CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Regular Meeting – May 9, 2023
12:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION, ZOOM/COURTYARD CONFERENCE ROOM 2:15 P.M. CONSENT, GENERAL BUSINESS, AND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS,
ZOOM/COUNCIL CHAMBERS
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.
Correspondence to be included in the agenda packet must be received by 5:00 pm on Monday, May 8th
May 9, 2023 City Council 2
PLEASE NOTE:
Council may take a break(s) as needed.
Requests for extra speaking time on items other than Oral Communications must be made by 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, May 7th 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 CalRelay 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.
Agenda and Agenda Packet Materials: The City Council agenda and the complete agenda packet containing public records, which are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, are available for review on the City’s website:
www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-council-meetings and at the Office of the City Clerk located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, California, during normal business hours.
Agenda Materials Submitted after Publication of the Agenda Packet: Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5, public records related to an open session agenda item submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available at the same time they are distributed or made available to the legislative body on the City’s website at: www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-councilmeetings and are also available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk, 809 Center Street Room 9, Santa Cruz, California, during normal business hours, and at the Council meeting.
Need more information? Contact the City Clerk’s office at 831-420-5030.
May 9, 2023 City Council 3
Closed Session
12:00 PM
Closed Session
1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(1))
1) City of Santa Cruz v. Service Employees International Union, Local 521, PERB Unfair Practice Charge No: SF-CO-511-M
2) City of Santa Cruz v. The Regents of the University of California, et al.
(Santa Cruz County Superior Court Case No. 22CV00373)
3) Regents of the University of California, et al. v. City of Santa Cruz (Santa Cruz County Superior Court Case No. 20CV02152)
2. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(2)
Significant exposure to litigation (one potential case to be discussed)
3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(4))
Initiation of litigation (one potential case to be discussed) May 9, 2023 City Council 4
City Council
2:15 PM
Call to Order
Roll Call
Presentations
4. Mayoral Proclamation Declaring May as Older Americans Month
5. Crisis Consulting for the Development of a City-Based Integrated Health Response Team
Presentation #6 will be heard at or around 4:30 p.m.
6. Hans Christian Andersen Contest Awards
Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification
Additions and Deletions
City Attorney Report on Closed Session
Council Meeting Calendar
7. The City Council will review the meeting calendar attached to the agenda and revise it as necessary.
May 9, 2023 City Council 5
Consent Agenda
8. Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the December 2022 and January 2023 Winter Storms (CA/CM) Resolution extending by sixty days the Local Emergency Declaration in connection with the December 2022 and January 2023 winter storms.
9. Minutes of the April 25, 2023 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion to approve as submitted.
10. Homelessness Response Quarterly Update (CM)
Receive quarterly update regarding City Council-directed homelessness response programs and services.
11. Pogonip Encampment Closure Refuse Disposal and Abatement Contract Approval (CM)
Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, between the City of Santa Cruz and Clean Team Associates in an amount not to exceed $250,000, to remove encampment debris in the Pogonip.
12. Award Contract for Services for Disaster Cost Recovery (FN) Motion to:
1) Award a contract for services for disaster cost recovery to Kermani Consulting Group, Novato, California; and
2) Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2023 budget to increase appropriations in the amount of $70,000 for disaster cost recovery services in FY 2023; and
3) Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney with Kermani Consulting Group.
May 9, 2023 City Council 6
Consent Agenda (continued)
13. Neary Lagoon Fence Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (m409668) – Approval of Plans and Authorization to Award (PW) Motion to approve the fence plans and authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract with Abacherli Fence Company (Watsonville, CA) in the amount of $130,850.00 in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.
14. Highway 1/9 Intersection - Approval of an Amendment to Consultant Agreement and Construction Budget Adjustment (c400805 and c401402) (PW)
Motion to:
1) Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a contract amendment in the amount of $356,562, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to the contract with BKF Engineers (San Jose, CA) for the Highway 1/9 Intersection Alternative Analysis consultant services and additional construction support services due to delays and changes; and
2) Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2023 budget by transferring funds from the Traffic Impact Fee Fund to fully fund the increased State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvement Project construction costs.
15. Murray Street Bridge Seismic Retrofit (c409321) TRC Engineers, Inc.- Contract Amendment 10 (PW)
Motion to approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment 10 with TRC Engineers Inc. (Rancho Cordova, CA) to provide Utility Coordination and Design Completion Services for the Murray Street Bridge Seismic Retrofit Project, in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to approve contract amendments within the approved project budget.
May 9, 2023 City Council 7
Consent Agenda (continued)
16. Dimeo Lane Paving and Storm Drain Project (c401312) – Approve Project as an Addendum to the Ocean Street Pavement Rehabilitation Project (c400809) (PW)
Motion to retroactively approve the Dimeo Lane Paving and Storm Drain Project (c401312) as an addendum to the Ocean Street Pavement Rehabilitation Project (c400809). The Director of Public Works is herby authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.
17. Bay Drive Protected Bike Lanes and Pedestrian Path (c402304) – Advertise for Bids and Award Contract (PW)
Motion to approve the plans and specifications for the Bay Drive Protected Bike Lanes and Pedestrian Path (c402304) and 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 acceptable to the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved budget.
18. Newell Creek Instream Habitat Restoration – Large Woody Debris Project Professional Services Agreement Amendment (WT)
Motion to:
1) Accept the proposal dated April 14, 2023 of cbec, inc. eco engineering (West Sacramento, CA) for bid support and construction services for the Newell Creek Instream Habitat Restoration – Large Woody Debris project in the amount of $141,103.00 and to authorize the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment No. 1 in a form to be approved by the City Attorney; and
2) Authorize the Water Director to approve change orders with cbec, inc. eco engineering in a form to be approved by the City Attorney for amounts that are within in the approved adjusted budget.
End Consent Agenda
May 9, 2023 City Council 8
General Business
19. Coral Street Visioning Report (PL)
Accept and file the Coral Street Visioning Report and provide direction to staff 1) regarding the preferred development option for the property at 125 Coral Street, as further recommended by staff in this report; 2) regarding the approach for addressing parking resources in proximity to the Coral Street neighborhood, as further recommended by staff in this report; and 3) to initiate land use changes that will facilitate development contemplated for 125 Coral Street.
20. 2024 Affordable Workforce Housing Bond (CN)
Motion to direct staff to initiate process to bring forward for placement of an affordable workforce housing bond measure on the March 2024 ballot, including engagement of research firm and scheduling community meetings and outreach.
21. Independent Police Auditor Report (CM)
Receive the annual report from the City’s Independent Police Auditor, OIR Group.
Oral Communications Announcement – Members of the public may address Council on matters not on the agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the Council. 30 minutes is allocated for Oral Communications. No extra time for groups will be granted.
Oral Communications
Adjournment
May 9, 2023 City Council 9
INFORMATION ITEMS PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED TO CITY COUNCILMEMBERS ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – MAY 9, 2023
22. Finance Department: Portfolio Management Report – Pooled Cash and Investments as of March 31, 2023 - 4/24/23 (FNFYI 366)
MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS
ADDENDUM TO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – MAY 9, 2023
23. Proclaiming May 5, 2023 as “Celebrate Potential Day” in recognition of the courage, commitment to wellness, and dedication to community shown by the participants, volunteers, family, and staff at Community Connection and Mariposa Center and encouraging all residents to join in rejecting discrimination, ending stigma, and embracing recovery.
24. Proclaiming the month of May 2023 as “Older Americans Month” and encouraging all citizens to join in supporting the City’s efforts to create an inclusive society by pursuing the benchmarks established in the AARP Network of Age-Friendly Communities.
25. Proclaiming the month of May 2023 as “Historic Preservation Month” and joining the Historic Preservation Commission in calling upon all residents to honor “People Saving Places” and celebrate Santa Cruz’ rich historical and cultural heritage.
26. Proclaiming May 5, 2023 as “Bruce McPherson Day” and urging all residents to join in expressing heartfelt appreciation for his numerous years of service and contributions to our community.
May 9, 2023 City Council 10
Advisory Body Appointments
The following positions are vacant. Council will make the appointments at a future meeting.
County Latino Affairs Commission One opening – at-large nomination Sister Cities Committee One opening – at-large nomination 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.
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.
Celebrating Older
Americans Month
Becoming an
Age-Friendly City
4.1 Age-Friendly Network
The AARP Network of Age-Friendly States and Communities is the United States affiliate of the World Health Organization Global Network for Age - Friendly Cities and Communities, an international effort launched in 2006 to help cities prepare for rapid population aging and the parallel trend of urbanization.
4.2 8 Domains of
Livability
1. Outdoor Spaces & Buildings
2. Transportation
3. Housing
4. Social Participation
5. Respect & Social Inclusion
6. Work & Civic Engagement
7. Communication & Information
8. Community & Health Services
4.3 Enrollment
Join the network:
Summer 2023
Year 1
Conduct a community
needs assessment:
January - March 2024
Year 2
Develop an action plan
Years 3-5
Implement the action
plan, and track the
progress
Year 5
Evaluate the impact of the work,
and create a progress report
Continue assessing
community needs, setting
goals, implementing plans
and evaluating progress
Age-Friendly Program Process
4.4 Thank you!
Kelly Mercer -Lebov
Senior Programs Coordinator
London Nelson Community Center
kmercer [email protected]
cityofsantacruz.com/seniors
4.5 REPORT for the CITY of SANTA
CRUZ
ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CITYBASED INTEGRATED HEALTH
RESPONSE TEAM
5.1 2
Table of Contents
CRISIS Consulting............................................................................................................................................... 2 Mobile Crisis Models........................................................................................................................................... 3 Access................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Two-Clinician Teams........................................................................................................................................... 5 Co-Response ....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Integrated Health First Response.......................................................................................................................... 11 Table 1 ............................................................................................................................................................. 17 An Integrated System ......................................................................................................................................... 17 Community and City Benefits.............................................................................................................................. 19 Local Social Service Agencies............................................................................................................................. 19 Support to Law Enforcement............................................................................................................................... 22 Support to Fire/EMS .......................................................................................................................................... 24 Data Assessment................................................................................................................................................ 25 Methodology..................................................................................................................................................... 26 Diversions......................................................................................................................................................... 28 Co-response ...................................................................................................................................................... 29 Possible Diversions............................................................................................................................................ 30 No Response ..................................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 2 ............................................................................................................................................................. 31 Funding ............................................................................................................................................................ 31 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................ 32 Chart 1.............................................................................................................................................................. 32 CRISIS Consulting
In the summer of 2022, the city of Santa Cruz (henceforth, the City) reached out to Ben Adam Climer, the author of this report, to discuss the prospect of working on an effort to develop a mobile crisis response team specifically for the City. After communicating with leaders in the city of Petaluma, the City determined that it would be worth exploring a similar process and service as what Petaluma performed to develop their mobile crisis team known as Specialized Assistance for Everyone (SAFE). SAFE is a mobile crisis response program based on the CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out on the Streets) team out of Eugene, OR. For
5.2 3
ease of understanding, I will refer to the CAHOOTS team specifically as CAHOOTS, and because of the unique traits of the model, I will refer to any team that is similar to CAHOOTS as an Integrated Health First Response team.
I, Ben Adam Climer, have assisted numerous cities throughout the state and the University of California Santa Cruz develop mobile crisis teams based on the Integrated Health First Response model. For five years, I worked as a member of the CAHOOTS team as a crisis counselor. I also served as an EMT (Emergency Medical Technician) for CAHOOTS for two and a half years and as an administrator for a year. The City approached me to assist in the exploration of a team for the City that would be dedicated to responding to calls for service (CFS) within the City. We executed a contract in late 2022 to perform this, and this report is the first major summary of that effort.
Mobile Crisis Models
The incredible success of SAFE in Petaluma and Rohnert Park-Cotati is spreading to San Rafael. Cities all around the state and country are increasingly interested in forming teams based on the Integrate Health First Response model. There are, broadly, two other models for mobile crisis response in the country and the State of California. Santa Cruz County employs both of them. The two models have a variety of names. For the purposes of this report, they will be called the Two-Clinician Model and the Co-Response Model. The goal of this report is not to summarily condemn either model. The goal is to illuminate the innate benefits and deficits of each and explain how Integrated Health First Response utilizes the best parts of each model and expands upon them to create a more robust response team.
• Two-Clinician Team: Typically operated by counties in California, this model employs at least one graduate-level or licensed mental health worker and responds to requests for support when a person is experiencing a mental health crisis.
5.3 4
• Co-Response: Typically operated by a collaboration between counties and law enforcement agencies, this model pairs a graduate-level or licensed mental health worker with a law enforcement officer and responds to any request that is outside the scope of typical law enforcement duties. • Integrated Health First Response: Typically operated by non-profits that are contracted with a municipality, this model pairs a trained crisis worker with a medical professional, usually an EMT, and responds to any mental health, substance use, or homelessness-related call for service in addition to basic, non-criminal welfare checks on people in their homes and in the community.
Access
Before introducing each model, it is important to note the difficulty of accessing any team for immediate and appropriate response. Have you ever played the game “Telephone?” Participants sit in a circle. One person starts by whispering a phrase into the ear of the person next to them. This person whispers into the ear of the next person, and the whispered phrase travels around the circle until it gets back to the person who started it.
The game is to see how the initial phrase was misheard and changed throughout the process of whispering it into the ear of the person next to you.
The process of dispatching someone to any call for service is somewhat akin to this process. For example, if someone is having a mental health crisis and they want someone to respond to assist, they need to first be able to communicate to someone that they are in a mental health crisis. By definition, a crisis might preclude someone from being able to convey this information clearly. If, by chance, they are able to communicate to someone, either a friend, family member, coworker, or bystander, that they are in need of immediate assistance, it becomes incumbent upon that person to call for assistance from the correct people.
Upon doing so, they need to be able to communicate what the issue is and why they need a mental health crisis response rather than a police officer or a paramedic.
5.4 5
It is this phenomenon that creates the discrepancy between actual police call data and the on-the-ground anecdotal reports of police officers themselves. While it is common for less than 1% of all CFS to be mental health-related, many officers working on the beat report that anywhere from 30-50% of their responses have some form of mental health component to them. The goal of a mobile crisis team should not be to focus on responding to that 1% of calls that are explicitly mental health but rather, to respond the broad spectrum of CFS that might include mental health, substance use, or homelessness. There is a lot of police time spent on calls simply because the words passed around the circle in the game of telephone were not clear. An Integrated Health First Responder team takes away the need for the words to be clear and instead deploys a team that can handle a wide array of requests.
Two-Clinician Teams
The Two-Clinician Team model is common in California. All major counties have some version of it in operation, and many smaller counties have similar services. These teams are almost exclusively run by County Mental and Behavioral Health Authorities. The exception is the endangered PET (Psychiatric Emergency Team) teams that are typically deployed by hospitals, often in coordination with local health authorities and law enforcement. The term “Two-Clinician Team” may be inaccurate. Not all the teams that operate in this model are staffed by two clinicians. At times, they deploy only one clinician so long as law enforcement is on scene. In other situations, they deploy one licensed clinician alongside a peer support worker or an unlicensed mental health worker of some kind.
Santa Cruz does deploy a team in this model. The team is called the Mobile Emergency Response Team (MERT). There is also a team designated specifically for youth called MERTY. According to County staff, these teams operate during normal business hours, Monday through Friday. They do not respond to anywhere
5.5 6
other than medical offices, hospitals, jails, social service agencies, businesses, schools, or anywhere without staff present.
The majority of these types of teams deploy two clinicians. It is important, from a safety and procedural standpoint, to not send first responders to CFS on their own without any kind of support. It is important to always have at least two people on every team that is deployed.
The most common way to access Two-Clinician teams is through a select 10-digit number that rings into a reception at the County mental health authority, and this is how MERT is accessed. Some teams with less funding will answer the phone calls themselves. Whoever responds to the phone call will screen the call for whether or not it is appropriate for the team. Universally, these teams respond exclusively to mental health calls.
Therefore, if the person they are assisting is intoxicated or homeless, they must also be experiencing a discrete mental health crisis in addition to their other struggles. As one can imagine, making the determination as to whether or not the person-in-crisis is experiencing something definitively mental health-related when they are intoxicated or experiencing homelessness can be difficult over the phone. This screening out process produces a barrier to access that is not seen in the other two models that are assessed below.
The primary responsibility of teams in this model is to perform risk assessments. In the State of California, Welfare and Institutions Code 5150 (WIC 5150) allows all law enforcement officers or anyone designated by the County Mental/Behavioral Health Authority Director to place someone on an involuntary psychiatric hold so long as they are perceived to be at imminent danger to harm themselves or others. When mental health workers are granted this power, it is known as having LPS-designation. While a county’s mental/behavioral health authority director has liberty to determine who has this designation, it typically is
5.6 7
reserved for mental health workers with advanced degrees such as Masters or Doctoral degrees in social work, psychology, or counseling. Oftentimes, licensure is also required.
While it is beyond the scope of this report to thoroughly discuss the philosophical, psychological, and legal problems of involuntary psychiatric holds, it is important to note that the majority of CFS that are mental health related that law enforcement agencies receive do not require either a 5150 assessment or a psychiatric hold. This has been one of the sticking points for developing mobile crisis teams throughout the state. Law enforcement agencies and activists alike have been calling for the expansion and addition of mobile crisis responders to handle non-law enforcement related CFS, and the response has often been to attempt to expand already understaffed crisis teams that respond to a strict criteria of request. Additionally, while all law enforcement agencies, fire departments, and EMS agencies operate 24/7/365, most mobile crisis response teams work no later than 10:00 pm and rarely start earlier than 8:00 am. Orange County’s CAT (Crisis Assessment Team) team is a rare exception, but even the massive LA County Department of Mental Health has been unable to field a 24/7 team. The question becomes whether or not it is worth implementing a team without LPSdesignation and without licensed or graduate level clinicians considering that a small minority of requests require that level of response.
Generally, in this model, transportation is handled by private ambulance companies or by law enforcement. MERT has these at their disposal, but with a fully compliant patient, they are able to transport on their own. However, they can only transport to the hospital or the CSP (Crisis Stabilization Program). When it is the former, the transports are almost exclusively because an involuntary hold has been placed. When transports are handled by private ambulance, the situation is often negative for patient care. Due to the perceived risk of transporting suicidal patients and the typically low reimbursement that they receive from counties for performing these transports, private ambulance companies often de-prioritize these transports
5.7 8
which leads to long wait times. The wait times will either lead to missed support or relying on law enforcement to perform the transport.
One nightmare situation that I have heard direct testimony about in LA County from a homeless service worker included a five hour wait for the crisis team who wrote a 5150 hold, left the service worker with the client, called for an ambulance to transport, and the ambulance took nine hours to arrive. The homeless service worker was required to remain with the client throughout the entire 14-hour process. This story is important because it highlights the critical need for a team that can safely and effectively transport their own clients to a variety of locations. There is a perception that an ambulance is required for health reasons. As you will see in the Integrated Health First Response model, by combining an EMT and a crisis worker, the mental health workers do the primary assessment while the EMT performs the assessment on whether or not the patient is safe to transport. This collapses the response into one team rather than a mobile mental health team followed by the medical staff hours later.
It might be important to note that many teams throughout the state that operate in the Two-Clinician model will not respond without law enforcement presence. In doing so, a single 5150 psychiatric hold can take hours to complete and start with law enforcement followed by the crisis team and finally an ambulance.
Furthermore, if the patient arrives at the receiving facility and the receiving facility determines that the patient is no longer at imminent risk to harming self or others, they will discharge the patient. At times, hospital stays for 5150s after the entire aforementioned process takes place can last a mere one to two hours. The goal of any alternative response team should be to resolve these inefficiencies rather than compound them.
One of the biggest barriers to creating a 24/7/365 Two-Clinician Team is the ability to hire staff. For most licensed clinicians, they must attend four years of undergraduate, two to three years of graduate school,
5.8 9
and at least two years of supervised training to get their licensure. The majority of people who seek licensure are interested in providing therapy, especially in a controlled environment, during normal business hours on weekdays. It is extraordinarily hard to hire licensed clinicians to mobile teams. To do so also means that the area’s therapists will be employed to do crisis response and not ongoing therapy which is necessary for actual healing. To have at least 24/7 coverage, at least six crisis workers are required. If Santa Cruz, Watsonville, and the broader county were to implement programs, there would be the need for 18 licensed or graduate level clinicians. To put this into perspective, a recent mobile response program in the City of Los Angeles, the second largest city in the country, attempted to hire 12 licensed clinicians and found it so difficult that they abandoned the requirement altogether, settling on bachelor’s degrees to suffice.
Co-Response
The Co-Response model is a composite team of a graduate-level mental health worker paired with a law enforcement officer. Sometimes, this is referred to as “The Memphis Model” named after a program started by the Memphis Police Department in 1988, one year before CAHOOTS started in Eugene. In this model, a law enforcement officer goes through extra CIT (Crisis Intervention Training) and is paired with a mental health worker. This is an extremely common model in California and is by far the most common model of crisis response in the country.
Santa Cruz has this model already in place. It is called MHL (Mental Health Liaisons). This team operates seven days a week, 10 hours per day from 8:00 am to 6:00 pm. On Wednesdays, they have two mental health workers on duty. Both are licensed therapists. The liaisons carry police radios and listen for relevant calls that come over the air. They also have their own designators on the radio and can be dispatched to CFS. They respond exclusively alongside police, hence the term “co-response.” They report that they respond to anyone
5.9 10
presenting with anything related to mental health issues. This can include people who are screaming in public, disorganized, domestic disputes, elderly folks, suicidal ideation, completed suicides, and many other call types.
A lot of their work involves telling people about what types of services exist to help with the situations that people are in.
One interesting evolution that has occurred due to COVID has been the separation of the crisis workers from the officers in vehicles. In traditional Co-Response, the crisis workers are paired with a specific officer.
Due to COVID, in order to avoid close contact, the MHL staff were given a separate car to take to CFS. This meant that they could respond to any call with any officer. This created an immediate boost in their call volume.
In prior years, if the officer they were paired with was sent to a non-mental health-related CFS, the MHL staff would be stuck on that call until it was resolved. This meant that MHL was too often responding to non-mental health CFS. Now, they are only sent to mental health CFS because they are no longer attached to a specific police officer. This point is important when thinking about making a mobile crisis team. By disconnecting the team from accompaniment with law enforcement, teams are able to respond to significantly higher call volumes, and their responses become more flexible.
Despite the individual cars, MHL does not provide transport for clients in their vehicles. They rely on law enforcement and ambulances for transport to locations like the hospital or the local crisis center. It is also important to note that Co-Response and Two-Clinician models tend to transport only to crisis centers or hospitals. This will be explored more in the next section, but flexibility of transport locations is important when creating a new mobile crisis system.
The greatest strength of Co-Response when compared to Two-Clinician teams is the flexibility of CoResponse. Co-Response can respond to a wider range of call types because it is dispatched the same way law
5.10 11
enforcement is. Co-Responder teams also have the advantage over Integrated Health teams in that they are, currently, able to be the first responders to intimate partner violence and domestic violence situations. By being tied into the 911 system and the radio, Co-Response is able to request additional support quickly and easily in ways that Two-Clinician teams are not. As will be shown in the following section, Co-Response is still limited in what it responds to, and the presence of law enforcement limits the types of engagements they can have.
