusionary Unit Distribution
 Same access to amenities for occupants of
affordable units
 Prohibits isolating affordable units to a floor or
area of the building
 Development receiving federal or state funding is
entitled to waivers of development requirements
 SB 728 – Non-profits can purchase for-sale
inclusionary units
 A qualified non-profit housing organization can
bring inclusionary units under their management

18.22 Homelessness
 AB 362 – Shelter health and safety
 Requires a local agency to follow a specified
process if a complaint is received alleging
substandard homeless shelter conditions
 AB 816 – Housing trust fund priority for
homelessness
 Requires the State to prioritize Federal
Housing Trust Fund money for projects
serving people experiencing homelessness 18.23
Student and Age-Related
Housing
 SB 290 – Density Bonus for low income
student housing
 One additional concession or incentive is now
granted to student housing projects with 20%
affordable units
 SB 591– Transition youth in senior housing
 Establishes “intergenerational housing” which
allows caregivers and youth aged 18-24 to
occupy up to 20% of senior housing 18.24
Tenant Protections
 SB 60 – Larger fines for illegal short term
rentals
 Allows local agencies to increase fines for illegal
or unsafe short term rentals
 AB 978 – Mobile home rent cap and eviction
protections
 No more than 3% plus cost of living increase,
or 5%, whichever is lower.

18.25 Housing Element
Requirements
 AB 215 – Public Engagement
 New public comment period required for first draft
revision of the Housing Element
 AB 787 – Conversion of market-rate to affordable
housing
 Now allowed to count towards the Regional Housing
Needs Allocation
 AB 1304 – Affirmative Furthering Fair Housing
 Requires that the Housing Element now specifically
discuss how the City seeks to address disparities in
housing needs and access 18.26
Staff Recommendation
Accept the State of California 2021 land
use and housing legislation update
agenda report.

18.27 State of California 2021
Land Use and Housing
Legislation Update
City Council
City of Santa Cruz
January 11, 2022

18.28 19.1

19.2 19.3

19.4 19.5

19.6 20.1

20.2 20.3

20.4

Santa Cruz City CouncilJanuary 11, 2022

Santa Cruz City Council
January 11, 2022