The presence of law enforcement is the primary problem with this model. Quality crisis intervention relies heavily on what is referred to as a positive “therapeutic alliance.” This requires the crisis worker form trust with the person-in-crisis. By no fault of the individual officer, the presence of law enforcement can increase the anxiety of the person-in-crisis because they fear that they might be in trouble for doing something wrong. This can undermine trust. When the trust is undermined, the willingness to be vulnerable is reduced.
This makes the therapeutic alliance and therefore the intervention less effective. This leads to increased hospitalizations and use of force.
Integrated Health First Response
As mentioned above, in order to disambiguate the CAHOOTS team as it operates in Eugene and Springfield, OR from the model that it created, we will refer to the model as Integrated Health First Response.
This model began in 1989 when CAHOOTS was first launched, but at that time, the CAHOOTS team was staffed by two crisis workers. Over the following 10 years, the team encountered CFS that required medical staff on a regular basis. Rather than calling out paramedics with the fire department to handle urgent but nonemergency medical issues, they replaced one of the crisis workers with an EMT. They also made it possible for the EMTs to “cross-train” as crisis workers so that they could have teams with two crisis workers and an EMT.
5.11 12
Integrated Health teams are distinct from the other two models, but they combine components of both.
They are non-law enforcement teams the same as the Two-Clinician teams, but they respond to CFS by being dispatched through a central communications system the way that Co-Response does. They respond to any location within their service area, regardless of income, health insurance, or housing situation of the person-incrisis. Integrated Health teams respond to a wide variety of issues. These are the following but are not limited to: mental health crises, suicidal feelings and actions, intoxication, welfare checks, family disputes, homelessrelated crises, chronic health-related crises, requests for referrals to social services, death notifications, public assists, and more.
Part of what makes Integrated Health teams capable of responding to such a wide range of CFS is that they have medical staff. This enables them to respond to CFS that typically are reserved for EMS (Emergency Medical Services). The practice of sending EMS to non-emergency calls can disrupt an entire system of Fire/EMS that is designed to be responsive to the most life-threatening human experiences, namely, fires, medical emergencies, and accidents.
A simple example of what is meant by this came while I was doing a ride-along with Santa Cruz Fire Department. The truck I was riding on was called to a Walgreens due to the smell of smoke in the building. As it was a potential fire, they dispatched two engines and a ladder truck. They set up fans, investigated the ventilation ducts, climbed onto the roof, and more. About 10 minutes after we arrived, another call that was in their district came in to check on someone sleeping on the sidewalk. These are often referred to as “subject down” calls. Fire/EMS is often sent to these calls because there is a small possibility that the person could be unconscious or overdosed. That is rare. Law enforcement is also routinely sent to these types of calls even though they are not criminal or violent in nature. A subject down call of this nature is a perfect Integrated Health First Response team service. Santa Cruz ended up pulling an engine from the far side of town to drive to
5.12 13
check on the person who was sleeping. If an accident or medical emergency had occurred during that time, there would have been almost no engines available to respond. An Integrated Health team is able to appropriately respond to these calls because they are not medical calls even though they have the potential to become one.
The EMT on the Integrated Health team enables the team to initiate basic life support interventions if it ends up that the person is overdosed and not sleeping, for example.
There are other advantages to having an Integrated Health team. For some people, talking about their emotional or mental health is a stressful experience that they try to avoid. Talking about their physical health is more tolerable. By having a medical professional who can talk with them about their physical well-being, the team is able to build rapport in a way that is impossible with the medical staff. Another simple example of this comes from the Petaluma SAFE (Specialized Assistance for Everyone) team. In week one of operation, the SAFE team made contact with a man who had been experiencing homelessness in town for more than a decade.
Police reported that he was totally resistant to any type of care. When SAFE first engaged, he did not want to talk. On the second try, we offered to bandage wounds on his feet. He was happy and grateful for this. After doing so, he was willing to meet with a wound care nurse and started receiving supportive services for the first time in over 10 years.
Integrated Health shares the same type of access as Co-Response. People seeking an Integrated Health team call a central communications system, typically police dispatchers, who then dispatch the team to the call.
This makes for a very flexible team. It means that a call can be made into a co-response at the point of dispatch.
This means that all the benefits of Co-Response as a model are included in Integrate Health teams while including the benefits of being a non-law enforcement team.
5.13 14
The Integrated Health model has a minimal threshold for response. What I mean by this is that rather than screening out, Integrated Health teams screen in. Rather than determining if the request for service is mental health before arriving on scene, Integrated Health casts a wide net of who can receive a response. This means that the game of telephone described above is circumvented, and law enforcement is diverted from going to CFS that do not require a law enforcement response. This is why the Two-Clinician teams in LA County, which is 167 times more populous than Petaluma, only respond to five times the amount of calls on an annual basis as Petaluma’s SAFE team. If Los Angeles County had a team responding to the same volume of calls per capita as Petaluma, they would respond to over 665,000 calls per year. Instead, they respond to just over 20,000.
There is another complication in this conversation. That is the problem of where would an Integrated Health team transport people to. Unlike ambulances, Integrated Health teams are not restricted by emergency medical laws that dictate that all patients must be transported to the emergency room. Instead, they can transport to any staffed service where a transfer of care can occur. In Santa Cruz County, there are a few places where this can occur, but the capacity of those services is limited.
The most obvious transportation destination is the CSP (Crisis Stabilization Program) operated by Telecare. This is a 24/7/365 service that provides acute care crisis services, but it is very limited in its volume.
COVID and staffing difficulties have restricted it even further. Nevertheless, it will still be a highly utilized service. Unlike Eugene, Santa Cruz has no sobering center. It does have Homeless Persons Health Project which has drop-in hours during the day.
There are, however, other social services in Santa Cruz, and while it is not the goal of this report to give an exhaustive list, it is important to note that by taking people to staffed services that are not the hospital, Integrated Health teams are able to divert many people from the emergency room. CAHOOTS estimates that
5.14 15
they divert hundreds of patients every year from the emergency room, especially in coordination with the local, non-lockdown crisis centers; SAFE diverted well over 100 in their first year of operation, as well. Too often, people needing assistance have defaulted to going to the ER. Due to the fact that many of the people diverted from the ERs by Integrated Health teams are either uninsured or underinsured, these diversions save local hospitals hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Additionally, social workers have relied heavily on making paper referrals in which they tell someone where to go but do not assist the person in getting there. Integrated Health teams do not rely on telling people where to get care but, rather, take them to the staffed services as a way to streamline the referral process. This helps guarantee a smooth transition, and it establishes a positive relationship between the Integrated Health team and the local social services who may call upon the team when one of their clients is in the middle of a crisis and requiring assistance with de-escalation.
Disambiguating Integrated Health First Response and Homeless Outreach As the homeless population grew from the ‘80s to the ‘90s and into the ‘00s, homeless service workers found that people living on the streets were often not accessing resources that were available to them. A way to solve this problem was the creation of homeless outreach teams. People experiencing homelessness, reasonably, had deep-seated mistrust of systems. Homeless outreach teams took on the responsibility of building trust to help people feel comfortable going into shelter or housing. Additionally, people experiencing homelessness often have no reliable modes of transportation. Getting to shelters or day-time drop-in centers can be difficult.
Outreach developed to bring case management out offices that are difficult to access and into the places where people experiencing homelessness actually are.
5.15 16
While Integrated Health has similarities to homeless outreach, it is ultimately a different service.
Outreach makes conscious efforts to work with specific people. They repeatedly and consistently meet with the same people over and over until a sense of trust is built so that resources are more easily accepted. Integrated Health is a first responder model designed to respond to crises as they happen. However, Integrated Health teams are also proactive, patrolling cities more like a police department rather than waiting like a fire department.
Through the course of their work, Integrated Health teams build trust and positive relationships with many people in need of services. This means that sometimes they become de facto outreach workers. While this is a normal and expected component of the work, it is important to not oversell an Integrated Health team and what they can accomplish. In order to be available for urgent calls such as suicidal people or time-sensitive welfare checks, Integrated Health teams cannot get caught up in doing homeless or housing case management.
Many Integrated Health teams throughout the state including SAFE, HOPE in Orange County, and CMC in Stockton have case managers who provide follow-up support after the response team makes contact. The goal of these case managers is to help support the person with their long-term needs after the response team manages the short-term crisis. It is important to have these types of case managers providing follow-up care for people, but it is also important to not turn crisis responders into case managers. It is also important to manage expectations of the public, other first responders, and the city government. When I worked as an outreach case manager, I had approximately 20 clients on my case load, and that was an extremely difficult volume. It is possible for an Integrated Health team to meet 20 people in a week. They cannot be expected to provide case management for all of them.
5.16 17
Table 1
Price Point Comparison
Integrated Health Team Clinician Team with Peer Support Position Salary Responsibilities Position Salary Responsibilities Unlicensed
Crisis
Worker
$65,000-
$80,000
Crisis intervention, deescalation, suicide
assessment, referral
Licensed
Mental
Health Crisis
Intervention
Specialist
$105,000-
$135,000
Crisis intervention,
de-escalation, 5150
assessment, referral
EMT $50,000-
$65,000
Medical assessments,
transport decisions, bandage
changes, rule outs, leads
unexpected emergencies
Peer Support
Worker
$60,000-
$75,000
Support, referral,
empathy
An Integrated System
Most counties in California have only had some form of Two-Clinician team and/or Co-Response while Eugene, OR has only had an Integrated Health Team. The reality is that the Integrated Health model and the Two-Clinician model only intersect at the point of acute mental health crises, namely suicidal, psychotic, and manic persons. For CAHOOTS, these make up approximately 10% of the total CFS. As shown below in the data assessment, an Integrated Health team in Santa Cruz could be responding to as many as 7,000 CFS in a year. This number is similar to the city of Springfield CAHOOTS team, and Springfield is almost identical to Santa Cruz in population. If there were 7,000 CFS and 10% were acute mental health crises, throughout the year there might be slightly less than two calls per day. These numbers expand when applied to the entire county, perhaps quadrupling to seven to eight CFS per day. With a tiered model in which the Integrated Health team operates as the first responders, whatever they are not able to effectively de-escalate or transport voluntarily could be passed off to a group of second responders that function as the County’s 5150 assessment team (see response chart at the end of this document).
5.17 18
This solves for numerous problems. One is resource distribution. Hiring and retaining licensed clinicians is extraordinarily difficult, but they are not necessary for at least 90% of the CFS that are handled by Integrated Health teams. Expanding a team of clinicians is substantially more difficult and costly than hiring teams of unlicensed crisis workers and EMTs. By developing Integrated Health teams as the primary responders, they are able to triage for the county team who can then respond to calls that exclusively require licensed clinical staff.
This would create a situation in which mental health workers will be on scene with the acute clients until the County team arrives. This would create a more effective continuum of care. It would also require very little adjustments by the County as their system currently exists.
If 9-8-8 could be employed to easily refer the Integrated Health team to CFS, there could be a system in which a crisis counselor answers the phone, responds, and transports. The burden this would remove from police departments is incalculable. More importantly, the experience of the person-in-crisis would significantly change. Instead of feeling the disconnect between a law enforcement officer responding for a non-criminal issue, which is a stigmatizing and anxiety-inducing experience, people would be able to rest assured that they would only ever interact with trained, compassionate mental health professionals.
Admittedly, to do this plan, the County would need to change some of the policies of MERT and MERTY. For example, they would need to start responding to homes so long as the police or the Integrated Health Team were on scene or had already cleared with the indication that the scene is safe. In our meeting with the County, it was made clear that they plan to utilize their funding in new and innovative ways by expanding and enhancing mobile crisis response over the next several years. They are excited about collaborative efforts to make the system streamlined, functional, and flexible.
5.18 19
Community and City Benefits
A good metaphor to use when talking about Integrated Health First Response is that of a wheel. If we think of the person-in-crisis as the hub of a wheel, the rim of the wheel would be the supportive services that assist them with ascertaining resources. These might be therapists, doctors, government benefits, shelter, case managers, crisis centers, and much more. The Integrated Health First Response team serves as the spokes of the wheel. Their role is to connect the person-in-crisis, the hub, to those services. Simultaneously, those services will invariably reach moments where they are not capable of managing a person’s crisis. This could be because of a lack of staffing or lack of ability. It could also be simply because it is after hours, and they cannot dedicate overtime for their staff to be able to handle the situation.
The benefits of an Integrated Health team are expansive. Below are examples of how these teams benefit local services. Included here are the opinions, as reported, of several organizations throughout the area.
Local Social Service Agencies
In the process of developing this report, we met with Encompass, the local NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness) chapter, Community Bridges, Family Services Central Coast who operate 988 in Santa Cruz, community members Jeff Arlt and Stacy Smith, and the County Behavioral Health leadership. These were important meetings that helped elucidate to the City staff how beneficial a team serving the City of Santa Cruz could be. All of the organizations stated that they would benefit from having expanded mobile crisis response in the region, especially in the city of Santa Cruz.
One important conversation was with Andrea Tolaio who is the director of 9-8-8. For those not familiar with 9-8-8, it is the continuation and expansion of the national suicide hotline. For many years, the national suicide hotline was operated by local organizations, and people could dial a 1-800 number or a local 10-digit
5.19 20
number to access crisis counselors over the phone. However, when someone is severely suicidal or struggling with their mental health, it can be difficult to look up a 10-digit number for help. To make the process simpler, the federal government mandated the transition from local 10-digit numbers to a simple, 3-digit number. That number is 9-8-8. The hope of 9-8-8 is to make calling for help during a suicidal crisis simpler. It also expanded the scope of the hotline, making it more than just suicide related. They expanded it to include any mental health crisis. Sometimes, 988 staff feel it is necessary to send an in-person response to a suicidal or escalated caller.
Unfortunately, they rarely have the ability to send anyone other than law enforcement. They do not have the ability to send non-police teams because the non-police teams do not respond to individuals in their homes. This means that they onl way an actual crisis worker can make it to the caller is if it is during MHL’s operating hours.
This is a problem for 9-8-8 because it can create a lack of trust between the caller and the service. When someone calls for help and instead receives the police, it can mean they might not call for help again, especially if they are their lowest point. This is partly why SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) has emphasized the importance of someone to call, someone to respond, and somewhere to go for when people are in mental health crisis. Our system has given these responsibilities to 911 operators who are not trained nor expected to be able to provide crisis counseling over the phone, law enforcement officers who are not mental health workers, and jails or emergency rooms, neither of which are designed to manage people experiencing mental health crises. A 24/7 mobile crisis team is therefore important for the best operational efforts of 988, and in order to have 24/7/365 coverage, the model needs to be able to handle that demand.
In our conversation with Encompass services, we heard a clarion call for assistance. Encompass is a large organization with many innovative programs providing a wide range of services to people who are in need of support. They report that crises occur often and that it feels as though they never happen during normal
5.20 21
business hours. As a result, if their staff are unable to de-escalate or if the client is acutely suicidal, they rely heavily on law enforcement. They report, and local law enforcement has confirmed, that law enforcement is making a concerted effort to refrain from being mental health responders. They recognize that it is inappropriate to send someone tasked with enforcing the law to a situation in which no laws have been broken. This fact alone exemplifies the necessity for a 24/7/365 mobile crisis response. As mentioned, the goal needs to be implementation of the most effective model.
When we met with Ray Cancino of Community Bridges, he helped illuminate the need from their perspective. Although they do not call for police very often, he reported that a 24/7 mobile crisis response team would "Help enhance the feeling of and ability to live in the community” for people who are struggling with their mental health. This highlights a key component of crisis response that is often misunderstood. People routinely believe that the purpose of a crisis team is to remove someone from a situation. While the ability to transport someone to a different location is important for any crisis response, the primary responsibility of an effective mobile crisis team is to do what Ray stated so clearly. It is to de-escalate and find a way for the person-in-crisis to remain where they are. Sometimes, it is the place where they are that is causing the crisis. In these instances, transport is necessary. In all other cases, transport to another location should always be considered the last option. An effective team, therefore, reduces ER and crisis center visits. The visits to these facilities that do happen are also transformed in the sense that they are more appropriate when they do happen.
The local NAMI chapter is in strong favor of a 24/7 mobile crisis team. This is a component of the larger national push by NAMI to address mental health crises with people other than police or firefighters. In addition to calling for more crisis response, NAMI representatives joined the chorus of the other organizations calling for more step-down facilities for crisis stabilization. Most crisis stabilization units throughout the state are designed to handle erratic or potentially violent people experiencing mental health crises. They can be
5.21 22
isolating and stigmatizing in their sterility and security procedures for people who are seeking a calm, relaxing retreat from the stimuli that is triggering their crisis response. In accordance with SAMHSA guidelines of “Someone to call; someone to respond; somewhere to go,” there needs to be a larger conversation about unlocked crisis centers. This conversation is beyond the scope of this report, but it should be noted that in our conversations, this was universally suggested. It should also be noted that when the CAHOOTS team launched in 1989, a sobering center was opened at the same time with the express purpose of being a primary transport location of the CAHOOTS team. The vision was to avoid unnecessary ER visits that clog up the hospital with intoxicated patients. In the era of COVID-19, this is even more important. While some people argue that without transport locations like this an Integrated Health team is ineffective, I argue that because an Integrated Health team’s first goal is for the client to remain in place, these locations are not mandatory for a successful team although they are necessary for an effective system that seeks to provide care outside of the standard hospitals and jails.
Support to Law Enforcement
A variety of different ways in which an Integrated Health team can alleviate the burdens placed on law enforcement to manage non-criminal issues have already been listed. A few more examples should be pointed out. First, in circumstances in which where there is a suspected public safety risk in addition to a mental health crisis, law enforcement is often tasked with both roles of managing the safety of the bystanders and the mental health of the person-in-crisis. While Co-Response as a model attempts to address these types of scenarios, specifically, the vast majority of requests for response do not fit into this category. Furthermore, if the original call is a suspicion of public safety mixed with mental health crisis, the Co-Response model prohibits law enforcement from leaving once the public safety concern has been addressed. However, Santa Cruz has shifted this policy because their MHL teams are now operating out of their own vehicles. This enables the clinician to ask the officers to leave if the scene feels safe and the officers are not needed anymore. This is a wise policy,
5.22 23
and it shows the efficiency that is baked into the Integrated Health model. With an Integrated Health team, once the public safety component has been addressed, law enforcement is free to leave while the Integrated Health team continues the de-escalation and crisis intervention. This enables law enforcement to focus on their purpose without getting trapped by the component of the call that is not their expertise.
Second, law enforcement is frequently tasked with checking on people experiencing homelessness, especially when they are in public spaces. These contacts can lead to arrests for trespassing or loitering which make it more difficult for people experiencing homelessness to access housing or shelter. Additionally, it requires law enforcement to make the decision to detain someone who may require mental health or physical health assistance. This experience of detaining people who are struggling can be exhausting and feel counterproductive. Most mobile crisis teams rarely engage in situations like this, thereby doing nothing to alleviate law enforcement of these duties. Integrated Health teams respond to CFS like this as a major component of their scope of service. This not only serves the well-being of local law enforcement, it serves the person experiencing homelessness and the callers who do not want the person to be punished but aided.
Third, law enforcement is still likely to end up on calls that should be sent to the mobile crisis team.
They currently respond to these types of requests daily. They often end in protracted interventions that can last hours if the person-in-crisis requires transportation to a hospital or crisis center. In the case that they do end up on a call for service, the simple integration of the Integrated Health team into the local first responder system makes a transition of care simple. Integrated Health First Responders are what their name implies, first responders. They are not mobile therapists attempting to provide therapy in a field-based environment. The model is closer to law enforcement or EMS than it is to the Two-Clinician team or the homeless outreach model. The goal is to de-escalate, problem solve, and move on. This creates a significant impact on local law enforcement in a positive way that improves morale and decreases time spent on calls.
5.23 24
Finally, Integrated Health teams add the fourth branch of the first responder system that is currently missing. This gives a clearer identity and mission to all forms of first response. Law enforcement are no longer tasked with quality of life, mental health, substance use, and related CFS and neither are fire departments. Even when all four arms of the first responder system arrive to a call in this model, each group has a clear understanding of who is tasked with what. Law enforcement officers are not asked to de-escalate someone; EMS is not required to determine someone’s mental health needs; and firefighters can stay focused on their primary role of responding to accidents and fires.
Support to Fire/EMS
The story mentioned above about the welfare check on the person sleeping that was dispatched while three units were investigating a potential fire at a Walgreens is a perfect example of how an Integrated Health team can alleviate the burden placed on emergency services that frequently get sent to non-emergency situations. While the call in question was classified as a “subject down” call, there was another “subject down” call that came in later that day. It was a person who collapsed while walking on the beach. This collapse was witnessed by bystanders. Calls like this require immediate response because every second lost can mean increased chance of death or loss of neurological function after intervention. It is important to point out that these two calls, the person sleeping and the person who collapsed, were classified as the same type of call even though the only similarity between them is that they both included a person who was not standing.
Responding to check on people who are asleep is an inefficient use of the time of Fire/EMS. This is especially true when the calls are at night when they are sleeping. Emergency medical response is a critical component of the health of any city and its residents. Emergency medical responders operate best when they are rested and not occupied with non-emergency situations. They need to get to that person who collapsed quickly
5.24 25
and not be stuck checking on the person who is sleeping on the sidewalk or in a restaurant. Furthermore, their only recourse for action is to transport to the hospital. This means that even a person experiencing an illness that is not an emergency will end up in the emergency room. This clogs ERs and exhausts ambulance resources.
Integrated Health teams can also offer support in situations where a family member is having a medical emergency. These are distressing experiences and medics and firefighters are not able to emotionally support families while they are trying to medically support the patient, nor should they be expected to. Integrated Health teams provide that service, and because of they are more readily available than on-call therapists, they can do so in real time.
At times, people might refuse care from EMS. Sometimes, this is because of intoxication or mental health issues. These situations are examples of when an Integrated Health team can provide support in the forms of de-escalation and intervention. They might not always be able to get someone to the hospital if the patient really needs it, but there are many examples of when they have. This creates a symbiotic relationship between EMS and the mobile crisis team. When the crisis responders end up on a call that requires EMS, they are able to easily access that resource and vice versa.
Data Assessment
What follows is an assessment of data that was provided by the Santa Cruz Regional 9-1-1 Center (SCRC). They manage dispatch for almost all agencies in the county and a few that are outside of it. The goal of this assessment is to give an accounting of CFS that could have been handled by an Integrated Health First Response team in prior years based on criteria that is used for these types of team in other municipalities. This is, by no means, an exact science. The other goal is to get a grasp on how many CFS already exist that could be diverted. The hope is to establish an estimated baseline so that one year after implementation, a team in Santa
5.25 26
Cruz could compare the estimate to the reality and use that information to determine if the team is being appropriately used and dispatched. As an example, in Petaluma, the actual responses were higher than the estimated responses. This was a good sign that they were being adequately sent to calls. • Diversions: These are CFS that can be handled by an Integrated Health Team without assistance and are currently being handled by law enforcement or fire/EMS. • Co-response: These are CFS that include components of mobile crisis response, public safety, and/or EMS and therefore should include either the Integrated Health team with law enforcement, with EMS, or with both.
• Possible Diversions: These are CFS that could potentially go to an Integrated Health Team, but there are not clear enough details to make a determination at this time. • No Response: These are CFS that have details that might seem to fall under the responsibility of an Integrated Health Team but upon closer inspection would not be in their purview.
Methodology
The first step in the assessment was to provide SCRC with a list of the types of CFS that Integrated Health teams respond to in other jurisdictions. They took these call types and compared them to how they code CFS. They then collated all the CFS from 2019 and 20211that matched the criteria that I provided. They returned a spreadsheet that included CFS coded as the following types: Welfare Checks2, Suicidal, Missing Persons3, Intoxicated Persons, Emotionally Disturbed Persons4, Subjects Down5, Disoriented Persons, Deaths, 1 For quality purposes, I always exclude 2020 data because the Covid-19 pandemic skews data and does not provide a sense of what a “normal” year might be like. The data was also provided before 2022 was completed so we also excluded that. 2 This is the most common type of call for the CAHOOTS team in Eugene, making up approximately 30% of their call volume.
Welfare checks are rarely concerns with violence and are typically doing exactly what it sounds like, checking on someone’s welfare. 3 While Integrated Health teams are not typically primary responders on missing persons CFS, they can help in searches or in communicating with local homeless populations who may have had contact with the person who is missing. Sometimes, especially missing youth, missing persons are more likely to engage with the non-police team, for a variety of reasons. 4 This was the second smallest type of call, and it is unclear the difference between it and 5150. 5 In Eugene, where CAHOOTS operates, they are the primary responders to all subjects down. Please see above for what a subject down call is. The reality is that a huge majority of these types of calls are simply people sleeping. Without integrated health and the EMT or medical component, a mobile crisis team becomes limited in their ability to respond to subjects down.
5.26 27
5150s6, and 415s (Public Disturbances7). There were 12,078 CFS identified in 2019 and 9,484 CFS identified in 2021. I proceeded to randomize all CFS in Excel and selected 10% of them to assess (1,200 CFS in 2019 and 950 CFS in 2021). Each call was assigned to one of four categories: Diversion, Co-response, Possible Diversion, and No Response.
The SCRC provided an exhaustive list, but it did not include any dispatcher notes. What I mean by this is that dispatchers will write in notes stating what the call for service is about and details regarding it. These notes are typically what I use to determine whether or not a call is appropriate for an Integrated Health team.
For example, a 415 might be described as a person screaming at no one in the park or it could be described as a man screaming while standing over a woman in what appears to be a threatening manner. I did not have access to this information. In order to determine whether something like a 415 is appropriate for an Integrated Health team, I based my assessment on three criteria. First, how many officers were dispatched. If there were three or more units sent to the scene, this indicates that it required more than two people to handle. This might mean that the situations was more intense and aggressive than if one or two units were sent. So, for example, all 415s that included three or more units was assigned “No Response.” Second, I judged off the call type. 415s were less likely to be assigned Diversion than a Welfare Check, for example. Third, I judged the call based on the disposition. A disposition is simply how an officer “clears” a call. It states in the briefest of terms what happened. As an example, if the original call was a Welfare Check but the disposition was a traffic-related disposition, I assigned it as “No Response” because Integrated Health First Responders do not typically manage traffic-related incidents. Similarly, if a Welfare Check involved three or more units and had a disposition of 6 5150 is a broad term for any mental health response. Sometimes it can include suicidality. 7 The reason 415s are included in this assessment is mentioned above when considering the “game of telephone” that occurs when calling for assistance. Police departments have a variety of different codes for things like threatening someone with a weapon (417) and assault (242). Many 415 calls for service are simply people being escalated in public. The goal of the Integrated Health team is to de-escalate situations before they reach criminal levels. There will be more on how I determined what should be an Integrated Health response versus a law enforcement response in my assessment.
5.27 28
“Suspicious Circumstances,” I inferred that the original call was oriented to a check on something that might be perceived as criminal in nature. That was, therefore, assigned, “No Response.” Due to the lack of dispatcher’s notes, I was overly generous as to what could or could not be diverted to an Integrated Health team. I recognize that in its first year there will be much more Co-response than there might be in cities with established teams like Eugene and Springfield. The goal should always be to progressively send law enforcement with the team less and less over time. This is important for several reasons.
First, it reduces the amount of time spent on calls by officers. This frees them for critical responses and the burdensome paperwork associated with those types of responses. Second, by reducing law enforcement presence on calls, people will become more likely to call for assistance when they are dealing with mental health or other socially-determined crises. This will increase the effectiveness and reach of the Integrated Health team thus ensuring the health of the program. Finally, sending large groups to a crisis is not always the best way to de-escalate a crisis. People who may be paranoid due to their mental health might become more so when interfacing with law enforcement, and associating the Integrated Health team with law enforcement might erode trust and therefore the effectiveness of the team. We want to minimize these problems wherever possible.
Diversions
A Diversion is a CFS that could be handled by an Integrated Health First Response team without assistance from either law enforcement or EMS. As mentioned above, Welfare Checks, Subjects Down, Intoxicated Persons, and mental health related (5150, suicidal, and emotionally disturbed) CFS for service can almost always be handled by an Integrated Health team without assistance. These make up the bulk of their work. Many of these types of CFS are homelessness-related, and this is why they frequently end up doing so much support to people living on the street or in shelters.
5.28 29
Of the 1,200 total CFS assessed from 2019, 801 or 66.75% of them were determined to be Diversions, and of the 950 total CFS assessed from 2021, 673 or 70.84% of the were determined to be Diversions. As I mentioned above, I was generous with assigning CFS as Diversions. A large amount of the Welfare Checks and Subjects Down were determined to be Diversions. When extrapolated this means that approximately 8,062 CFS from 2019 and 6,718 CFS from 2021 could have been diverted to an Integrated Health First Response team, so long as that team is operating 24/7/365. While the 2019 number seems abnormally high, the 2021 number is similar to the amount of calls handled by CAHOOTS in Springfield, OR, a city with a similar population to Santa Cruz. While that number is significantly higher than SAFE in Petaluma, the unhoused population in Santa Cruz is substantially higher than that of Petaluma or Springfield. This almost certainly means that more Welfare Checks and Subjects Down CFS are generated in the city than in the others. It is these types of CFS that the Integrated Health team is designed to divert from law enforcement, especially considering how much time is taken up by these types of calls for individual officers.
Co-response
I distinguish the Co-Response model from the Co-response of law enforcement with the Integrated Health team as a way to demonstrate how an Integrated Health team is able to respond to a wide range of CFS without a law enforcement presence while still quickly transitioning to a shared response between the two agencies. There are two ways that a CFS might end up being a Co-response. First, the call may include both a public safety and a social service component. For example, it might be a suicidal person with a weapon. In these instances, both teams would be deployed at the outset. Second, the officers may be dispatched to a call that appears criminal in nature but is determined to be mental health, substance use, or homelessness-related upon their arrival. When this happens, if the officers can easily access the team, it becomes second nature to them to request the team’s assistance, thereby quickly turning the call into a Co-response.
5.29 30
Of the calls assessed in 2019, 56 or 4.67% were determined to be Co-response. In 2021, 66 or 6.95% were determined to be Co-response. I assign all Missing Persons calls as Co-response because, as I mentioned in the footnotes above, when searching for a missing person, an Integrated Health team can service as one more unit searching the area. Additionally, missing persons, especially youth, might be inclined to run or hide from law enforcement whereas they might not do so when encountering a non-law enforcement team. I can attest to this reality from many personal experiences. Integrate Health teams are therefore excellent components to any missing persons requests. Additionally, as a former CAHOOTS worker, it was not uncommon for us to join officers in the initial report filing, see a picture of the missing person, and find them later on a different call.
This is especially true of elderly patients who walk away from their homes due to dementia and later turn up in stores or other public locations, disoriented.
Overall, these estimates indicate a potential of 564 Co-responses in 2019 and 659 Co-responses in 2021.
While this number might be higher in the first year, it is important to note that these numbers are consistent with CAHOOTS numbers out of Eugene which have an approximately 10% rate for Co-response. This 10% number is not to be confused with the number of times that CAHOOTS or any Integrated Health team calls for emergency police assistance due to violence on the call. No Integrated Health team member has ever been injured by an aggressive or violent client, and calls for emergency assistance are extremely rare at approximately one in 1,000 interactions.
Possible Diversions
This category is always the smallest category in these assessments. Possible Diversions simply mean that I cannot determine if it fits in any of the other categories due to lack of information, or it can also mean that it could be an Integrated Health response if there was a change in policy. However, this latter type of Possible
5.30 31
Diversion was not at play in this assessment. There were 51 Possible Diversions in 2019 and 26 in 2021. That is
4.25% and 2.74% of the total calls assessed, respectively. It is difficult to project what Possible Diversions mean, but the category is included as a way to indicate that deciphering who should go to what request is not an exact science and requires constant communication between all the respective responding agencies.
No Response
As a way to conclude this section, it is important to note that not all CFS that are included in the categories for an Integrated Health team are appropriate for that style of response. Sometimes, there might be circumstances that are substance use-related but are intoxicated drivers. These still fall under the authority and responsibility of the police. Of the CFS that were identified by SCRC in collaboration with CRISIS Consulting, 292 in 2019, or 24.3%, and 185 in 2021, or 19.47%, were categorized as No Responses.
Table 2
Year Total Calls
Assessed
Diversions Co-Response Possible
Diversion
No Response Total Calls
2019 1,200 801 56 51 292 12,078
2021 950 673 66 26 185 9,484
Funding
One major question about starting an Integrated Health Team is around funding. The bulk of cities throughout the state who have implemented teams in this model have used some combination of federal COVID funds, Crisis Care Mobile Units (CCMU) grants from the state, and general funds. It is unclear to me if CCMU grants are still available, and that will need to be determined. It would be difficult to operate a 24/7/365 team for less than $1.5 million. With Santa Cruz’s high cost of living, this is especially true.
5.31 32
Conclusion
Every city in the US deserves to have an effective, flexible, and responsive mobile crisis team that can assist its citizens in matters of mental health, substance use, social, and homelessness-related crises. It is the goal of CRISIS Consulting to help develop these teams in as many places as possible. While every city is different, there is wisdom in not trying to reinvent the wheel. Within this document and within my work, there have been ways to create mobile crisis teams that are more and less effective. I hope that we can take these recommendations and transform them into a team that serves the residents, the first responders, the businesses, and especially the social service agencies of Santa Cruz.
Chart 1
A two-tiered response network
5.32 MOBILE CRISIS
RESPONSE IN
SANTA CRUZ
Ben Adam Climer
CRISIS Consulting
5.33 INTRODUCTION
I, Ben Adam Climer, have helped implement or improve mobile crisis teams in Sonoma, Marin, Santa Cruz, San Joaquin, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties. I worked for a mobile crisis team in Eugene, OR called CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out on the Streets) for five years. I worked as a crisis intervention worker, an EMT, and as an administrator. I have produced a report regarding the work I have completed with the City so far, and that is available to be read on the City’s website.
2 5.34
THE PROBLEM
As a society, we have developed a system of responding to crime, violence, fires, and medical emergencies. This system is composed of law enforcement, fire departments, and
Emergency Medical Services. However, a large quantity of requests for assistance from these services do not fit neatly into these categories. There has been a call for a dedicated service that can respond appropriately to the types of calls that are outside our current system’s purpose. These include mental health, substance use, quality-of-life, homelessness, non-violent conflict, resource referral, welfare checks, and others. The goal of this presentation is to put forward an explanation of types of response and recommendations. 5.35 MENTAL
HEALTH
AWARENESS
MONTH
May is Mental Health Awareness Month!
It is fitting that we are having this conversation
now! It is important to remember that having a
mental health crisis can be a frightening and
isolating experience. Let’s remember to tell
those we love who have crises that we care for
them and want them with us! 5.36
A STORY ABOUT ERNEST
Ernest was living in a hotel on a fixed income that left him with very little money left after paying for a roof over his head. He had numerous co-occurring conditions and took several different prescription drugs including Xanax, an anti-anxiety drug. He started to feel suicidal and took 3 Xanax in two hours, more than was prescribed. He proceeded to call 9-1-1 for his suicidal feelings. He also called a friend and told them that he had overdosed on Xanax. The friend called 9-1-1 and reported an overdose. The dispatchers sent our Integrated Health Response Team and Fire/EMS because of the reported overdose. What happened next? 5 5.37
RESPONSE IN A NORMAL CITY
6 LAW
ENFORCEMENT
Because he was
suicidal, nearly all
cities would send at
least two officers to
the scene.
FIRE/EMS
Due to the reported
overdose, the fire
department with
EMS would respond,
typically with five
staff.
CRISIS TEAM
Some cities and
counties have crisis
teams. Due to his
suicidal thoughts,
they might send one
to two staff out.
AMBULANCE
Because of the OD,
he would be
transported by
ambulance to the ER
before being
transferred to a CSU.
A HEFTY BILL
Due to his inability
to pay, he would take
on a hefty bill that
would be footed by
the services involved.
All told, in a normal city, anywhere from seven to ten responders might have arrived on scene. Because of the prescription drug use, he would have been forced to go to the ER first, taking up a bed and the time of the staff there. 5.38
INTEGRATED HEALTH FOR ERNEST
7 SUICIDE ASSESSMENT
• The Integrated Health First
Responders were first on
scene and performed a
suicide assessment.
• There was no need for law
enforcement to ever be
involved.
MEDICAL ASSESSMENT
• Because they were first on
scene, the EMT was able to
perform a rapid medical
assessment.
• Because Xanax is not lethal
in those doses, they were
able to disregard Fire/EMS
before they arrived.
DIRECT TRANSPORT TO
CSU
• Without an ambulance or
ER bill, the team was able
to transport Ernest straight
to the CSU.
• This saved the time of five
Fire/EMS staff, the ER staff,
and prevented needless
ambulance and hospital
bills.
5.39 A RECENT STUDY IN GEORGIA HAS SHOWN
THAT PEOPLE WITH HISTORIES OF MENTAL
HEALTH ISSUES AND THEIR FAMILIES PREFER
NON-POLICE CRISIS RESPONSE.
“Crisis Response Model Preferences of
Mental Health Care Clients with Prior
Misdemeanor Arrests and of Their Family
and Friends”
8 5.40
MODELS OF RESPONSE
9 CO-RESPONSE
• Licensed Clinician paired
with law enforcement
• Accessed through 9-1-1
• Responds to a wide variety
of call types
• Can transport
• No medical capabilities
CLINICAL TEAM
• At least one Licensed
Clinician
• Accessed through 10-digit
number
• Responds to mental health
• Can transport but is limited
• No medical capabilities
INTEGRATED HEALTH
• Crisis worker paired with a
medical professional
• Accessed through 9-1-1
• Responds to a wide variety
of call types
• Can transport
• Has medical capabilities
5.41 WHAT IS INTEGRATED
HEALTH FIRST RESPONSE
• Integrated Health First Response is a mobile crisis model based on the CAHOOTS team in Eugene, OR.
• It includes a crisis worker and a medical staff member, typically an EMT or higher.
• The primary focus is de-escalation, support, resource referral, and helping the person-in-crisis access their own internal and external resources to manage the crisis.
• Integrated Health First Response provides transport to any staffed service and is therefore not constrained the way that EMS is. 10 5.42
TO WHAT TYPES OF REQUESTS DOES
INTEGRATED HEALTH RESPOND?
11 MH/SUICIDE
Mental health crises
and suicidal persons
of all kinds are the
top priorities of
IHFRT.
SUBSTANCE
USE
Whether the person
is intoxicated or
contemplating going
to treatment, IHFRT
is there to help
UNHOUSED
IHFRT responds to
people sleeping on
the street or other
quality-of-life-related
issues frequently.
WELFARE
CHECKS
Worried about your
friend, loved one, or
the person you saw
in the park, Welfare
Checks make up
~30% of IHFRT calls.
CONFLICT
Sometimes people
need a referee!
IHFRT is a great
resource for
mediation in the
moment.
5.43 A TALE OF TWO CITIES
12 SAN RAFAEL
• Population: 62,000
• Area: 22 sq. mi.
• County Seat for Marin County
(population 260,000)
• Launched an Integrated Health First
Response Team on 3/27/2023
• Responded to 301 calls for service in the
first 33 days of operation
• Operational 12 hours per day, 7 days per
week
• Is on pace for 3,330 calls for service in
the first year
• Could reach as high as 5,000 calls per
year if expanded to 24/7/365
SANTA CRUZ
• Population: 64,000
• Area: 16 sq. mi.
• County Seat for Santa Cruz County
(population 270,000)
• Currently has a Co-Response and
Clinical team
• While Co-Response team is 7 days/week,
Clinical Team is only regular business
hours
• What would it look like to shift to a 24/7
integrated health team with County
Clinical team as support?
5.44 9-1-1 screens
all calls
Fire: 9-1-1 –
Accidents, fires,
spills, medical
EMS: 9-1-1 – Medical
emergencies,
accidents
Police: 9-1-1 –
Crimes, violence,
threats
Integrated Health:
Mental health, SUD,
homelessness, welfare
checks
Fire Marshall: Fire
Investigation and
Prevention
Detectives: Crime
Investigation
County Clinical
Team: 5150 and Risk
Assessments
Emergency Room:
Medical emergencies
First Responders
Second Responders
Proposed System of Response
9-8-8 for
Mental Health
calls
5.45 BENEFITS TO FIRST
RESPONDERS
LAW ENFORCEMENT
• Reduces or eliminates time spent
on non-criminal calls for service.
• Reduces contact with people
having mental health crises.
• Reduces or eliminates time spent
at hospitals.
• Enables officers to focus on safety
rather than performing crisis
interventions.
• Reduces contact with people who
are unhoused and needing social
support.
FIRE/EMS
• Reduces responses to non-medical
calls that may have medical
component that cannot be
verified until arrival.
• Reduces responses and transports
of people who are experiencing
quality-of-life issues or chronic
conditions.
• Reduces or eliminates responses
to mental health calls for service.
• Reduces responses to intoxicated
patients.
14 5.46
BENEFITS TO
COMMUNITY
RESIDENTS & CLIENTS
• Reduces contact with law
enforcement in non-criminal
situations.
• Provides quality, in-the-moment
crisis intervention.
• Provides referral system for
people needing support.
• Provides a mechanism for
supportive mediation during
disputes.
• Provides a quick tool for residents
requesting checks on unhoused.
SOCIAL SERVICES
• Reduces overtime spent managing
crisis situations.
• Enables a non-law enforcement
tool for performing welfare
checks on clients after hours.
• Provides a support system to
employees when clients are
experiencing crises.
• Helps connect potential clients to
social service agencies.
• Provides crisis-related transports
to places like the CSP.
15 5.47
DATA
2019 % 2021 %
Total Police Calls for
Service 96,576 88,822
Total Calls
Identified as
possible diversions 12,078 13% 9,484 11%
Types of Responses
Diversion 8,062 66.75% 950 70.84%
Co-Response 564 4.67% 659 6.95%
Possible Diversion 513 4.25% 260 2.74%
No-Response 2,935 24.30% 1,657 17.47%
16 5.48
SUMMARY
17 The Integrated Health First Response model is growing, and a large driver of the growth is due to the law
enforcement and fire/EMS agencies who have the fortune
to work with the teams. This way of doing mobile crisis response is as efficient as it is effective. I hope that you have seen the social utility of this type of response, and I hope that we can continue moving forward working on
developing a team for Santa Cruz!
5.49 THANK YOU
Ben Adam Climer
[email protected]
5.50 Meeting Type
Holiday
Jewish Holiday
Regular Meeting
Special Meeting
Study Session (will be added as scheduled)
Budget Hearing
DATE Location Meeting Type
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public May 23 and 24 Council Chambers Budget Hearings
May 29
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public June 19
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 4
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public September 15/16
September 24/25
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 November 10
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public November 23
November 24
December 7/8
Courtyard Conf. Room Closed Session ‐ Closed to the Public Council Chambers Council Regular Meeting ‐ Open to the Public December 25
Yom Kippur (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
City Council Meeting Calendar for 2023
November 28
December 12
City Hall Closure ‐ Thanksgiving Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Day After Thanksgiving Day
June 27
September 12
September 26
May 23
City Hall Closure ‐ Juneteenth
Please note: Meeting times are not final and are likely to change August 8
June 13
City Hall Closure ‐ Labor Day
August 22
July 11 and 25 Meetings Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
City Hall Closure ‐ Independence Day
City Hall Closure ‐ Memorial Day
December 26 Meeting Cancelled ‐ CITY COUNCIL DARK
City Hall Closure ‐ Christmas Day
Hanukkah (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
Rosh Hashanah (City observed ‐ sundown to sundown)
November 14
October 10
October 24
City Hall Closure ‐ Veteran's Day (observed)
7.1 City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 04/26/2023
AGENDA OF: 05/09/2023
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Extending the Emergency Declaration in Connection with the December 2022 and January 2023 Winter Storms (CA/CM)
RECOMMENDATION: Resolution extending by sixty days the Local Emergency Declaration in connection with the December 2022 and January 2023 winter storms.
BACKGROUND: Storms in December 2022 and January 2023 have caused significant flooding, infrastructure damage, and other storm impacts, including downed trees and impacts to persons experiencing homelessness. On January 4, 2023, the City Manager issued a “Proclamation of Existence of Local Emergency.”
DISCUSSION: Chapter 2.20 of the City of Santa Cruz Municipal Code, at Section 2.20.030, empowers the Director of Emergency Services to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity or disaster, subject to confirmation by the City Council at the “earliest practicable time.” During the existence of such emergency, the Director of Emergency Services is also authorized, pursuant to Section 2.20.040(1), to “[m]ake and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property as affected by such emergency,” also subject to confirmation by the City Council “at the earliest practicable time.” In view of the facts and circumstances described above, on January 4, 2023, the City Manager declared the existence of a local emergency in the City of Santa Cruz. The City Council ratified the emergency declaration by Resolution No. NS-30,085 at its January 10, 2023 regular meeting.
At its regular meetings on January 24, 2023, and March 14, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-30,095 and NS-30,116, further extending the declaration of emergency by 60 days.
The attached resolution, if adopted by the City Council, would extend the emergency declaration related to the December 2022 and January 2023 winter storms emergency by an additional 60 days, to July 8, 2023.
FISCAL IMPACT: Actions taken by the City during a declared emergency are potentially recoverable from Cal OES (California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services) and FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).
8.1 Prepared By:
Stephanie Duck
Deputy City Attorney
Submitted By:
Tony Condotti
City Attorney
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. RESOLUTION.DOCX
8.2 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ EXTENDING
THE LOCAL EMERGENCY DECLARATION IN CONNECTION WITH THE DECEMBER 2022 AND JANUARY 2023 WINTER STORMS
WHEREAS, Santa Cruz Municipal Code section 2.20.030 empowers the City Manager, as the director of emergency services, to proclaim the existence or threatened existence of a local emergency when the City is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity, subject to confirmation by the City Council at the earliest practicable time; and WHEREAS, on December 30 and 31st, 2022, the City of Santa Cruz experienced a major rain event (the "December 2022 Atmospheric River Winter Storm"); and WHEREAS, as a result of the December 2022 Atmospheric River Winter Storm, flooding, debris from trees, and mud have impacted the San Lorenzo River and adjacent areas, including the Tannery area, San Lorenzo Park, and the beach. The San Lorenzo River reached
22.1 feet. Rainfall amounts exceeded 7 inches in the mountains over a 24-hour period; and WHEREAS, soil conditions in the City of Santa Cruz remain saturated as a result of the December 2022 Atmospheric River Winter Storm, and another powerful storm event occurred on January 4 and 5th, 2023, increasing flooding and other storm impacts, including downed trees, major infrastructure damage, and impacts to persons experiencing homelessness; and
WHEREAS, the County of Santa Cruz proclaimed the existence of a local emergency in the County on January 3, 2023; and
WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing and pursuant to his authority as Emergency Services Director, on January 4, 2023, the City Manager declared the existence of a local emergency (the "Emergency Proclamation").
WHEREAS, at its January 10, 2023 meeting, the City Council adopted Resolution No.
NS-30,085 declaring the existence of a State of Emergency in connection with the December 2022 and January 2023 winter storms, confirming the January 4, 2023 Emergency Proclamation by the Director of Emergency Services; and WHEREAS, at its regular meetings on January 24, 2023 and March 14, 2023, the Council adopted Resolution Nos. NS-30,095 and NS-30,116, further extending the declaration of emergency by 60 days; and
WHEREAS, damage to City infrastructure from the December 2022 and January 2023 winter storms is extensive and as a result, the City’s emergency response to the December 2022 and January 2023 winter storms will likely be ongoing.
8.3 RESOLUTION NO. NS-XX,XXX
2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz (City Council) as follows:
A. That the City Council hereby declares that the local emergency declaration adopted at its January 10, 2023 regular meeting by Resolution No. NS-30,085, and extended on January 24, 2023 by Resolution NS-30,095, and on March 14, 2023 by Resolution NS30,116, shall be extended an additional sixty (60) days from its adoption pursuant to California Government Code Section 8630, et seq., by this Resolution; and B. This Resolution shall remain in full force and effect and shall thereafter terminate on the sixtieth (60th) day after its adoption, unless earlier terminated or further extended by subsequent City Council action.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of May, 2023, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DISQUALIFIED:
APPROVED: __________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: ___________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
8.4 MINUTES ARE UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED BY COUNCIL
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060
MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April 25, 2023
1:00 PM
Mayor Keeley opened the City Council Closed Session at 1:01 p.m. in a public meeting via Zoom and in Council Chambers, for the purpose of announcing the agenda, and receiving public testimony.
Roll Call
Present: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
Absent: None.
Staff: City Manager M. Huffaker, Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt, City Attorney T. Condotti, Finance Director E. Cabell, Director of Information Technology K. Morgan (via Zoom), Deputy City Clerk Administrator J.
Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush.
Public Comment
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period at 1:02 p.m. There were no speakers. Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period at 1:02 p.m., at which time the meeting was closed to the public and Council adjourned to the Courtyard Conference Room.
Closed Session
1. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Government Code §54957.6) SEIU Temporary Employees
SEIU Service Employees
City Negotiator – Sara De Leon
Council received a status report from the City Negotiator, and no reportable action was taken.
9.1 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6445
Closed Session (continued)
2. Conference With Legal Counsel – Liability Claims (Government Code §54956.95) 1) Claimant: Bernt Barbera
2) Claimant: Cristopher Allen Malsack
Claims against the City of Santa Cruz
Council received a status report, took up under agenda item 17, and no reportable action was taken.
3. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation (Government Code §54956.9(d)(2)
Significant exposure to litigation (one potential case to be discussed) Council received a status report, and no reportable action was taken.
9.2 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6446
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060
MINUTES OF A CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April 25, 2023
2:00 PM
Call to Order – Mayor Keeley called the meeting to order at 2:34 p.m. in Council Chambers.
Roll Call
Present: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
Absent: None.
Staff: City Manager M. Huffaker, Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt (via Zoom), City Attorney T. Condotti, Director of Economic Development and Housing B. Lipscomb, Deputy City Manager L. Murphy, Chief People Officer S. De Leon, Director of Planning and Community Development L.
Butler, Finance Director E. Cabell (via Zoom), Director of Information Technology K. Morgan (via Zoom), Chief of Fire R. Oatey (via Zoom), Director of Parks and Recreation T. Elliot (via Zoom), Chief of Police B.
Escalante, Water Director R. Menard (via Zoom), Waste Reduction Assistant L. O’Malley, Principal Management Analyst T. Lake, Senior Planner C. Stanger, Engineering Associate C. Busenhart, Senior Professional Engineer K. Stewart, Police Sergeant J. Trog, Principal Planner M. VanHua, Deputy City Clerk Administrator J. Wood, City Clerk Administrator B. Bush.
Presentations
4. Master Recycler Volunteer Training Program
Waste Reduction Assistant L. O’Malley gave a presentation on the Master Recycler Volunteer Training Program.
5. Mayoral Proclamation Declaring the Month of May as Affordable Housing Month
9.3 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6447
Mayor Keeley announced the month of May as Affordable Housing Month.
Director of Economic Development and Housing B. Lipscomb spoke about events.
Presentations (continued)
6. Mayoral Proclamation Declaring April 30—May 6, 2023, as Municipal Clerks Week
Mayor Keeley presented a proclamation to City Clerk Administrator B. Bush, declaring April 30—May 6, 2023 as Municipal Clerks Week.
Presiding Officer's Announcements
Statements of Disqualification – None.
Additions and Deletions – None.
City Attorney Report on Closed Session – See pages 6444—6445 for the report.
Council Meeting Calendar
7. The City Council reviewed and did not revise the meeting calendar attached to the agenda.
Consent Agenda
Councilmember Watkins pulled item 12 for further discussion.
Vice Mayor Golder made a comment on item 23.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. The following people spoke:
James Ewing Whitman spoke regarding item 11.
Stephen La Berg spoke regarding item 16.
Garrett spoke regarding item 11.
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
Mayor Keeley pulled item 16 for further discussion.
MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to approve the remaining Consent Agenda.
9.4 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6448
Consent Agenda (continued)
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
8. Minutes of the April 11, 2023 City Council Meeting (CC) Motion carried to approve as submitted.
9. Minutes of the April 18, 2023 City Council Special Meeting (CC) Motion carried to approve as submitted.
10. Children’s Fund Oversight Committee Bylaws (CM)
Motion carried to approve amendments to the Children’s Fund Oversight Committee bylaws and governing document.
11. Initiative No. 21-0042A1, The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (CN)
Motion carried to:
Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,133 opposing Initiative No. 21-0042A1, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act; and Authorize the Mayor to send letters and copies of the adopted resolution to state legislators and the League of California Cities on behalf of the Santa Cruz City Council opposing Initiative No. 21-0042A1.
9.5 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6449
Consent Agenda (continued)
12. City Council District Engagement Policy (CN)
Councilmember Watkins spoke.
MOTION: Councilmember Watkins moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to approve City Council Policy, 6.21, District Engagement, and direct staff to conduct a market comparison of Mayor and Council compensation amongst comparable cities and return to Council with the findings, along with outlining the process for the Council to consider proposing potential changes to Council compensation to ensure that the City continues to stay competitive with the market and attracts candidates to these important positions.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. The following person spoke.
Unidentified person
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner,
Kalantari-Johnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
13. Support for Senate Bill 331 (SB 331) (CN)
Motion carried to authorize the Mayor to send a letter of support to Senator Laird on behalf of Santa Cruz City Council in support of Senate Bill 331 (SB 331).
9.6 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6450
Consent Agenda (continued)
14. Approval of Parklet Design Standards Contained within the Parklet Guidelines and Approval of two “Pre-Approved” Parklet Design Plans (ED/PW) Motion carried to:
Approve the design standards incorporated in the parklet guidelines; and Approve two “pre-approved” parklet designs created by Dillon Design Associates; and
Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,134 approving the design standards incorporated in the parklet guidelines and two “pre-approved” parklet designs pursuant to Government Code Section 830.6.
15. Santa Cruz Parklet Incentive Program for Outdoor Dining (ED) Motion carried to authorize the establishment of the Santa Cruz Parklet Incentive Program for Outdoor Dining.
16. 223 Darwin Street CFSC, Inc. Loan Extension (APN: 011-122-04) (ED) Mayor Keeley invited Stephen La Berg to speak.
Principal Management Analyst T. Lake spoke.
MOTION: Councilmember Watkins moved, seconded by Councilmember Brown, to continue this item to the meeting of May 23, 2023 with direction to staff and the City Attorney to meet with Mr. La Berg to see if it is possible to structure a forgiveness of the loan with certain findings that would not make it a precedent that the City would normally do that, as well as explore unintended impacts of this direction.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. There were no speakers.
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner,
Kalantari-Johnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
9.7 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6451
Consent Agenda (continued)
17. Liability Claims Filed Against the City of Santa Cruz (FN) Motion carried to reject the liability claims of 1) Bernt Barbera and 2) Cristopher Allen Malsack, based on staff recommendation.
18. Award Contract for Financial Auditing Services (FN) Motion carried to:
Award a contract for Financial Auditing Services to The PUN Group, LLP, Walnut Creek, California for Fiscal Years ending June 30, 2023, 2024 and 2025, with two option years; and
Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney with The PUN Group, LLP for Financial Auditing Services.
19. Resolution Adopting the Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Management Association (HR)
Resolution No. NS-30,135 was adopted adopting the Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Management Association.
20. Resolution Adopting the Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Officers’ Association (HR)
Resolution No. NS-30,136 was adopted adopting the Memorandum of Understanding with the Police Officers’ Association.
21. Resolution Adopting the Memorandum of Understanding with Service Employees Local 521 (HR)
Resolution No. NS-30,137 was adopted adopting the Memorandum of Understanding with Service Employees SEIU Local 521.
9.8 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6452
Consent Agenda (continued)
22. City of Santa Cruz Pump Station No. 1 Project (c401707) – Professional Services Agreement Amendment (PW)
Motion carried authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Schaaf & Wheeler (Santa Clara, CA) in the amount of $105,900 to provide Consulting Engineering Services for the City of Santa Cruz Pump Station No.1 Project (c401707) in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute contract amendments within the approved budget.
23. Santa Cruz High School Parking Update (PW)
Council received an update regarding ongoing staff coordination with Santa Cruz High School regarding weekday parking issues.
24. Proposed Permanent Easement Acquisition of Real Property Owned by PAP, LLC, including 24 Front Street (APN 007-212-10) and 30 Front Street (APN 007- 212-09) for the Pacific-Beach Roundabout Improvement Project - Budget Adjustment (PW)
Motion carried to:
Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,138 authorizing and directing the City Manager to enter into an agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for acquisition of the permanent easement required for the construction of the Pacific-Beach Roundabout Improvement Project; and
Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,139 amending the FY 2023 budget by transferring funds from the City Liability Fund for acquisition of the easement.
25. Purchase Natural Gas at Wastewater Treatment Facility – Budget Adjustment (PW)
Resolution No. NS-30,140 was adopted amending the FY 2023 budget and appropriating funds in the amount of $260,000 to fund rising natural gas purchased at the Wastewater Treatment Facility.
9.9 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6453
Consent Agenda (continued)
26. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 – Soquel Avenue Main Replacement with MNS Engineers, Inc. for Construction Management Services (WT) Motion carried to:
Approve Contract Amendment No. 1 - Soquel Avenue Main Replacement with MNS Engineers, Inc. (Santa Barbara, CA) in the amount of $151,740 and to authorize the City Manager to execute Contract Amendment No. 1 in a form approved by the City Attorney; and
Authorize the Water Director to approve change orders with MNS Engineers, Inc. in a form to be approved by the City Attorney and for amounts that are within the approved adjusted budget.
End Consent Agenda
Mayor Keeley reordered the agenda and heard item 33 at this time.
Consent Public Hearing
Councilmember Brown made a comment on item 27.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. There were no speakers. Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Councilmember KalantariJohnson, to approve the Consent Public Hearing Agenda.
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
9.10 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6454
Consent Public Hearings (continued)
27. 2023-2024 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Annual Action Plan, Amendment to the 2019-2020 HUD, Amendment to the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan, and Amendment to the Citizen Participation Plan (ED) Motion carried to:
Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,141 for the City’s 2023-2024 HUD Annual Action Plan (AAP) and amendments to the 2019-2020 AAP, 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan, and Citizen Participation Plan for the City’s Housing and Community Development Program, direct staff to submit the 2023-2024 AAP and amended 2019-2020 AAP and 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan (CP) which includes the 2023 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA) Plan to HUD, and authorize the City Manager to sign an application for federal funding assistance for the 2023-2024 program year; and
Authorize the City Manager to execute program/project contracts, loan agreements and related loan documents with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) sub-recipients and contractors in connection with Consolidated Plan (CP) activities proposed in the 2023-2024 Action Plan and any subsequent revisions to the 2023-2024 Action Plan; and
Approving the 2023-2024 AAP Budget Adjustment reallocating 2019-2020 CDBG Funds, allocating 2023-2024 CDBG and HOME Funds and appropriating the funds in the FY 2024 budget.
9.11 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6455
Consent Public Hearings (continued)
28. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 2023-06 Amending Title 24 of the Municipal Code - Zoning Ordinance Chapters 24.12 and Chapter 24.22: Parking and Bicycle Parking Regulations, Including Updates to the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (PL/PW)
Motion carried to:
Adopt Ordinance No. 2023-06 amending Municipal Code Title 24 - Zoning Ordinance Chapters 24.12 and Chapter 24.22 to update bicycle parking requirements, incorporate recent changes to state law relating to automobile parking standards, update other existing standards related to bicycle and vehicle parking, and add new definitions, while recognizing the environmental determination; and
Adopt Resolution No. NS-30,142 authorizing and directing the City Manager to submit the proposed amendments to Title 24 as Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan amendments to the California Coastal Commission for final certification.
29. 2nd Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-07 to Amend Chapter
10.52 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code to Increase Downtown Parking Meter Rates (PW)
Adopt Ordinance No. 2023-07 to amend Chapter 10.52 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code to increase downtown parking meter rates.
9.12 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6456
Public Hearing
30. Development Proposal at 514, 516, 518, 524, and 530 Front Street Involving Lot Line Adjustment, Non-Residential Demolition Authorization Permit, Special Use Permit, Design Permit, Additional Height Request, Density Bonus Request, Revocable License for Outdoor Extension Area, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit to Demolish Existing Commercial Buildings, Reconfigure Four Lots Into One, Remove Eight Heritage Trees, and Construct a Mixed-Use Building with 276 Residential Dwelling Units (Including a 50% Density Bonus) and 6,865 Square Feet of Commercial Space, with Design Variations to Downtown Plan Development Standards, on a Site in the CBD/F-P/FP-O (Central Business District/ Floodplain/ Floodplain Overlay) Zone District and Within the Front Street Riverfront Area of the Downtown Plan. File Number CP20-0098.
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 005-151-37, 005-151-44, -45, -46. Environmental Determination: Categorical Exemption. Owner: Green Valley Corporation.
Applicant: Jessie Bristow, Swenson. (PL)
Director of Planning and Community Development L. Butler introduced the item and responded to Councilmember questions.
Senior Planner C. Stanger gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.
Jessie Bristow, Development Project Manager with Swenson Builders, gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.
Unidentified person
Gabriel Sanders
Lee Brokaw
Nicholas Whitehead
Bradley Snider
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
MOTION: Councilmember Newsome moved, seconded by Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson, to adopt Resolution No. NS-30,143 acknowledging the environmental determination and approving the Lot Line Adjustment, NonResidential Demolition Authorization Permit, Special Use Permit, Design Permit, Additional Height Request, Density Bonus Request, Revocable License for Outdoor Extension Area, and Heritage Tree Removal Permit for File Number CP20-0098 at 514, 516, 518, 524, and 530 Front Street, subject to the attached conditions of approval, with the following changes:
9.13 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6457
Public Hearing (continued)
30. 530 Front Street (PL) (continued)
MOTION (continued):
11.The applicant and/or property owner shall be responsible for ensuring that any existing buildings approved for demolition or conversion remain occupied by a tenant or, if any buildings are vacant or become vacant prior to demolition or conversion, that these buildings are adequately secured to prevent break-ins and other vandalism. All windows, doors, and other openings into vacant buildings shall be completely covered and a six-foot tall chain link fence shall be installed around the perimeter of the property. Graffiti shall be removed or painted over within 72 hours.
If a break-in occurs, the applicant and/or property owner shall, within 24 hours, clean the site of trash and debris, and re-secure the site and building(s). Additionally, following a break-in, the applicant/property owner shall provide the Planning Department, SCFD and Fire Marshall and SCPD with a copy of a signed contract with a private security company to provide ongoing monitoring of the site. If a break-in or other public safety concern related to the vacant status of the property/space occurs at the vacant site/space that requires an emergency response, the applicant and/or property owner shall be responsible for paying the fully burdened hourly rates for Police, Fire, Code Compliance, or other City staff to respond and follow up as abatement costs, civil penalties, and/or pursuant to all other rights and remedies the City has. The City will not issue the certificate of occupancy/final permit until all fines, fees, civil penalties, and/or costs are paid.
12.Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit a noise study addendum or letter from the noise consultant that provides any additional recommendations for noise attenuation within the building considering the effects of a pump station on the northeastern property line that meets the City General Plan noise standards of 65 dBA assuming that the pump station will comply with Zoning Ordinance noise standards. The Public Works Department additionally commits to completing a noise study for the future pump station when that design is known and to implement measures to attenuate noise from the pump station consistent with General Plan and Zoning Ordinance noise standards as recommended by that study.
9.14 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6458
Public Hearing (continued)
30. 530 Front Street (PL) (continued)
Engineering Associate C. Busenhart responded to Councilmember questions.
Senior Professional Engineer K. Stewart responded to Councilmember questions.
ACTION: The motion carried with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: Councilmember Brown.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
Mayor Keeley reordered the agenda and heard item 34 at this time.
General Business
31. Santa Cruz Children’s Fund Oversight Committee Appointments (CC) Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. There were no speakers.
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
Councilmember Watkins nominated Ryan Coonerty and Allison Guevara.
Councilmember Brunner nominated Aracely Contreras.
Voting for Ryan Coonerty: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner, Kalantari-Johnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
Voting for Aracely Contreras: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Brunner; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
Ryan Coonerty and Aracely Contreras were appointed as at-large members to the City of Santa Cruz Children’s Fund Oversight Committee, with terms ending January 31, 2026.
9.15 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6459
General Business (continued)
32. Collective of Results and Evidence-Based (CORE) Progress Report (CM) Assistant City Manager L. Schmidt introduced the item.
Santa Cruz County representatives Randy Morris, Director of Human Services, and Kimberly Petersen, Deputy Director of Human Services, gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.
Clay Kempf
Allison Guevara
Martha Ceja
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
MOTION: Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson moved, seconded by Councilmember Brunner, to:
Accept Santa Cruz County’s Human Services Department CORE Five-Year Lookback, Lessons Learned, 2022 Mid-Year Assessment, and Alternative Funding Sources Summary update; and
Direct staff to coordinate with the Human Services Department to return on or before December 12, 2023 with a progress report of the FY 2022-23 annual summary of CORE Investments-funded programs with an update on community engagement; and
Approve the proposed Timeline and Next Steps for the RFP process.
ACTION: The motion carried with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: Councilmember Brown.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
9.16 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6460
General Business (continued)
33. Tobacco Product Waste Update (CN)
MOTION: Councilmember Watkins moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Golder, to continue this item to the meeting of June 13, 2023.
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner,
Kalantari-Johnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
34. Receipt of AB 481 Annual Military Equipment Report and Renewal of SCMC Chapter 9.90 Pertaining to AB 481 Military Equipment (PD) Chief of Police B. Escalante and Police Sergeant J. Trog gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.
Peter Gelblum
Lee Brokaw
Bradley Snider
Unidentified person
Scott Graham
Unidentified person
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved to delay making a decision on this item until after the May 16, 2023 meeting.
Motion failed due to lack of a second.
MOTION: Councilmember Watkins moved, seconded by Councilmember Kalantari-Johnson, to adopt Resolution No. NS-30,144 renewing Chapter 9.90 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code (SCMC) pertaining to AB 481, Military Equipment.
9.17 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6461
General Business (continued)
34. Receipt of AB 481 Annual Military Equipment Report and Renewal of SCMC Chapter 9.90 Pertaining to AB 481 Military Equipment (PD) (continued) Deputy City Attorney S. Duck responded to Councilmember questions.
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Mayor Keeley requested to direct staff to submit the next annual report as an FYI no less than 30 days before the item returns to Council for final action and hold a public meeting within those 30 days.
Councilmembers Watkins and Kalantari-Johnson accepted.
ACTION: The motion carried with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Watkins, Brunner, KalantariJohnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: Councilmember Brown.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
35. Appeal of Proposed Single Space Markings on David Way (PW) Continued to the June 27, 2023 City Council meeting.
Recess – Council recessed at 6:44 p.m. and returned at 7:32 p.m.
Oral Communications Announcement - The Mayor provided a brief announcement about Oral Communications.
Oral Communications
At 7:32 p.m. Mayor Keeley opened Oral Communications for members of the public who wished to speak regarding items not listed on the City Council agenda.
Bradley Snider spoke regarding the intersections at Lincoln and Pacific, and the sandstone promontory at the San Lorenzo river mouth, stating both locations have limited access.
Garrett spoke regarding the natural gas ban in Berkeley, and the Enterprise Fund.
Eric Grodberg spoke regarding temporary diesel generators at the wastewater treatment facilities.
At 7:39 p.m. Mayor Keeley closed Oral Communications.
9.18 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6462
General Business
36. Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element Update Review for State Submittal (PL) Director of Planning and Community Development L. Butler and Principal Planner M. VanHua gave a presentation and responded to Councilmember questions.
Mayor Keeley opened the public comment period. The following people spoke.
Garrett
Eric Grodberg
Rafa Sonnenfeld
Darius Mohsenin
Ryan Meckel
Mayor Keeley closed the public comment period.
MOTION: Councilmember Brown moved, seconded by Mayor Keeley, to accept the 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Update and direct staff and the Council subcommittee to consider the following revisions and explore the feasibility:
On Page 2-8 - Affordable Housing
Amend Objective 2.1b to state: “Review the Inclusionary Ordinance to determine if amendments are needed to ensure that the inclusionary requirements provide the maximum number of affordable units or deeper levels of affordability without being a barrier to housing development, while considering implications for how developers will use density bonus, including considering higher levels of affordability for density bonus projects. Analysis will evaluate affordability levels to incentivize deeper levels of affordable housing or more moderate-income units depending on needs. (Metric: by end of 2026) (AFFH)
Add Objective 2.1d: “Consider implementing a program that increases workforce housing units in market rate multi-family projects, with adequate financial incentives.”
On Page 2-17
Add Objective 3.7b: “Support and facilitate the efforts of the Santa Cruz City School District to provide housing for its employees.” On Page 2-18 - Housing Assistance
Add Policy 4.3 to state: “Provide protection for tenants from unlawful rent increases or excessive application fees.”
9.19 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6463
General Business (continued)
36. Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element Update Review for State Submittal (PL) (continued)
MOTION (continued):
Add Objective 4.3.a: “Support programs that provide legal assistance to tenants challenging unlawful rent increases.” (Metric: 2023)(AFFH) Add Objective 4.3.b: “Consider an ordinance to ensure that rental applications follow the provisions of state law.” (Metric: 2023)(AFFH) Add Objective 4.4.b: “Consider rent stabilization measures for mobile home parks in accordance with new state law.”
On Page 2-22
Add language to Objective 5.5b: “In relation to HUD’s upcoming Equity Plan requirements, evaluate the effectiveness of existing anti-displacement strategies and tools and present to Council best practices and recommendations for additional anti-displacement policies and programs such as additional anti-retaliation policies and a revised first right of refusal to tenants displaced due to development and consider the establishment of a community-based Displacement Housing Task Force to advise the City Council. (Metric: by September of 2025) (AFFH)
On Page 2-24
Amend Objective 6.2b: Revise ADU regulations to provide additional units in single-family zoning by such methods as removing owner occupancy requirements, allowing additional ADUs under certain circumstances, or similar measures. (Metric: May of 2024)
ACTION: The motion carried unanimously with the following vote.
AYES: Councilmembers Newsome, Brown, Watkins, Brunner,
Kalantari-Johnson; Vice Mayor Golder; Mayor Keeley.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISQUALIFIED: None.
Adjournment – Vice Mayor Golder moved, seconded by Councilmember Newsome, to adjourn. By consensus City Council adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
9.20 April 25, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6464
Respectfully Submitted:
Julia Wood, Deputy City Clerk Administrator
Attest:
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator
Approved:
Fred Keeley, Mayor
9.21 City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 04/27/2023
AGENDA OF: 05/09/2023
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
SUBJECT: Homelessness Response Quarterly Update (CM)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive quarterly update regarding City Council-directed homelessness response programs and services.
BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Homelessness Response Action Plan (HRAP) in March 2022. The HRAP was developed to guide the City’s efforts over a 3-year period. Per City Council’s request, staff continues to provide quarterly updates on the progress of the HRAP.
This quarterly update encompasses the timeframe of January through March 2023. It includes a summary of the HRAP program highlights and a dashboard (attached) of the City’s Homelessness Response program outcomes to date.
DISCUSSION: The City’s three-year Homelessness Response Action Plan (HRAP) (2022 – 2025) is focused on the values of collaboration, health, safety, economic vitality, practicality, resource stewardship, and transparency.
The plan has five key action areas:
- Building partnerships and capacity;
- Permanent affordable and supportive housing;
- Basic support services;
- Care and stewardship; and
- Community safety.
HRAP PRIORITY PROJECTS
- Basic support services: Maintain temporary shelter capacity in a manner that supports rehousing
- Basic support services: Develop emergency shelter plan in response to severe weather events
- Care and stewardship: Minimize the health, safety and environmental impacts of encampments throughout the City
- Build capacity and partnerships: Obtain sustainable funding for Homelessness Response program
- Build capacity and partnerships: Enhance collaboration with County and community partners for a regional approach to homelessness response - Community safety: Build cross-departmental homelessness response capacity - Housing: Develop affordable and permanent supportive housing
10.1 HRAP PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS
Basic Support Services
- The City’s two Safe Sleeping Programs (1220 River Street and the City Overlook shelter at the Santa Cruz Armory) can serve up to 165 people. Residents at these sites receive case management and basic services. These low-barrier, short-term shelters continue to be a critical step toward stability for people living in encampments. - The City’s tiered Safe Parking Program for oversized vehicles can serve a total of 27 vehicles. Tier 1 and 2 (overnight-stay only) are not at capacity, likely due to the requirement that the vehicle must be moved every day. Additional capacity is available should the demand increase. Tier 3 (up to 6 month (24/7) stay) has been at capacity since it opened in 2022.
- In response to the winter storms, the City opened a Severe Weather Shelter for the unhoused that was activated during extreme weather events. Since January, the City has activated shelter at the Civic Auditorium and the Depot Park Freight Building for a total of 19 nights, providing a cumulative 725 safe sleeping spaces and over 1200 instances of individuals receiving food, drinks or supplies at shelter locations during this activation period. The City also transported people to and from County run shelters when they were available.
- The City is developing a Severe Weather Shelter activation protocol and policy. The City continues to engage with the County regarding a countywide solution to emergency weather shelters.
Build Capacity and Partnerships:
- The new Hygiene Bay at Housing Matters opened in March 2023 with restrooms and hot showers. Towels and basic toiletries are provided. The showers are open daily from 7 am to 3 pm, and restrooms are open 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The Hygiene Bay is located in a City owned building and the City funded the $1.4 million renovation project using ARPA (American Rescue Plan Act) funds. City Council approved the funding in December 2021, and the contract was awarded in June 2022. - The Coral Street Visioning Process is nearly complete, with the report being presented to the City Council concurrently with this update. Community partners, service providers, neighbors, businesses and members of unhoused community had the opportunity to provide feedback on preliminary designs of the Coral Street study area at in-person and on-line events. Council direction is being requested for final updates to the report, including but not limited to the preferred development approach for 125 Coral Street, which the report identifies as the priority development project for the area, and for addressing current and future parking challenges.
- The City applied for Round 2 of the California Encampment Resolution Grant with a request of $6,271,521 over two years to fund encampment management activities and to provide additional support for current sheltering programs with expanded case management services. Notification of grant awards is scheduled for April 30, 2023. - The City submitted legislative requests to:
o Senator Dianne Feinstein: $2,000,000 for the Homeless Services Navigation Center on Coral St.
o Congressman Panetta: $500,000 for the Homeless Services Navigation Center on Coral St.
10.2 Community Safety / Care & Stewardship
- Every week, the City Homelessness Response Outreach Team offers assistance to people experiencing homelessness. At the same time, the Homelessness Response Field team, the Parking Division, and the Police and Fire Departments work to make our City streets, parks, beaches, and open space areas clean and safe.
- Over the past several months, a significant but informal encampment of unhoused individuals has formed on the edge of the Pogonip Open Space in Santa Cruz. Based on recent outreach to people at the site, the City estimates between 80 and 100 people currently living in this area. This number is subject to daily change. The City is committed to managing environmental degradation of this sensitive area and will continue to closely monitor wildfire risk. City Staff is onsite multiple times a week to connect people to services, conduct refuse management, maintain roadway clearance and to address other safety concerns in the area.
- The Homelessness Response Outreach Team is actively collaborating with the County and community partner case managers to connect City Overlook and 1220 River Street participants with support services and resources to locate housing and employment. - The City is exploring the feasibility of a 24/7 mobile crisis response program to provide an alternative response to law enforcement response to service requests that are noncriminal and non-emergency in nature. The first phase of work involves conducting a feasibility assessment and analysis for a Santa Cruz Mobile Crisis Response program.
The second phase of work would involve supporting the operational development and service implementation.
Permanent Affordable and Supportive Housing
- Over 870 affordable housing units are in process, between the stages of filing a preliminary review application and prior to completion of construction. Over 350 of these units are dedicated to very-low-income households (<50% Area Median Income (AMI)) and approximately 520 of them are dedicated to low-income (<80% AMI). - Approximately 220 of the affordable units noted above are permanent supportive housing (PSH) units for people experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness, with 34 of the PSH units currently under construction (Pacific Station South & Center/Cedar Apartments – occupancy expected within a year), 50 PSH units having been issued building permits to start construction (Jessie Street – occupancy expected in less than two years), and 120 PSH units expected to be issued building permits this summer (120 Coral Street – occupancy expected in less than two years).
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no net fiscal impact associated with this quarterly update. The HRAP implementation actions were included in the expenditure plan for the $14 million received from the State of California that was authorized on March 8, 2022, as well as the ARPA funds that were authorized on December 14, 2021. Specific contracts, agreements, and budget adjustments will be brought back to Council as needed, and in a manner consistent with City policies and procedures. Post-FY 2023 funding for ongoing services identified in the Homelessness Response Action Plan will be identified as part of the upcoming FY 2024 budget cycle.
10.3 Prepared By:
Larry Imwalle
Homelessness Response
Manager
Submitted By:
Lisa Murphy
Deputy City Manager
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE DASHBOARD.DOCX
2. HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE PROGRAM OVERVIEW.DOCX
10.4 HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE PROGRAM DASHBOARD
City safe sleeping and safe parking programs
2022 – March 30, 2023
Served 428 people Housed* 62 people
1220 River Street Transitional Community Camp
27 tent capacity
Sheltered 66 people
Housed* 30% of participants (20 people)
City Overlook Shelter at the Armory
135 tent capacity
Sheltered 313 people
Housed* 12% of participants (36 people)
Oversized Vehicle Safe Parking Program
27 vehicle capacity
Served 21 people at the Tier 2 (City lots)
Served 28 people at the Tier 3 (Armory)
Housed* 21% of participants (6 people) through Tier 3 program* *Housed = people who have moved on to more stable housing or have obtained housing with family and friends.
Community Safety / Care & Stewardship
January – March 2023
Homelessness Response Field Crew & Community Service Officers Responded to 328 constituent requests via CRSP
Collected 50.62 Tons (101,240 pounds) of trash
Collected 258 large items (abandoned carts, furniture, dressers, etc.) Removed and disposed of 1,598 sharps (needles, devices with sharp points or edges that can puncture or cut skin)
10.5 Homelessness Response Program Overview
City Overlook at the National Guard Armory
Located on state-owned property, the City Overlook at the Armory is part of the City’s temporary, tent-based, safesleeping program that provides space for up to 135 tents, 24/7 staff support, and offers participants two meals a day.
City programs at the Armory offer participants hygiene facilities, electrical charging, access to health care, transportation to and from the site, and connections to support services. Participants must adhere to a code of conduct. Drugs and alcohol are not allowed in the shelter. This site is “low barrier”— pets, possessions, and partners are welcome.
The Salvation Army (TSA) manages the daily oversight and infrastructure support of the program. Participants are required to meet with TSA staff regularly to work on removing barriers to jobs and housing such as applying for housing and facilitating guests’ transportation to jobs, coordinating job interviews and appointments to see apartments. Case managers from local service providers meet clients onsite at its community gathering area.
The Homeless Persons Health Project, a program of Santa Cruz County, brings their mobile health unit, doctors and health care providers to the Armory twice a month. Services offered: General medicine, Urgent Care, Wound Care, Flu + COVID-19 vaccine (schedule to be determined), Medication-Assisted Treatment, and Care Coordination.
Current program participants at City Overlook confirm that a critical step for moving out, and staying out, of an encampment is the availability and access to a “low-barrier shelter” where they may move beyond their day-to-day focus on survival. They have stable access to food, health, hygiene services, and they can give more attention to their searches for jobs and longer-term housing. Participants are in a stable and supportive environment at this shelter site, and they can consistently connect with service providers and case managers.
Brief background: In June 2022, the County made the decision to discontinue their emergency shelter programs throughout the region. In response, the City of Santa Cruz made it a priority to manage, develop, and fund ongoing shelter programs in partnership with other service providers. The programs formerly offered by the County were of similar size to those currently being offered by the City.
This shelter location is not open to the public. Please contact the City’s Homelessness Response Team for more information or to schedule a site visit.
10.6 1220 River Street Transitional Community Camp
Located on City-owned property, 1220 River Street is part of the City’s temporary, tent-based safe-sleeping program that provides space for up to 27 tents. Participants have access to basic services such as hygiene and cooking facilities and are interested in maintaining these shared spaces. City outreach staff manages the daily oversight and infrastructure support of the program. Participants are required to meet with City staff once a week, and to work with them to complete an Individual Service Plan. These plans help identify practical steps to move individuals toward stable, permanent and affordable housing. This site is “low barrier”— pets, possessions, and partners are welcome. Case managers from local service providers meet clients onsite at its community gathering area.
Current program participants at 1220 River Street have confirmed that a critical step for moving out, and staying out, of an encampment is the availability and access to a “low-barrier shelter” where they may move beyond their day-today focus on survival. They have stable access to food, health and hygiene services, and they can give more attention to their searches for jobs and longer-term housing. Participants are in a stable and supportive environment at this shelter site, and they can consistently connect with service providers and case managers.
The operations model for the transitional community camp at 1220 River Street focuses on deepening the relationships with unhoused people to better understand their needs, challenges, and perspectives affecting their housing, and to work with them to develop individual plans and solutions for their pathways to more stable housing. This shelter program was developed with specific input from the unhoused community such as barriers to accepting shelter, challenges with job applications and personal documents, transportation, and necessary and ideal on-site services and more.
This shelter location is not open to the public. Please contact the City’s Homelessness Response Team for more information or to schedule a site visit.
Safe Parking
Tier 1: Originally planned as an emergency, one night only, overnight parking for individuals who need an immediate sanctioned parking spot. The demand for Tier 1 has proved to be limited and the Tier 1 program is now
10.7 co-sited with the Tier 2 program. Tier 1 participants are immediately enrolled in the Tier 2 program as space allows in order to extend their stay from one-night only to a minimum of 30 days. Should the demand for these programs expand, the Tier 1 program may be re-instated as originally planned with its own assigned parking lot and enrollment procedure.
Tier 2: Safe overnight parking for a minimum of thirty vehicles throughout the City, was implemented within four months of passing the OV Amendments. Tier 2 lots provide legal, overnight parking for those living in their RVs who park on City streets. Registered participants receive a permit and designated spot for night-time parking. Basic hygiene services available on-site. The vehicle must be operable for this night-only program, but current registration is not required. Once registered in the Tier 2 program, participants may generally park in designated spaces from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Spaces may be reserved for up to 30 consecutive days. During the daytime hours, these RVs can park in many locations throughout the City based on current parking regulations. This is a low barrier program, and participants simply must sign on to a basic participation agreement that includes a simple “good neighbor” code of conduct. No vehicle registration is required.
Tier 3: A robust safe parking program in partnership with service providers, health providers, and County partners, prioritizing: families with children, seniors, transition-age youth, veterans, and those with a valid disabled placard or license plate issued pursuant to the California Vehicle Code. Tier 3 opened in September 2022. This is a low barrier program, and participants simply must sign on to a basic participation agreement that includes a “good neighbor” code of conduct and an agreement to engage in case management and housing navigation. No vehicle registration is required.
Operated by The Free Guide, it provides 24/7 parking for up to 15 oversized vehicles. Current program participants in this program have confirmed that a critical step for finding stable housing and job is the availability and access to a safe place to park their RV, somewhere they may move beyond their day-to-day focus on survival. They have stable access to health and hygiene services and they can give more attention to their searches for jobs and longer-term housing. Participants are in a stable and supportive environment at this shelter site, and they can consistently connect with service providers and case managers.
The operations model for the Tier 3 Oversized Vehicle program focuses on deepening the relationships with unhoused people to better understand their needs, challenges, and perspectives affecting their housing, and to work with them to develop individual plans and solutions for their pathways to more stable housing. This shelter program was developed with specific input from the unhoused community such as barriers to accepting shelter, challenges with job applications and personal documents, transportation, and necessary and ideal on-site services and more.
Theses shelter locations are not open to the public. Please contact the City’s Homelessness Response Team for more information or to schedule a site visit.
10.8 City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 05/01/2023
AGENDA OF: 05/09/2023
DEPARTMENT: City Manager
SUBJECT: Pogonip Encampment Closure Refuse Disposal and Abatement Contract Approval (CM)
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, between the City of Santa Cruz and Clean Team Associates in an amount not to exceed $250,000, to remove encampment debris in the Pogonip.
BACKGROUND: The Pogonip recreational area nearest Highway 9 and Golf Club Drive has become an extremely large homeless encampment over the last several months. Over time, the camp has significantly increased in size, growing into an environmental crisis that presents a significant threat to public safety, health and welfare. Closure of the encampment and restoring it to its natural habitat will begin in late May.
DISCUSSION: The encampment located in the Pogonip area presents a significant threat to public safety, health and welfare. Environmental degradation is occurring in the hillside, and encampment-related pollution is directly impacting adjacent environmentally sensitive habitats.
In addition, the specific location is considered a high fire risk location requiring the Santa Cruz Fire Department to conduct hazard mitigation by conducting a vegetation management program this summer prior to fire season.
The challenge of the steep terrain makes it extremely unsafe for police to conduct enforcement activities, and for the Fire Department to respond to emergency calls for service, including fires.
Furthermore, City staff do not feel safe working in and around the Pogonip without a police escort.
To effectuate the clean-up, staff requested proposals from refuse disposal contractors. Staff received 3 bids, and is recommending authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with Clean Team Associates in an amount not to exceed $250,000.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds to support the clean up of the refuse, and dispose of the hazardous materials will be from the California homelessness response $14 million grant funds in an amount not to exceed $250,000.
11.1 Prepared By:
Lisa Murphy
Deputy City Manager
Submitted By:
Laura Schmidt
Assistant City Manager
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
None
11.2 City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 04/27/2023
AGENDA OF: 05/09/2023
DEPARTMENT: Finance
SUBJECT: Award Contract for Services for Disaster Cost Recovery (FN) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Award a contract for services for disaster cost recovery to Kermani Consulting Group, Novato, California; and
2) Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2023 budget to increase appropriations in the amount of $70,000 for disaster cost recovery services in FY 2023; and 3) Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney with Kermani Consulting Group.
BACKGROUND: On January 14, 2023, President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. declared that a major disaster exists in the State of California and ordered Federal aid to supplement State, tribal, and local recovery efforts in the areas affected by severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides beginning on December 27, 2022, and continuing.
The President’s action made Federal funding available to State, tribal, and eligible local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work in the counties of Merced, Sacramento, and Santa Cruz under DR-4683.
DISCUSSION: Kermani Consulting Group has been engaged with the City for disaster cost recovery services for the CZU Lightning Fire Complex DR-4558 and COVID-19 Emergency DR-4482. Due to the scope of the disaster of the Dec/January 2023 storms, additional budget appropriation is needed to have Kermani continue disaster cost recovery efforts with FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and CalOES (California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services) for DR-4683.
The initial damage estimates are above $10 million, and each site required a walk-through evaluation by FEMA and CalOES, to which Kermani Consulting Group was present. This helped determine initial damage and will lead to determining reimbursable funding estimates for over 30 initial projects.
This type of work is highly specialized and requires detailed knowledge of FEMA and CalOES procedures, systems and protocols. The work and workload is beyond the ability of the current
12.1 staff to perform. Kermani will be supported by staff in Finance and Fire, and will coordinate with all departments that have disaster projects.
FISCAL IMPACT: $70,000 in General Fund appropriations are requested to cover services through the end of the current fiscal year. The Fire Department has $85,000 budgeted in Activity 2205 Office of Emergency Services that will be used for these services in FY 2024. There are sufficient funds in the Finance Department FY 2024 budget to cover the balance of the contract.
Prepared By:
Marisol Gomez
Assistant Director of Finance
Submitted By:
Elizabeth Cabell
Director of Finance
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - LERMANI CONSULTING GROUP.PDF
2. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF
3. SOLESOURCEVENDORFORM KERMANI.PDF
4. KCG SCOPE OF SERVICES - ESTIMATED BUDGET.PDF
12.2 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 1
Professional Services Agreement With
KERMANI CONSULTING GROUP
For DISASTER COST RECOVERY
THIS AGREEMENT for professional services is made by and between the City of Santa Cruz (“City”) and KERMANI CONSULTING GROUP (“Consultant”) (each is referred to individually as a “Party” and collectively, as the “Parties”) as of May 9, 2023 (the “Effective Date”).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of each other’s mutual promises, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
SECTION 1: SCOPE OF WORK
Consultant will furnish services as defined and described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein.
SECTION 2: RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONSULTANT
All work performed by Consultant, or under Consultant’s direction, shall be rendered in accordance with the generally accepted practices, and to the standards of, Consultant's profession. Consultant represents and agrees that Consultant: (i) is fully experienced and properly qualified to perform the work and services provided for herein, (ii) has the financial capability required for the performance of the work and services, and (iii) is properly equipped and organized to perform the work and services in a competent, timely, and proper manner, in accordance with the requirements of this Agreement.
Consultant shall not undertake any work beyond the Scope of Work set forth in Exhibit A unless such additional work is approved in advance and in writing by City. The cost of such additional work shall be reimbursed to Consultant by City on the same basis as provided for in Section 4.
If, in performing the work, it is necessary to conduct field operations, security and safety of the job site will be the Consultant's responsibility excluding, the security and safety of any facility of City within the job site which is not under the Consultant's control.
Consultant shall meet with ELIZABETH CABELL, Director of the FINANCE Department, hereinafter called "Director", or other designated and authorized City personnel, or third parties as necessary, on all matters connected with carrying out of Consultant’s services described in Exhibit A. Such meetings shall be held at the request of either Party. Review and City approval of completed work shall be obtained monthly, or at other intervals as may be mutually agreed upon during the course of this Agreement. Review, approval, or acceptance of Consultant’s work by City or others shall not relieve Consultant from responsibility for errors and omissions in Consultant’s work.
SECTION 3: RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY
City shall make available to Consultant all necessary data and information in the City's possession and shall actively assist Consultant in obtaining such information from other agencies and individuals as needed. Consultant is entitled to reasonably rely upon the accuracy and completeness of such data and information, and Consultant shall provide City prompt written notice of any known defects in such data and information.
The Director may authorize a staff person to serve as his or her representative. The work in progress shall be reviewed at such intervals as may be mutually agreed upon between the Parties. The City will be the sole judge of acceptable work, provided that such approval will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If the work is not acceptable, City will inform Consultant of the changes or revisions necessary to secure approval.
12.3 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 2
SECTION 4: FEES AND PAYMENT
For services actually performed, the City will compensate Consultant at the rates set forth in the Fee Schedule detailed in Exhibit B and in accordance with the terms set forth therein. Payment for Consultant's services in carrying out the entire Scope of Work shall be made within the budget limit, or limits shown, upon Exhibit B. Such payment shall be considered the full compensation for all personnel, materials, supplies, and equipment used by Consultant in the Scope of Work. Markups shall not be charged for any approved sub-consultants or subcontractors.
Consultant agrees that the payments to Consultant specified in this Section 4 will constitute full and complete compensation for all obligations assumed by Consultant under this Agreement. Where conflicts regarding compensation may occur, the provisions of this section apply.
Variations from the budget for each task which are justified by statements indicating personnel time expended and submittal of a revised budget are only allowed with prior City approval; however, in no event shall the total fee charged for the Scope of Work set forth in Exhibit A exceed the budget of $216,075 without advance written City authorization in the form of an amendment or change order.
Invoices shall detail the time worked by each class of employee on each task and the expenses incurred for which billing is made. Invoices shall indicate the percentage completion of each work task as identified in the Scope of Work in Exhibit A and the overall percentage of completion of the total required services. Unless otherwise specified in the fee schedule, payments shall be made monthly by the City within 30 days based on itemized invoices from the Consultant which list the actual costs and expenses.
All invoices shall contain the following affidavit signed by Consultant (if individual) or by a principal of Consultant’s firm (if Consultant is an entity):
"I hereby certify [or as principal of Consultant] that the charge of (Insert invoice amount) as summarized above and shown in detail on the attachments is a fair and reasonable use of public funds, is in accordance with the terms of Agreement dated (Insert Agreement Date), and has not been previously paid."
This Agreement is contingent upon the appropriation of sufficient funding by the City for the services covered by this Agreement. If funding is reduced or deleted by the City for the services covered by this Agreement, the City has the option without penalty or liability to either terminate this Agreement or to offer an amendment to this Agreement indicating the reduced amount.
SECTION 5: TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
The City agrees to reimburse Consultant and Consultant’s employee(s) for only authorized travel expenses, as indicated by a mark below, and according to the City’s Travel Reimbursement Policy. It is expected that all travel expenses incurred by Consultant while conducting activities on behalf of the City will be at reasonable rates and that Consultant and Consultant’s employee(s) will exercise prudence in incurring these expenses. ☒ Ground Transportation: Ground transportation is reimbursable when it is for travel between the Consultant’s place of business, an airport, or Santa Cruz hotel, as applicable, to the City work location, when using vehicles owned by Consultant or Consultant’s employer:
• Mileage will be reimbursed at the current IRS mileage rate. • Evidence of automobile liability insurance meeting the City’s requirements must be provided. • Maps showing starting point, City work location, and total miles are required for reimbursement.
12.4 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 3
General Rule
1. Travel expenses not listed or checked above will not be reimbursed.
2. Travel reimbursements are paid after the completion of travel. There are no travel advances.
3. Exceptions to any of the above requirements require advance written permission from the Director or City’s designated agent contracting with the Consultant.
4. Tips and gratuities will not be reimbursed.
5. Alcoholic beverage purchases will not be reimbursed.
6. Consultants will exercise prudence in incurring reimbursable expenses.
7. The City of Santa Cruz has the sole discretion to deny any reimbursement request the City has determined to be excessive or an inappropriate use of public funds.
SECTION 6: CHANGES IN WORK
City may negotiate changes in the Scope of Work. No changes in the Scope of Work shall be made without the written approval of City and Consultant. Any change requiring compensation in excess of the sum specified in Exhibit B shall be approved in advance in writing by the City. Only City’s authorized representative(s) is authorized to approve changes to this Agreement on behalf of City.
SECTION 7: TERM AND SCHEDULE
The term of this Agreement shall be on the effective date of this Agreement and terminating on June 30, 2024. At the option of the City, this Agreement may be renewed annually under the same contractual terms and conditions by letter agreement.
Consultant shall begin work as specified in a written authorization (e.g., Notice to Proceed) to perform services. The written authorization to perform work shall not be issued until after this Agreement has been approved and authorized by the City.
The Work Schedule for completion of the work shall be as shown upon Exhibit C. In the event that major changes are ordered, the schedule for completion as stated in Exhibit C may be adjusted by City so as to allow Consultant a reasonable period of time within which to complete any additional work which may be required as a result of the ordered changes.
Neither party will be held responsible for delay or default caused by declared emergencies, natural disasters, or any Force Majeure event which is beyond the party's reasonable control. Consultant will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and will, upon the cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligations in this Agreement.
The City reserves the right to obtain the item(s) and/or services covered by this Agreement from another source during any on-going suspension of service due to the circumstances outlined above.
Consultant acknowledges that it is necessary for Consultant to complete its work on or before the completion date set forth in Exhibit C in order to allow the City to achieve its objectives for entering into this Agreement. The Parties therefore agree that time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
SECTION 8: TERMINATION
The City may terminate the Agreement for any reason by providing written notice to Consultant not less than 10 calendar days prior to an effective termination date.
12.5 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 4
The Consultant may terminate the Agreement for cause by providing written notice to the City` not less than 30 calendar days prior to an effective termination date.
The City may, at its option, allow Consultant to cure its failure to perform within 10 business days (or longer period authorized in writing by the City) from the date of the City’s termination notice. The termination shall be become effective if Consultant has not cured within the specified time period to the City’s satisfaction.
Consultant may terminate this Agreement for cause if the City fails to cure a material default in performance within a period of 30 calendar days (or such longer period agreed to by the Consultant), from date of the Consultant’s written termination notice specifying the default in performance.
Upon notice of termination by either the City or Consultant, the Consultant will immediately act to not incur any additional obligations, costs or expenses, except as may be reasonably necessary to terminate its activities. The City’s only obligation to the Consultant will be just and equitable payment for services authorized by, and received to the satisfaction of, the City up to and including the effective date of termination less any amounts withheld. All finished or unfinished work or documents procured or produced under the Agreement will become property of the City upon the termination date. In the event of Consultant’s failure to perform pursuant to the Agreement, the City reserves the right to obtain services elsewhere and Consultant will be liable for the difference between the prices set forth in the terminated Agreement and the actual cost to the City. Termination of the Agreement pursuant to this paragraph shall not relieve the Consultant of any liability to City for additional costs, expenses, or damages sustained by City due to failure of the Consultant to perform pursuant to the Agreement. City may withhold any payments to Consultant for the purpose of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due City from Consultant is determined. After the effective date of termination, Consultant will have no further claims against the City under the Agreement. No other compensation will be payable for anticipated profit on unperformed services.
SECTION 9: INSURANCE
Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Agreement, Consultant will maintain and comply with the Insurance Requirements as set forth in Exhibit D. Consultant will insure the City against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder. The insurance coverages required shall not in any way limit the liability of the Consultant.
SECTION 10: INDEMNIFICATION
Consultant agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers (collectively, “Indemnitees”) from and against any and all liability, claim, action, loss, injury, damage, judgment, or expense, including attorneys’ fees and costs (“Losses”) caused by or resulting from the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, Consultant’s officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors in any way related to this Agreement. Consultant’s duty to indemnify and hold harmless Indemnitees shall not apply to the extent such Losses are caused by the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of Indemnitees. Consultant’s obligation to defend shall arise regardless of any claim or assertion that Indemnitees caused or contributed to the Losses.
In the event this Agreement involves the performance of design professional services by Consultant, Consultant’s officers, employees, agents, or subcontractors, Consultant’s costs to defend Indemnitees shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault per Civil Code §2782.8. This section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.
SECTION 11: EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY/NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICIES City’s policies promote a working environment free from abusive conduct, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation; and require equal opportunity in employment for all regardless of race, religious creed (including
12.6 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 5
religious dress and grooming practices), color, national origin (including language use restrictions), ancestry, religion, disability (mental and physical), medical condition, sex, gender (including gender identity and gender expression), physical characteristics, marital status, age, sexual orientation, genetic information (including family health history and genetic test results), organizational affiliation, and military or veteran status, or any other consideration made unlawful by local, State or Federal law. City requires Consultant to comply with all applicable Federal and State and local equal employment opportunity laws and regulations, and Consultant is responsible for ensuring that effective policies and procedures concerning the prevention of abusive conduct, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation exist in Consultant’s business organization. The City’s current Equal Employment Opportunity and Non-Discrimination policies to which this Section applies may be viewed at http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruz/?SantaCruz09/SantaCruz0983.html and http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showdocument?id=59192.
SECTION 12: LEGAL ACTION/ATTORNEYS’ FEES
If any action at law or in equity is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief. The laws of the State of California, with jurisdiction in the Santa Cruz County Superior Court, shall govern all matters relating to the validity, interpretation, and effect of this Agreement and any authorized or alleged changes, the performance of any of its terms, as well as the rights and obligations of Consultant and the City.
SECTION 13: AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may not be amended in any respect except by way of a written instrument which expressly references and identifies this particular Agreement, which expressly states that its purpose is to amend this particular Agreement, and which is duly executed by the City and Consultant. Consultant acknowledges that no such amendment shall be effective until approved and authorized by the City’s authorized representative. No representative of the City is authorized to obligate the City to pay the cost or value of services beyond the scope of services set forth in Exhibit A.
Such authority is retained solely by the City Manager, Director, or their designee. Unless expressly authorized by the City Manager or Director, Consultant’s compensation shall be limited to that set forth in Exhibit B, Fee Schedule.
SECTION 14: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
1. Project Manager/Key Staff. Director reserves the right to evaluate and confer with Consultant regarding the project manager or other key staff assigned by Consultant to perform the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall replace the project manager or key staff upon Director’s request due to Director’s concern about their performance, or City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement. Otherwise, no change in assignment by the Consultant may occur without prior written approval of the City.
2. Consultant Services Only. Consultant is employed to render professional services only and any payments made to Consultant are compensation solely for such professional services.
3. Independent Contractor. In the performance of this Agreement, it is expressly understood that Consultant, including each of Consultant’s employees, agents, subcontractors or others under Consultant’s supervision or control, is an independent contractor solely responsible for its own acts and omissions, and shall not be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. Consultant agrees to comply with AB5, codified at Labor Code section 2750.3, and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents against any claim or liability, including attorneys’ fees and costs, arising in any manner related to this Agreement that an employee, agent or others under Consultant’s supervision or control was misclassified.
4. Consultant Not an Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
12.7 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 6
5. Subcontractors. Consultant shall obtain prior approval of the City prior to subcontracting of any work pursuant to this Agreement. If at any time, the City determines any subcontractor is incompetent or unqualified, Consultant will be notified and will be expected to immediately cancel the subcontract. Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all of the requirements stated herein, including naming the City of Santa Cruz, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds. Any modification to the insurance requirements for subcontractors must be agreed to by the City in writing.
6. Assignment. This Agreement shall not be assigned without first obtaining the express written consent of the Director or after approval of the City Council. Neither party may assign this Agreement unless this Agreement is amended in accordance with its terms.
7. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant agrees to comply with conflict of interest lawsin performing the work and services under this Agreement. Consultant covenants (on behalf of Consultant and Consultant’s employees, agents, representatives, and subcontractors) that there is no direct or indirect interest, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of services required under this Agreement. Consultant acknowledges and agrees to comply with applicable provisions of conflict of interest law and regulations, including the CA Political Reform Act, Sections 1090 and 87100 of the Government Code, and the City’s conflict of interest code. Consultant will immediately advise City if Consultant learns of a conflicting financial interest of Consultant during the term of this Agreement.
8. City Property. The work, or any portion, of Consultant in performing this Agreement shall become the property of City. The Consultant may be permitted to retain copies of such work for information and reference in connection only with the provision of services for the City. All materials and work product, whether finished or unfinished, shall be delivered to City upon completion of contract services or termination of this Agreement for any reason.
Consultant acknowledges and agrees that the work product shall be considered a work made for hire within the meaning of the patent and copyright laws of the United States; and Consultant agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of project-related documents and materials pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the City and Consultant waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of City. Any work product related to this Agreement shall be confidential, not to be used by the Consultant on other projects or disclosed to any third party, except by agreement in writing by the City, or except as otherwise provided herein.
Consultant’s final deliverables shall comply with Section 508 (29 U.S.C. Section 794d) accessibility requirements, as applicable.
9. Intellectual Property and Indemnity. Consultant represents to City that, to the best of Consultant’s knowledge, any Intellectual Property (including but not limited to: patent, patent application, trade secret, copyright and any applications or right to apply for registration, computersoftware programs or applications, tangible or intangible proprietary information, or any other intellectual property right) in connection with any services and/or products related to this Agreement does not violate or infringe upon any Intellectual Property rights of any other person or entity.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents, from any and all claims, demands, actions, liabilities, damages, or expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs) arising out of a claim of infringement, actual or alleged, direct or contributory, of any Intellectual Property rights in any way related to Consultant’s performance under this Agreement or to the City’s authorized intended or actual use of Consultant’s product or service under this Agreement. This provision shall survive termination or expiration of this Agreement.
If any product or service becomes, or in the Consultant’s opinion is likely to become, the subject of a claim of infringement, the Consultant shall, at its sole expense: (i) provide the City the right to continue using the product
12.8 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 7
or service; or (ii) replace or modify the product or service so that it becomes non-infringing; or (iii) if none of the foregoing alternatives are possible even after Consultant’s commercially reasonable efforts, in addition to other available legal remedies, City will have the right to return the product or service and receive a full or partial refund of an amount equal to the value of the returned product or service, less the unpaid portion of the purchase price and any other amounts, which may be due to the Consultant. City shall have the right to retrieve its data and proprietary information at no charge prior to any return of the product or termination of service.
10. Confidentiality.
a. Consultant shall not acquire any ownership interest in data and information (“City Data”) received by Consultant from City, which shall remain the property of the City. Certain information may be considered confidential (“Confidential Information”). Confidential Information shall mean all information or proprietary materials (in every form and media) not generally known to the public and which has been or is hereafter disclosed or made available directly or indirectly to Consultant through any means of communication, either verbally or in writing even if it has not been designated in writing as “Confidential” to Consultant in connection with this Agreement. Unless otherwise required by law, Consultant shall not, without City’s written permission, use or disclose City Data and/or Confidential Information other than in the performance of the obligations under this Agreement. As between Consultant and City, all City Confidential Information shall remain the property of the City. Consultant shall not acquire ownership interest in the City’s Confidential Information.
b. Consultant shall be responsible for ensuring and maintaining the security and confidentiality of City Data and Confidential Information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of City Data and Confidential Information, protect against unauthorized access to or use of City Data and Confidential Information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to City or any end users; and ensure the proper return and/or disposal of City Data and Confidential Information upon termination of this Agreement with notice to the City.
c. Consultant shall take appropriate action to address any incident of unauthorized access to City Data and Confidential Information, including addressing and/or remedying the issue that resulted in such unauthorized access, notifying City as soon as possible of any incident of unauthorized access to City Data and Confidential Information, or any other breach in Consultant’s security that materially affects City or end users; and be responsible for ensuring compliance by its officers, employees, agents, and subcontractors with the confidentiality provisions hereof. Should confidential and/or legally protected City Data be divulged to unauthorized third parties, Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations, including but not limited to California Civil Code sections 1798.29 and 1798.82 at Consultant’s sole expense. Consultant shall not charge City for any expenses associated with Consultant’s compliance with these obligations.
d. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its officials, officers, employees and agents against any claim, liability, loss, injury or damage (including attorneys’ fee and costs) arising out of, or in connection with, the unauthorized use, access, and/or disclosure of City Data and/or Confidential Information by Consultant and/or its agents, employees or subcontractors, excepting only loss, injury or damage caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.
11. Consultant's Records. Consultant shall maintain accurate accounting records and other written documentation pertaining to the costs incurred relating to this Agreement for examination and audit by the City, State, or federal government, as applicable, during the period of this Agreement, and for a period of at least five (5) years from the date of the final City payment for Consultant's services, or date of the termination of this Agreement, whichever is
12.9 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 8
later. If Consultant engages a subcontractor to perform work related to this Agreement with a cost of $10,000 or more over a 12-month period, such subcontract shall contain these same requirements. This provision shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
12. California Public Records Act. City is a public agency subject to the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”). If Consultant’s proprietary information is contained in documents or information submitted to City, and Consultant claims that such information falls within one or more CPRA exemptions, Consultant must clearly mark such information “Confidential and Proprietary,” and identify the specific lines containing the information. In the event of a request for such information, City will make best efforts to provide notice to Consultant prior to such disclosure. If Consultant contends that any documents are exempt from the CPRA and wishes to prevent disclosure, it is required to obtain a protective order, injunctive relief, or other appropriate remedy from a court of law in Santa Cruz County before the City is required to respond to the CPRA request. If Consultant fails to obtain such remedy within the time the City is required to respond to the CPRA request, City may disclose the requested information without any liability. Consultant further agrees that it shall defend, indemnify and hold City harmless against any claim, action or litigation (including but not limited to all judgments, costs, and attorney’s fees) that may result from denial by City of a CPRA request for information arising from any representation, or any action (or inaction), by the Consultant.
13. Compliance with Laws. All activities of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and/or agents will be carried out in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Consultant further agrees to comply with the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and other provisions of Santa Cruz Municipal Ordinance chapter 3.09, or otherwise Consultant may be subject to penalties including being declared an irresponsible contractor.
14. Licensure. Consultant agrees that Consultant, its subcontractors and/or agents (if any) has/have complied with all applicable federal, state, and local licensing requirements and agrees to provide proof of a current City of Santa Cruz Business Tax Certificate if:
• Consultant, its subcontractor(s) and agent(s) or its business is/are located in the City of Santa Cruz; • Will perform actual work in the City of Santa Cruz for 6 or more days annually; or • Will use company vehicles to deliver within the City of Santa Cruz for 6 or more days annually.
For additional information and licensing requirements, view the City’s Business Licenses and Permits webpage or call the Revenue and Taxation division at 831/420-5070.
15. Living Wage. Every contract for services to the City for $10,000 or more, is subject to City of Santa Cruz Living Wage Ordinance number 2000-25. If applicable, Consultant agrees to comply with the requirements of the Living Wage ordinance as provided in Santa Cruz Municipal Code Chapter 5.10.
16. Prevailing Wages for Public Work. To the extent that the work or services to be performed under this Agreement may be considered a “public work” (construction, alteration, demolition, or repair work) pursuant and subject to Labor Code section 1720 et seq., Consultant (and any subconsultant performing the work or services) shall conform to any and all prevailing wage requirements applicable to such work/and or services under this Agreement. Consultant (and any subconsultant) shall adhere to the prevailing wage determinations made by the Director of Industrial Relations (DIR) pursuant to California Labor Code Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2, applicable to the work, if any. All workers employed in the execution of a public works contract (as such term is defined California Labor Code section 1720 et seq. and section 1782(d)(1)) must be paid not less than the specified prevailing wage rates for the type of work performed. (CA Labor Code sections 1720, 1774 and 1782.) To the extent applicable to the scope of work and services under this Agreement, Consultant agrees to be bound by the state prevailing wage requirements, including, but not limited to, the following:
12.10 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 9
a. If a worker is paid less than the applicable prevailing wage rate owed for a calendar day (or any portion thereof), Consultant shall pay the worker the difference between the prevailing wage rate and the amount actually paid for each calendar day (or portion thereof) for which the worker(s) was paid less than the prevailing wage rate, as specified in Labor Code section 1775; b. Consultant shall maintain and make available payroll and worker records in accordance with Labor Code sections 1776 and 1812;
c. If Consultant employs (and/or is legally required to employ) apprentices in performing the work and/or services under this Agreement, Consultant shall ensure compliance with Labor Code section 1777.5; d. Consultant is aware of the limitations imposed on overtime work by Labor Code sections 1810 et seq. and shall be responsible for any penalties levied in accordance with Labor Code section 1813 for failing to pay required overtime wages;
e. Consultant shall post a copy of the applicable wage rates at each jobsite at a location readily available to its workers.
f. Any failure of Consultant and/or its subconsultant to comply with the above requirements relating to a public work project shall constitute a breach of this Agreement that excuses the City’s performance of this Agreement at the City’s sole and absolute option and shall be at the sole risk of Consultant. Consultant on behalf of itself and any subconsultant, agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, liabilities, losses, costs, expenses, attorney’s fees, damages, expenses, fines, financial consequences, interest, and penalties, of any kind or nature, arising from or relating to any failure (or alleged failure) of the Consultant and any subconsultant to pay prevailing wages or to otherwise comply with the requirements of prevailing wage law relating to a public work.
g. Consultant acknowledges that it and/or any subconsultant may not engage in the performance of any contract for public work unless currently registered with the DIR and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 [with limited exceptions from this requirement for bid purposes only under Labor Code section 1771.1(a)].
17. Storm Water Requirements. To the extent applicable to the Scope of Work under this Agreement, Consultant, Consultant’s employees, subcontractors, and agents are required to abide by the applicable City of Santa Cruz Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the duration of the work. The City’s mandatory Storm Water BMPs, which are listed according to the type of work, operations, or business, are located on the City website at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/public-works/stormwater/bestmanagement-practices
18. Dispute Resolution. The Parties agree to attempt in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement. Either party may initiate negotiations by providing written notice in letter form to the other party, setting forth the subject of the dispute and the relief requested.
Promptly upon such notification, the Parties shall meet at a mutually agreeable time and place in order to exchange relevant information and perspective, and to attempt to resolve the dispute. In the event that no resolution is achieved, and if, but only if, the parties mutually agree, then prior to pursuing formal legal action, the parties shall make a good faith effort to resolve the dispute by non-binding mediation or negotiations between representatives with decision-making power, who, to the extent possible, shall not have had substantive involvement in the matters of the dispute. To the extent that the dispute involves or relates to a public works project, the Parties agree to attempt to resolve the dispute by complying with the claims process as set forth in
12.11 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 10
Public Contract Code sections 9204(e), 20104-20104.6, but without waiving the requirements of the California Tort Claims Act, Gov’t Code section 800 et seq. unless otherwise agreed to by the Parties.
19. Force Majeure. Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligation hereunder to the extent that the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed by an act of God, natural disaster, pandemic, acts of terrorism, war, a strike, lockout or other labor difficulty, or other peril, which is beyond the reasonable control of the affected party and without the negligence of the respective Parties. Each party hereto shall give notice promptly to the other of the nature and extent of any Force Majeure claimed to delay, hinder or prevent performance of the services under this Agreement. Each Party will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and will, upon the cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligations in this Agreement. In the event either party is prevented or delayed in the performance of its respective obligation by reason of such Force Majeure, the only remedy is that there may be an equitable adjustment of the schedule based on City’s sole discretion.
20. Complete Agreement. This Agreement, along with any attachments, is the full and complete integration of the Parties’ agreement with respect to the matters addressed herein, and that this Agreement supersedes any previous written or oral agreements between the Parties with respect to the matters addressed herein. Unless otherwise stated, to the extent there is any conflict between this Agreement and any other agreement (written or oral), the terms of this Agreement shall control.
21. Severability. The unenforceability, invalidity or illegality of any provision(s) of this Agreement shall not render the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal.
22. Waiver. Waiver by any party of any portion of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the same or any other portion hereof.
23. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with California law.
24. Contract Interpretation. Each party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Agreement and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement.
25. MacBride Principles/Peace Charter. City of Santa Cruz Resolution NS-19,378 (7/24/90) encourages all companies doing business in Northern Ireland to abide by the MacBride Principles and Peace Charter.
26. Notices. If either party shall desire or is required to give notice to the other such notice shall be given in writing, via email, and concurrently delivered by: (a) personal delivery, in which case notice is effective upon delivery; (b) overnight courier (i.e., Federal Express) with charges prepaid or charged to the sender’s account, in which case notice is effective when delivered; (c) priority U.S. Mail, in which case notice shall be deemed delivered on the second business day after the deposit thereof with the U.S. Postal Service. Notices shall be addressed to recipient as follows:
To CITY:
Finance Department
Marisol Gómez
1200 Pacific Avenue
Suite 290, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
[email protected]
(831) 420-5232
To CONSULTANT:
Kermani Consulting Group
Masoud N. Kermani. P.E.
530 Alameda Del Prado
Suite 132c, Novato, CA 94949
[email protected]
(415) 883-3820
12.12 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 11
Changes to the above information shall be given to the other party in writing ten (10) business days before the change is effective.
27. Counterparts. The Parties may execute this Agreement in two or more counterparts, which shall, in the aggregate, be deemed an original but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. A scanned, electronic, facsimile or other copy of a party’s signature shall be accepted and valid as an original.
28. Warranty of Authority. The signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this Agreement and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this Agreement. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
12.13 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 12
Approved As To Form:
By: _____________________________ Date: __________________ Office of the City Attorney
CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
By: _____________________________ Date: __________________ Matt Huffaker
City Manager
CONSULTANT
By: _____________________________ Date: __________________ Printed: ___________________________ Title: __________________ May 3, 2023
12.14 12.15
City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 13
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF WORK
12.16 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 14
12.17 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 15
EXHIBIT B: FEE SCHEDULE
12.18 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 16
12.19 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 17
EXHIBIT C: WORK SCHEDULE
The consulting services will be provided to the City of Santa Cruz (the City) to assist with obtaining the necessary approvals from the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for reimbursement of the costs related to the 2023 winter storm disaster (FEMA-4683-DR-CA) including the potential declaration for the March storms and other eligible activities under the Public Assistance (PA) and California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) programs. The consulting services will also be provided to continue with cost recovery for the DR 4558 and DR 4482 disasters and to close out the remaining projects from DR 4308.
12.20 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 18
EXHIBIT D: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Consultant shall procure and maintain insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property and otherwise which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work under this Agreement and the results of that work by Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors.
A. CERTIFICATE REQUIREMENTS
The City will be issued a Certificate of Insurance (a Memorandum of Understanding will not be accepted) with the following minimum requirements:
• Certificate(s) will show current policy number(s) and effective dates, • Coverage and policy limits will meet, or exceed, requirements below, • The Certificate Holder will be City of Santa Cruz, Risk Management, 1200 Pacific Ave., Suite 290, Santa Cruz, CA 95060,
• Certificate will be signed by an authorized representative, • An endorsement, if required below, will be provided to show the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers as additional insureds, and
• Coverages must be maintained during the term of the Agreement with the City, unless a longer duration is required as specified below.
B. MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMITS OF INSURANCE
Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. If Consultant maintains broader insurance coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown below, the City of Santa Cruz requires and shall be entitled to the broader insurance coverage and/or higher limits maintained by Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of Santa Cruz.
Coverage will be at least as broad as:
• COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY (CGL): $1,000,000 PER OCCURRENCE; $1,000,000 AGGREGATE Proof of coverage for $1 Million per occurrence and $1 Million in the aggregate including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury, personal and advertising injury will be provided on Insurance Services Office (ISO) Form CG 00 01 covering CGL. • PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY (ERRORS AND OMISSIONS): $1,000,000 PER OCCURRENCE OR CLAIM, $1,000,000 AGGREGATE.
Consultant will maintain insurance appropriate to Consultant’s profession; with limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $1,000,000 aggregate. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after date of completion of the services under this Agreement. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date or start of work date, Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
• AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY:
Proof of coverage for $1,000,000 provided on ISO Form Number CA 00 01 covering any auto (Code 1), or if Consultant has no owned autos, hired, (Code 8) and non-owned autos (Code 9), per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
• WORKERS’ COMPENSATION AS REQUIRED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WITH STATUTORY LIMITS, AND EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY INSURANCE: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
12.21 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 19
The Worker’s Compensation policy must be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by the Consultant and its employees. (Not required if Consultant provides written verification it has no employees) - If Consultant has no employees, Consultant shall complete and sign a Workers’ Compensation Exemption Declaration and Release of Liability.
OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS
The insurance policies are to comply with the following provisions:
• ADDITIONAL INSURED STATUS
The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Consultant including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations, products and completed operations. General liability coverage will be provided in the form of an endorsement to Consultant’s insurance at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85, or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 (if a later edition is used).
o PRIMARY COVERAGE
For any claims related to this Agreement, Consultant’s and all subcontractor’s insurance coverage will be primary and non-contributory as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, or volunteers will be excess of Consultant’s and all subcontractor’s insurance and will not contribute with it.
• NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
Each insurance policy required above shall state that the coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.
• WAIVER OF SUBROGATION
Consultant hereby grants to the City a waiver of any right to subrogation, except as otherwise not applicable, which any insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss, including attorney’s fees under such insurance. Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effectuate this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer. • EXCESS LIABILITY/UMBRELLA INSURANCE POLICIES
Consultant may use excess liability/umbrella policies to meet the required liability limits on the condition that they provide all of the insurance coverages required herein, including, but not limited to, primary and non-contributory, additional insured, Self-Insured Retentions (SIRs), indemnity, and defense requirements. The excess liability/umbrella insurance policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying CGL insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the additional insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Consultant’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted. • DURATION OF COVERAGE
CGL & Excess Liability/Umbrella policies for any construction related work, including, but not limited to, maintenance, service, or repair work, shall continue coverage for a minimum of 5 years for Completed Operations liability coverage. Such Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
12.22 City of Santa Cruz Professional Services Agreement for DISASTER COST RECOVERY May 2023 (Form Rev.01/23 ) Page 20
• SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS (SIR)
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. City may require Consultant to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related expenses.
The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or City.
• ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURERS
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
• CLAIMS MADE POLICIES
If any of the required policies provide coverage on a claims-made basis:
1. The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work. • VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE
Consultant will furnish the City with original Certificates of Insurance including all required amendatory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause) and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsement Page of the CGL policy (and CPL, automobile and any Excess Liability/Umbrella policies, as applicable) listing all policy endorsements to be approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning will not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.
C. SUBCONTRACTORS
Consultant shall include their subcontractor(s) as additional insured(s) under the policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each contractor and subcontractor. Consultant shall require and verify that all contractors and subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are named as additional insureds on insurance required from its contractor(s) and subcontractor(s).
D. SPECIAL RISKS/CIRCUMSTANCES
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances and provide notice to Consultant.
12.23 City of Santa Cruz
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
)LVFDO<HDU
ACCOUNT 352-(&71$0(
LIDSSOLFDEOH
255(9(18($&&28177,7/(
ACCOUNT 352-(&71$0(
LIDSSOLFDEOH
25EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT TITLE
NET: $
REQUESTED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD
APPROVAL
BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('
FINANCE DIRECTOR
APPROVAL
CITYMANAGER
APPROVAL
5HVR
352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
TOTAL EXPENDITURE
TOTALREVENUE
'DWH
1VSQPTF
3FWJTFE/PWFNCFS
Clear Form
2023
04/26/2023
Increase to appropriation requested for FY23 Disaster Cost Recovery services provided by Kermani Consulting Group due to Dec/Jan Storms.
0 101-14-11-1241-52199 Other professional and technical services 70,000 70,000
-70,000
Marisol
Gomez
Digitally signed by Marisol Gomez
DN: cn=Marisol Gomez, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance
Department,
email=mgomez@cityofsantacruz.
com, c=US
Date: 2023.04.26 16:20:21 -07'00'
Elizabet
h Cabell
Digitally signed by Elizabeth Cabell
DN: cn=Elizabeth Cabell, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance
Department,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2023.04.27 13:04:57 -07'00'
Nicholas
Gong
Digitally signed by Nicholas Gong
DN: cn=Nicholas Gong, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2023.04.26 16:41:37 -07'00'
Elizabet
h Cabell
Digitally signed by Elizabeth Cabell
DN: cn=Elizabeth Cabell, o=City of Santa Cruz,
ou=Finance Department,
[email protected], c=US
Date: 2023.04.27 13:05:34 -07'00'
12.24 P:\FNPU\Intranet Files\Purchase Orders Revised August 2021 PO Doc# :
Vendor’s Name:
Item/Service being purchased:
One-of-a-kind The commodity or service has no competitive product (one-of-a-kind) AND IS ONLY AVAILABLE FROM ONE VENDOR.
Software
Maintenance
The only vendor that can provide maintenance for this software program is the company that developed the software.
No Substitute
A component or replacement part has no substitute AND CAN BE OBTAINED FROM ONLY ONE VENDOR.
Compatibility Compatibility is the overriding consideration AND THE ITEM/SERVICE CAN BE OBTAINED FROM ONLY ONE VENDOR.
Delivery Date The ability of ONLY ONE VENDOR to meet a necessary delivery date.
Follow-up Service ONLY ONE VENDOR is able to make on-call repairs at a particular location.
Prior PO#(‘s) required:
Emergency Urgent need for the item or service does not permit soliciting competitive bids, as in cases of emergencies, disaster, etc.
Monopoly A monopoly exists, as in the case of the U.S. Post Office, PG&E, the Santa Cruz Sentinel, the League of California Cities, the County of Santa Cruz, etc.
Explain why this vendor is the only one able to provide the service/good.
Completed by: Department:
Sole Source Vendor
Justification
Attach to all draft/PO’s for sole source purchases $10,000 to $99,999 Policy
For purchases between $10,000 and $99,999, a minimum of three quotes is normally required. On occasion, a purchase in this informal range can be made only through one vendor in which case it becomes a “sole source” purchase. In this instance, the Purchasing Division must have justification for bypassing the normal competitive process. To qualify as a “sole source” purchase one of the above criteria must be met.
12.25 1 | P a g e
KERMANI CONSULTING GROUP
Disaster Grants - Project Management - Hazard Mitigation Grants 530 Alameda Del Prado STE 132C OFFICE (415) 883-3820
Novato CA 94949 FAX (415) 883-3916
April 24, 2023
Ms. Marisol Gómez
Assistant Finance Director
Finance Department
City of Santa Cruz
RE: Disaster Cost Recovery and Grant Management
Statement of Qualifications – Scope of Services
FEMA and Cal OES Declared Disasters
Dear Ms. Gómez,
As a follow up to our meeting last Wednesday with you and Mr. Paul Horvat, and as requested, we are pleased to provide the Kermani Consulting Group (KCG)’s Statement of Qualification and scope of services in accordance with the enclosed Exhibit “A”. We are looking forward to continuing to work with the City to assist with disaster cost recovery for all FEMA/Cal OES disaster related projects.
KCG started working with the City of Santa Cruz following the proposal submitted on September 21, 2017. Our initial tasks were to work on projects from the three 2017 storm disasters, FEMA DRs 4301, 4305 and 4308, and report back to the City with the status of each project. What started as a small contract to evaluate the status of each disaster related project turned into a long-term partnership between KCG and City staff spanning the past 5+ years.
The City’s initial cost estimate for the three 2017 storm disasters was approximately $4.5 million ($1.4M, $640K and $2.5M respectively). We also assisted with the 2016 California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) State-level disaster and received additional money in the form of a supplemental Damage Survey Report (DSR) for the Brookwood Drive project.
Since our original purchase order was approved by the City, we have obtained the approval for reimbursements of the actual costs of repairs for the damages incurred by the 2017 and 2016 storm disasters. We have also been successful in winning all of the appeals filed with FEMA.
The only appeal that was partially approved was for the East Cliff @3rd project, noting that the portion that was denied by FEMA was for improvements made by the City therefore deemed not eligible for FEMA funding. Other than that, we were able to receive full funding from FEMA and Cal OES for the actual cost of all the City’s disaster related projects through requests for Project Worksheet (PW) versions, supplemental DSRs, and/or appeals.
12.26 2 | P a g e
In addition to the storm disasters, we have also assisted with disaster cost recovery for damages incurred by the CZU Fire (FEMA DR 4558) as well as COVID 19 expenditures (FEMA DR 4482). We assisted with the preparation of FEMA’s Section 404 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) applications for the City’s Water Department, applications for the Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG) program and other grants as requested by the City.
The City’s total estimate for repairs to damages caused by the recent 2023 storm disaster (FEMA DR 4683) is approximately $21M. Even though some of these costs may be funded through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the overall number of disaster related projects and their complexity requires a firm like ours to process the claims to ensure full cost recovery for eligible items. We expect that new sites may be added to the Damage Inventory (DI) list.
We appreciate the trust and confidence that City management has in our ability to facilitate the disaster cost recovery process. Over the years we’ve developed a strong working relationship with City staff as well as an understanding of City operations, both critical as we process claims and coordinate activities among the various local, State and Federal agencies.
The myriad of activities generated by the recent storm disaster (FEMA DR 4683) has provided us with the opportunity to train key staff with the Finance, Public Works, Water and Parks Departments so the City is better prepared for future disaster cost recovery efforts with FEMA and Cal OES. This in turn will lower our cost and involvement as the City assumes greater responsibility managing disaster related projects.
In summary, KCG is uniquely qualified to continue providing consulting services to the City of Santa Cruz for the following reasons:
• Proven results and great working relationship between City staff and KCG • Knowledge of City staff and operation systems
• Extensive experience and technical qualifications to analyze complex projects • Ability to maximize disaster recovery reimbursement because of KCG’s extensive experience and close long-term professional and personal relationship with FEMA and Cal OES staff • Large number of satisfied clients including many Cities and Counties over the last twenty-six years assisting with disaster cost recovery, appeals and audits of various disasters We appreciate the opportunity to submit our proposal and look forward to continuing to work with you and City staff to successfully secure funding for disaster related activities and to manage the disaster grants as they are obligated. Please call me at (415) 328-9446 or email [email protected] if there are any questions.
Sincerely,
Masoud N. Kermani, P.E.
Enclosure: Exhibit “A”
12.27 3 | P a g e
EXHIBIT “A”
City of Santa Cruz
Disaster Cost Recovery and Grant Management
A.1 Proposed Scope of Services
The consulting services will be provided to the City of Santa Cruz (the City) to assist with obtaining the necessary approvals from the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for reimbursement of the costs related to the 2023 winter storm disaster (FEMA-4683-DR-CA) including the potential declaration for the March storms and other eligible activities under the Public Assistance (PA) and California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) programs. The consulting services will also be provided to continue with cost recovery for the DR 4558 and DR 4482 disasters and to close out the remaining projects from DR 4308.
The scope of services will be performed as authorized by the City. Some examples of the tasks that will be provided for each phase are listed below:
1. Provide guidance to the City to prepare the FEMA & Cal OES disaster grant application forms
2. Prepare request(s) for Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG)
3. Attend the Cal OES/FEMA Applicant Briefing
4. Initiate the necessary actions needed to obtain a disaster declaration by the County, State and FEMA
5. Meetings /conference calls with City staff as needed
6. Respond to the Email and telephone inquiries
7. Finalize the City’s List of Projects (LOP) and Damage Inventory (DI) to submit to Cal OES and FEMA
8. Attend the Recovery Scoping Meeting (RSM) with FEMA and Cal OES
9. Review the list of damaged sites and storm activities including expenditures to date
10. Provide guidance on the eligibility of the expenditures and repairs
11. Provide guidance to the City Finance staff to properly document and track expenditures
12. Visit the damaged sites with FEMA/Cal OES officials
13. Monitor and upload the necessary and requested information on the FEMA grants portal
14. Provide assistance with the project files for each activity listed on the DI
15. Review and provide comments on the engineering reports
16. Review the procurement contracts to complete project scopes of work
17. Review and provide comments on project scopes of work and cost estimates
18. Organize and review the expenditures related to the disaster
19. Assist with the preparation of FEMA’s Project Worksheets (PW)
20. Review and analyze the Project Worksheets (PW) prepared for each project
21. Review the Cal OES Notification of Obligation Packages
22. Work with Cal OES and FEMA to expedite funding approval
12.28 4 | P a g e
23. Prepare requests for Time Extensions as needed
24. Prepare appeal packages, as needed, including cost and regulation analyses
25. Coordinate activities between the City, State and FEMA
26. Prepare requests for PW Versions
27. Request the City’s share from Cal OES for the FHWA projects
28. Assist with the preparation of the Quarterly Reports
29. Prepare the closeout package for the Large Projects
30. Prepare the Net Small Project Overrun (NSPO) appeal for all Small Projects
31. Financial analysis of the reimbursable funds/checks received
32. Assist with the Final Inspection Audit for Disaster Closeouts
33. Follow up with Cal OES to receive final retention
34. Manage Audits with the City, State Controller’s Office and Federal Office of Inspector General (OIG) as needed
A.2 Qualifications and Experience
Kermani Consulting Group (KCG) was founded in 1997 to provide comprehensive disaster consulting services to organizations seeking grant assistance from the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), and Federal agencies such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
Masoud Kermani, president of KCG, has a Master’s Degree in Civil/Structural Engineering and is a registered civil engineer with over forty years of experience in the field of engineering, disaster response, cost recovery, construction, and project management. For over eight years, he worked for the California Governor’s OES office and was co-located with the FEMA Region IX personnel in their headquarters at the Presidio of San Francisco. He managed the Cal OES staff assigned to the disaster cost recovery of all the sites damaged by the Loma Prieta Earthquake.
In the past twenty-six years, KCG has assisted many Cities and Counties with disaster cost recovery of the sites damaged by declared disasters including the floods of 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2005, 2006, 2016, 2017, 2019,2023, the San Simeon, Loma Prieta and Napa earthquakes, the 2017 and 2020 California Wildfires as well as the ongoing Covid-19 disaster.
KCG worked with the City of Pacifica beginning in March of 1997 on ALL declared disasters from 1994 to 2010. We provided disaster cost recovery consulting, technical advice, and project management for all the sites damaged by the various disasters securing over $12M for the City from Cal OES and FEMA.
In 2012, KCG worked with the City of Pacifica to manage the Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit of these disaster funds. KCG prepared complete project and financial files for all the project work sheets requested by OIG. As a result, all of the auditor’s inquiries and requests for information were addressed with no significant findings and the City was able to keep the grant funding.
12.29 5 | P a g e
KCG provided disaster management services to the County of Marin beginning in 1998 as well as the City of Larkspur following the 2005/2006 Winter Storms. The County had a total of 246 damaged sites and the City of Larkspur had 25 sites which included seven major landslides from the storms. As a result of KCG’s efforts, a total of $10.5M was obligated for both applicants. The ratio of the actual cost of the projects to the approved funding by both Cal OES and FEMA was close to 98%. Most of the projects were approved after filing first and/or second level appeals with FEMA. The approval success rate for the appeals was 99%.
KCG worked with the City and County of San Francisco (CCSF) OES from December 2000 to October 2005 on various sites damaged by the 1996 State disaster and by the storms of the Federally declared 1997 and 1998 disasters. KCG was able to obtain reimbursement exceeding $10 million from Cal OES and FEMA. The additional funds secured by KCG were considered “dead money” that the City had given up hope of receiving. KCG also coordinated the response and the activities for the final audit by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the approved funds. OIG’s auditors issued their final report with no findings.
In March 2000, the City of Millbrae experienced a massive and dangerous landslide on private land that damaged a public sewer line, destroyed one home, and threatened ten others. KCG provided comprehensive disaster consulting services and helped the City obtain $9 million dollars in public assistance funding from the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) under the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA).
KCG assisted the City of Paso Robles with disaster cost recovery following the 2003 San Simeon earthquake, managed the disaster grants, and filed the necessary appeals and requests for supplemental project worksheets to maximize the grant funding for the City.
KCG also filed an appeal for the City of Atascadero’s City Hall requesting that FEMA pay for the seismic upgrade and repairs in the amount of $35 million dollars. As a result of the arguments presented in the appeal the City was ultimately able to obtain approval and restore the historic City Hall to its pre-disaster function in accordance with the applicable codes and standards.
At the request of the City of San Rafael, KCG reviewed the City’s existing policies and procedures for managing State and Federal disasters and provided recommendations to improve cost recovery. In October 2013, KCG prepared a comprehensive report on the FEMA- CalOES Public Assistance Guide for the City of San Rafael’s disaster cost recovery process.
At the invitation of Cal OES’s California Specialized Training Institute (CSTI), Masoud Kermani taught a course on State of California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) and FEMA’s Public Assistance programs to local government representatives for seven years.
KCG was hired by Napa County to file all the necessary appeals for the sites damaged by the 2014 Napa earthquake for which funding was denied by FEMA.
12.30 6 | P a g e
KCG worked on the 2016-2017 and 2019 storm disaster projects with Sonoma County and the Cites of Mill Valley, Vallejo, Santa Cruz, San Rafael, and Larkspur and the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) to provide FEMA-Cal OES consulting services for disasters declared by the State and FEMA in 2017 and 2019.
KCG is currently assisting the Cities of San Bruno, Pacifica, Brisbane and Santa Cruz with disaster cost recovery from the 2023 Severe Winter Storm Disasters.
A.3 Key Project Professionals
KCG will draw upon the collective experience of diverse professionals to provide comprehensive consulting services to the City on an as-needed basis to complement City’s staff. The professionals selected to work on this project have extensive experience in disaster cost recovery management.
The following Key Project Professionals will be available to work on the projects, as needed:
➢ Project Leader: Mr. Masoud Kermani, Professional Civil Engineer ➢ Project Manager: Ms. Thea Liskamm, MPP, Senior Consultant ➢ Project Fiscal Specialist: Mr. Dwight Steeves, Auditor A.4 List of Major Clients
Client Contact Title Phone #
City of Santa Cruz Mr. Paul Horvat Emergency Admin
Manager
831-420-5280
City of Vallejo Mr. Terrance Davis DPW Director 707-649-3559 Marin County DPW Mr. Michael Frost Deputy Director 415-473-3725 City of San Bruno Mr. Matt Lee DPW Director 650-226-6382 San Mateo County Mr. Brian Molver District Coordinator 650-766-4245 City of Brisbane Mr. Randy Breault DPW Director 415-508-2131 City of Larkspur Mr. Julian Skinner DPW Director/City
Engineer
415-927-5017
City of Pacifica Raymund Donguines Senior Civil Engineer 650-738-3768 Napa County Mr. Kerry Whitney Risk Services Manager 707-253-4821
12.31 7 | P a g e
Sonoma County Mr. Johannes
Hoevertsz
DTPW Director 707-565-3585
City of San Rafael Mr. Bill Guerin DPW Director 415-485-3389 City of Mill Valley Mr. Ahmed Ali DPW Project Manager 415-384-4830 East Bay Dischargers
Authority (EBDA)
Ms. Jackie Zipkin General Manager 510.278.5910
Guerneville School District Ms. Dana Pedersen Superintendent 707-869-2864 A.5 Hourly Rate of Services
The following hourly fee schedule shall be charged to perform the consulting services plus actual cost for other expenses including travel based on Time and Material (T&M). A rate of $0.65 per mile shall be charged when traveling using personal vehicle. It is expected that the hourly rate will also cover typical expenses such as software cost, software maintenance and insurance.
Other expenditures, if needed, will be charged with prior approval from the City. Please note that we have NOT increased our hourly rates for the city since the original proposal in 2017.
TITLE RATE
Project Leader $195
Project Manager $150
Project Fiscal Specialist $95
A.6 Budget
The invoice for the month of March 2023 has been submitted in the amount of $18,459.75.
It is difficult to estimate the budget for the full scope of services, especially for the recent 2023 storm disaster(s), due the policy and schedule changes by FEMA , however, it is recommended that approximately $66K is budgeted for the remaining months in this fiscal year (March, April , May and June 2023). It is also recommended that approximately $150K to be budgeted for the next fiscal year of 2023-2024 (See tables on next page). The estimated budget is for the scope of services related to DR 4558, DR 4482, DR 4308 and DR 4683. KCG will also perform other
12.32 8 | P a g e
tasks such as potential March storm disaster for Category A & B and other assignments as requested by the City officials.
Estimated Budget for the remaining months in fiscal year 2022-2023 Disaster Tasks Est. Hours
Project Leader
($195/hour)
Est. Hours
Project Manager
($150 /hour)
Total
4558-DR Appeal FAL Cat
Z costs, closeout
5 20 $3,975
4482-DR RFIs- Submit
costs through July
2022and through
May 11, 2023
5 45 $7,725
4308-DR Disaster CloseoutFIR5 20 $3,975
4683-DR Portal- Site VisitsRSM- Grant
Management- See
Scope of Services
100 205 $50,250
TOTAL 115 290 $65,925
Estimated Budget for fiscal year 2023-2024
Disaster Tasks Est. Hours
Project Leader
($195/hour)
Est. Hours
Project Manager
($150 /hour)
Total
4558-DR Appeal FAL Cat
Z costs, closeout
5 20 $3,975
4482-DR RFIs- Submit
costs through July
2022and through
May 11, 2023
5 45 $7,725
4308-DR Portal- Site VisitsRSM- Grant
Management
5 20 $3,975
4683-DR Portal- Site VisitsRSM- Grant
Management- See
Scope of Services
355 435 $134,475
TOTAL 370 520 $150,150
12.33 9 | P a g e
A.7 Compensation
Consultant shall submit a statement of account, for the hourly professional services and the reimbursable expenses every month. The payments shall be due within thirty (30) days of its receipt.
12.34 City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 04/27/2023
AGENDA OF: 05/09/2023
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Neary Lagoon Fence Rehabilitation and Improvement Project (m409668) – Approval of Plans and Authorization to Award (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the fence plans and authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract with Abacherli Fence Company (Watsonville, CA) in the amount of $130,850.00 in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The Public Works Director is authorized to execute change orders within the approved project budget.
BACKGROUND: The Neary Lagoon Management Plan was established in 1992 and serves as a guide to maintain and preserve the long-term viability of the lagoon area as an ecosystem. The Neary Lagoon Fence is part of that plan and was set up to control public access to important and sensitive wildlife habitat areas. Part of the existing chain-link fence installed along the northeastern boundary of the management area for security purposes and to discourage entry into the riparian areas was installed over 20 years ago and has deteriorated. The fence has reached the end of its service life and needs to be reinstalled and replaced.
DISCUSSION: The project consists of rehabilitating and improving the existing fence. This will be accomplished by installing a new ornamental iron fence along the existing fence line.
Bids were opened on March 16, 2023, but none were received. The initial engineer estimate for this project was $90,000.
On March 17, 2023, requests for quotes were put out for the project and were received as follows:
Bill Fannin Fencing & Gates - Declined Project
Del Monte Fence - Declined Project
Abacherli Fence - $130,850.00
Plans for this project can be found at www.cityofsantacruz.com/publicworksprojects FISCAL IMPACT: The project is funded in the FY 2023 Wastewater Enterprise Fund as Neary Lagoon Park Annual Rehabilitation and Maintenance (m409668). There is no impact to the General Fund.
13.1 Prepared By:
Dale Cabreros
Engineering Technician
Submitted By:
Nathan Nguyen, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
None.
13.2 City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 04/27/2023
AGENDA OF: 05/09/2023
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
SUBJECT: Highway 1/9 Intersection - Approval of an Amendment to Consultant Agreement and Construction Budget Adjustment (c400805 and c401402) (PW)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Authorize and direct the City Manager to execute a contract amendment in the amount of $135,568, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to the contract with BKF Engineers (San Jose, CA) for the Highway 1/9 Intersection Alternative Analysis consultant services and additional construction support services; and
2) Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2023 budget by transferring funds from the Traffic Impact Fee Fund to fully fund the increased State Route 1/9 Intersection Improvement Project construction costs.
BACKGROUND: In previous years the City of Santa Cruz (City) approved a contract and contract amendments with BKF Engineers to prepare the environmental documents, plans and specifications, right-of-way acquisition and construction support services for the Highway 1/9 Intersection consistent with the reporting requirements of Caltrans. The project was recently completed.
Over the past year the City has been negotiating with Caltrans and California Department of Housing and Community Development for the acquisition of the Caltrans right-of-way northeast of the intersection, which has been leased by Central Home Supply for many years. The intent is to construct low-income housing at the site. The City has already acquired the Central Home Supply site.
Caltrans has indicated a willingness to engage with City and is requiring further transportation planning for the area to support and update current and future state, regional and local transportation, and to update the current freeway agreement. This is the necessary step before Caltrans considers the property excess and available for acquisition. City staff have worked with BKF Engineers to develop a scope of work that has now been reviewed and approved by Caltrans.
14.1 In addition, the Highway 1/9 Intersection project construction, now completed, has experienced costs in excess of available funding from the extended construction window due to poor weather, encountering steelhead in the culvert, and utility conflicts.
DISCUSSION: BKF Engineers are uniquely qualified for this transportation planning effort having worked with the City and Caltrans for the last 20 years on the Highway 1/9 project.
Hexagon, their transportation subconsultant, has also been involved in the project for many years. The same project managers from the previous contract have been assigned to complete the analysis and are very familiar with the area transportation system and the Caltrans process.
The scope of services includes four tasks:
1. Project Management, Meetings and Coordination.
2. Investigation, Research, and Compile Information.
3. Traffic Assessment/Reporting
4. Transportation Alternative assessment/Reporting
The tasks will take approximately 12 weeks to complete, assuming quick turnaround times for review by the City and Caltrans.
The additional funds needed to complete the intersection construction include costs for Granite Rock Construction, WSP Construction Management and BKF Engineers in the amount of $413,087. The additional funds of $250,000 are needed to supplement the remaining project funds. As this is a Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program intersection and TIF funds have been used extensively to match grant funding for the project, it is an appropriate funding source.
FISCAL IMPACT: The contract amendment in the amount of $135,568 is funded by the Highway 1 Bridge Replacement project (c401402) as the analysis will benefit the background work needed for that project. The budget adjustment in the amount of $250,000 from the Traffic Impact Fee fund will fully fund the additional Highway 1/9 Intersection (c400805) construction costs.
Prepared By:
Christophe Schneiter
Senior Professional and
Technical Assistant
Submitted By:
Nathan Nguyen, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT.PDF
2. CONTRACT AMENDMENT.PDF
3. EXHIBIT A-9.PDF
4. EXHIBIT B-9.PDF
14.2 City of Santa Cruz
BUDGET ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH$SSURYDO
)LVFDO<HDU
ACCOUNT 352-(&71$0(
LIDSSOLFDEOH
255(9(18($&&28177,7/(
ACCOUNT 352-(&71$0(
LIDSSOLFDEOH
25EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT TITLE
NET: $
REQUESTED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD
APPROVAL
BUDGET/ACCOUNTING
5(9,(:('
FINANCE DIRECTOR
APPROVAL
CITYMANAGER
APPROVAL
5HVR
352-(&7
352-(&7
$02817
$02817
&RXQFLO$SSURYDO
TOTAL EXPENDITURE
TOTALREVENUE
'DWH
1VSQPTF
3FWJTFE/PWFNCFS
Clear Form
2023
04/18/2023
To fully fund the construction of the Highway 1/9 Intersection project construction. 221-00-00-0000-49124 c400805 925-0-0 Transfer from Traffic Impact Fees 250,000 State Route 1/9 Intersection Imp
250,000
221-40-64-9330-57304 c400805 100-2020-0 Street Systems 250,000 State Route 1/9 Intersection Imp
226-00-00-0000-59107 To Gas Tax Fund 250,000
500,000
-250,000
Nathan N.
Nguyen
Digitally signed by
Nathan N. Nguyen
Date: 2023.04.26
22:41:16 -07'00'
Nathan N.
Nguyen
Digitally signed by
Nathan N. Nguyen
Date: 2023.04.26
22:41:31 -07'00'
Nicholas
Gong
Digitally signed by Nicholas Gong
DN: cn=Nicholas Gong, o=City of
Santa Cruz, ou=Finance,
[email protected],
c=US
Date: 2023.04.27 14:23:37 -07'00'
Elizabet
h Cabell
Digitally signed by Elizabeth Cabell
DN: cn=Elizabeth Cabell, o=City of Santa Cruz,
ou=Finance Department,
[email protected], c=US
Date: 2023.04.27 14:56:10 -07'00'
14.3 P:\PWAD\920-30.05\Highway1/9 Intersection – Amendment 9 to BKF Consultant Services 1 NINTH AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
AND BKF ENGINEERS
This Ninth Amendment to Contract for Services is entered into on __________________, 2023 by and between the City of Santa Cruz (“Agency” or “City”) and BKF Engineers (“Consultant”).
RECITALS
1. On January 13, 2004, the former Redevelopment Agency authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposals for Consulting Engineering Services for the design of Highway 1/9 Intersection Improvements.
2. On July 13, 2004, the former Redevelopment Agency authorized the Executive Director to enter into an agreement (“Contract for Services”) with BKF Engineers (Consultant) for Consulting Engineering Services for the design of Highway 1/9 Intersection Improvements in an amount not to exceed $168,325.
3. On January 10, 2006, the former Redevelopment Agency directed that the contract with Consultant be expanded and amended to cover the design of a Highway 1 bridge bike/pedestrian underpass and to address changes in the environmental documentation requirements of the Federal Highway Administration in an amount not to exceed $64,005.
4. On March 13, 2007 the former Redevelopment Agency authorized the Executive Director to execute the second amendment to the agreement with Consultant for additional Consulting Engineering Services for the preparation of final engineering design for the Highway 1 bridge bike/pedestrian underpass in an amount not to exceed $134,881.
5. On April 25, 2007, and in response to design modifications required by Caltrans, the former Redevelopment Agency approved the third amendment to the agreement with Consultant for additional services to modify the preliminary design for the proposed Highway 1/9 Intersection Improvements in an amount not to exceed $30,526.
6. On April 2, 2008, the former Redevelopment Agency approved the fourth amendment to the agreement with Consultant to complete the construction plans and specifications for the Highway 1 bridge bike/pedestrian underpass in an amount not to exceed $12,750.
7. On November 23, 2010, the former Redevelopment Agency approved the fifth amendment to the agreement with Consultant in the amount of $184,830 to accommodate additional work required by Caltrans to address design and environmental requirements not previously anticipated for the Highway 1/9 Intersection Improvements. Caltrans had determined that the lane widths and transitions must meet current standards and that design exceptions will not be approved except in extraordinary circumstances.
8. On December 9, 2014, the City Council approved the sixth amendment to the agreement with the Consultant in the amount of $898,941.00 to complete the Plans, Specifications and Estimate, and Right-of-Way Phases per the approved technical reports and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
14.4 P:\PWAD\920-30.05\Highway1/9 Intersection – Amendment 9 to BKF Consultant Services 2
9. On July 8, 2019, the Santa Cruz City Council approved the seventh amendment to the agreement with the Consultant in the amount of $356,128.00 to complete the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate and Right-of-Way Phases, and coordinate the final approval process with Caltrans.
10. On May 26, 2022, the Santa Cruz City Council approved the eight amendment to the agreement with the Consultant in the amount of $262,447.00 to fund additional scope of work that is needed to complete the Plans, Specifications and Estimate, the right-of-way process, permitting, construction support and coordinate the final approval process through Caltrans.
11. The City and Consultant now wish to further amend the Contract for Services to increase the amount of the contract fees in the amount of $135,568.00 for the Highway 1/9 Intersection Alternative Analysis and $220,522 to fund additional scope of work for the Highway 1/9 Intersection construction support services due to delays and changes associated with project construction.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the Parties to incorporate the above Recitals hereto, and;
1. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED THAT THE CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AND BKF ENGINEERS DATED
JULY 13, 2004, AS AMENDED, IS FURTHER AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
a. Appendix One, “Scope of Services”, is amended as follows:
Complete the Highway I/9 Intersection Transportation Alternatives, per the detailed scope and fees prepared by BKF and dated April 18, 2023 hereto attached, and to fund additional construction support services to complete the project construction. b. Appendix Two, Fees and Payments”, is amended as follows:
The contract is increased by Three Hundred, Fifty-Six Thousand, Five Hundred and Twenty- Two Dollars ($356,522).
2. All other terms and conditions of the Contract for Services, as amended, which are not amended pursuant to this Ninth Amendment, shall remain in full force and effect. The terms of this Ninth Amendment shall control if any conflict exists.
3. The parties may execute this Nine Amendment in two or more counterparts, which shall, in the aggregate, be deemed an original but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. A scanned, electronic, facsimile or other copy of a party’s signature shall be accepted and valid as an original.
4. The signatories to this Ninth Amendment warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this Eighth Amendment and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate
14.5 P:\PWAD\920-30.05\Highway1/9 Intersection – Amendment 9 to BKF Consultant Services 3 their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this Ninth Amendment.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Ninth Amendment to the Contract for Services effective as of the date shown above.
Date: ____________________________
Date: ____________________________
Approved as to Form
__________________________________
Office of the City Attorney Date
CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
______________________________________
Matt Huffaker, City Manager
BKF ENGINEERS
By: __________________________________
Its: ___________________________________
14.6 BKF ENGINEERS
1730 N. First Street, Suite 600, San Jose, CA 95112 | 408.467.9100 April 16, 2023
20157008-20
Ms. Bonnie Lipscomb – Economic Development Director/Successor Agency Director City of Santa Cruz Economic Development
337 Locust Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Transmitted Via Email: [email protected]
Subject: Hwy 1-9 Intersection – Transportation Alternative Analysis - Proposal Dear Ms. Lipscomb,
BKF Engineers (BKF), and our traffic engineer Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc (Hexagon) welcome the opportunity to submit this proposal for preliminary transportation and traffic engineering services associated with the Hwy 1/9 Intersection Transportation Alternative Analysis Project, located in the City of Santa Cruz, California.
To arrive at the estimated effort required by our office for this project, we have outlined a proposed scope of services, identified assumptions, and determined a level of effort fee based on our understanding of the project.
Attached is our corresponding Proposal Fee Summary, BKFs 2023 Rate Schedule, and Hexagon scope and fee.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Based on our scoping coordination meetings conducted with the City, Caltrans, BKF and Hexagon, we understand the project as:
It is our understanding that the City of Santa Cruz (City) is pursuing acquiring Caltrans-owned land, considered as “excess,” at the northwest corner of the Highway 1 / Highway 9 intersection (assuming Highway 1 runs north/south). The City desires to develop this land, along with remnants acquired as part of the Hwy 1/9 Intersection PS&E Project, for the purpose of affordable housing and/or the expansion of the Tannery Arts Center.
Caltrans has indicated a willingness to engage with the City to discuss a path moving forward to address Caltrans-owned excess land, however has mentioned further planning is needed at this location to support and update current and future state, regional and local transportation, and updates to the current Freeway Agreement between the City and Caltrans.
Since a standard or formal process to navigate Caltrans’ planning requirements, goals, and expectations in order to pursue a path forward addressing excess land is not available, several coordination meetings were conducted between BKF and the City, and later with Caltrans and Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) to identify a possible solution and path moving forward to update transportation planning for this location and pursue a path moving forward to address Caltrans-owned excess land(s).
With the understanding that the Hwy 1/9 intersection and area surrounding Caltrans is built-out, and prior decisions, environmental challenges, and local/regional community issues have constrained opportunities for major highway operational improvements at this intersection, Caltrans is interested in exploring a high-level and pragmatic general approach to transportation geometric alternative analysis (within public R/W) with the goal of a long-term conceptual plan, through updates and preliminary assessment of traffic intersection operations and safety conditions, and evaluate potential transportation improvement solutions in the area, with a possible focus on active
14.7 April 16, 2023
transportation, mobility and VMT reduction. Based on this – the general scope necessary to move forward will include coordination, gathering available information, supplementing/updating data (where appropriate), conducting traffic assessments and conceptual geometric alternative development, and documentation (Traffic Assessment Memorandum and Transportation Alternative Memorandum)
As a function of these preliminary meetings, discussions, coordination and scoping sessions, BKF Engineers and our traffic consultant Hexagon, developed an outline or summary of scope recommendations, which was circulated in August 2022 and reviewed by all parties. Following a final coordination meeting in September and minor comments received, the outline was deemed viable by all parties to move forward, and BKF was requested to develop formal scope, fee, and schedule.
The desired goal and outcome following completion of this scope of services includes:
· Caltrans/City consensus,
· Freeway Agreement revisions/update considerations, and · Identifying a path moving forward to address excess lands related to the Caltrans property (NE quadrant of Hwy 1 and Hwy 9) and the City’s interest for future development, with a focus on affordable housing opportunities
It is understood future project steps associated with the development of this property, including preliminary/final engineering/development, traffic analysis, environmental clearance (CEQA and NEPA), and project approval through the applicable and appropriate local, state and federal jurisdictions or resource agencies, will be required, and are separate from this scope of services.
BASIS OF DESIGN
The basis of design for this proposal involves the re-use of available information, data, and mapping for this proposal includes:
1. Hwy 1/9 Intersection Project Report, including Traffic Operations Analysis Report (TOAR) - 2011
2. Hwy 1/San Lorenzo River Bridge PSR/PDS and TEPA - 2013
3. Hwy 1/9 Intersection PS&E - 2020
Available information will be updated/supplemented where possible as summarized below. Project limits for assessment will focus on River Street and Hwy 9 at the intersection of Highway 1:
a. River Street/Hwy 9 – Potrero St and Golf Club Drive
b. Highway 1 – San Lorenzo River Bridge and Santa Cruz, Big Trees and Pacific Railroad
SCOPE OF SERVICES
TASK 1: Project Management, Meetings and Coordination
1. Project Management/Coordination with Teams, City and Subconsultant: BKF will coordinate with the City, Caltrans, SCCRTC, Santa Cruz Metro, and Hexagon for design concepts and electronic data exchange associated with the traffic assessment and alternative analysis. This Project Management task includes time for project management (BKF team and Hexagon), including contractual compliance, invoicing/reporting, scheduling, and QA/QC for deliverables.
2. Meetings: BKF has identified and budgeted the following meetings to facilitate coordination and collaboration, and support the development of a Traffic Assessment Memorandum (TAM) and Transportation Alternative Memorandum. Anticipated meetings may include:
· Meeting #1 - Project Methodology and Approach Coordination Meeting (1) – With a traffic focus, BKF and Hexagon will engage with Caltrans Traffic and Caltrans Planning to establish an agreeable methodology and approach to Task 3, Traffic Assessment Memorandum. Current and
14.8 April 16, 2023
project year assumptions, along with existing and future traffic conditions and alternatives will be discussed.
· Meeting #2 – Preliminary Alternatives/Geometric Discussion/Coordination Meeting (1) – Based on discussions and agreements at Meeting #1, and ongoing investigations, base mapping, preliminary traffic, and general coordination conducted under Task 2 and 3, a check-in or progress meeting is proposed to facilitate input, discussions, collaboration, and ideas to reinforce the path moving forward and concepts/alternatives under early-consideration. · Meeting #3 - Traffic Comment Coordination Meeting (1) – A joint resolution team (JRT) or comment coordination meeting will be conducted between the draft and final traffic assessment memorandum to discuss and resolve comments, responses, and planned report adjustments/changes before finalizing.
· Meeting #4 - Geometric Comment Coordination Meeting (2) - Two meetings with a geometric and transportation alternative focus will be conducted, including 1 dedicated as a JRT coordination meeting between the draft and final transportation alternative memorandum to discuss and resolve comments, responses and planned report adjustments/changes before finalizing.
· General Coordination Meeting (1) - An extra meeting has been included/scoped during the course of the project, to offer some flexibility and assist with the evolving needs/requirements of the project/process.
Between April and September, BKF and Hexagon participated in 4+ coordination and scoping meetings, phone conversations and email correspondences with Santa Cruz Economic Development (and later with Caltrans, SCCRTC and the City). Meetings including development of a strategy, exhibits, and scope outline, to move the project discussions forward; a partial (reduced) budget of BKF/Hexagon meeting effort to date has been included in this scope of services.
TASK 2: Investigations, Research, and Compile Information
1. Request Information, Collect Data, and Conduct Updated Traffic Counts: The Highway 1 / Highway 9 TOAR (supporting the Hwy 1/9 PA&ED) and the Highway 1 TEPA (Supporting the San Lorenzo River Bridge PSR/PDS) offer the most recent traffic information and studies completed in the study area, along with history, general project information and geometric alternative concepts considered. These reports analyzed Hwy 1/SLR Bridge and Hwy 1/9 intersection, including the existing (2005) and future (2030) traffic conditions at four intersections with Highway 9. The 2005 traffic counts and 2030 forecasted traffic volumes are outdated and need to be refreshed.
This task includes requesting/compiling available information including traffic, geometric (AutoCAD), and general project information from the Hwy 1 San Lorenzo River Bridge, as well as conducting AM (7:00- 9:00) and PM (4:00-6:00) peak hour turning movement counts at four study intersections:
· Highway 9 and Highway 1
· Highway 9 and Coral Street
· Highway 9 and Fern Street
· Highway 9 and Encinal Street
Updated traffic counts will include personal automobiles, trucks, pedestrians, and bicycles.
Additionally, a copy of the Santa Cruz County Travel Forecasting Model to obtain existing and future forecasted volumes will be requested from SCCRTC/City. These model forecasts will be used to calculate growth factors to be applied to the existing counts to estimate future traffic volumes at the study intersections.
14.9 April 16, 2023
Collision data in the area will be obtained from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS).
Signal timing sheets at the signalized intersections of Highway 9 with Highway 1 and with Encinal Avenue will be requested from Caltrans.
Additional site and planning information will be requested from the City, SCCRTC, and Santa Cruz Metro to bolster options/opportunities related to future planning/development,
2. Field Observations: Vehicular traffic conditions and other modal movements (transit, bikes and peds) in the field will be observed to identify any existing traffic problems that may or may not be directly related to intersection operations, such as vehicles that spill out of turn lanes and block through movements, vehicle movements that require two or more cycles to clear the intersection and vehicle queues that block up stream intersections. These observations will be used to confirm the traffic operational results from the traffic simulation model.
3. Compile Information and Prepare Base Mapping: BKF will compile the requested and collected data/information/mapping from Task 2.1 and 2.2, including any supplemental Hwy 1 SLR Bridge PSR/PDS information provided by the City. This information will be integrated and compiled to update the Project’s AutoCAD base mapping (sourced from the Hwy 1/9 Intersection Projects, PA&ED and PS&E) to support alternative design development.
In the event geometric alternatives or study areas under consideration are outside currently available mapping limits, BKF will supplement the aerial base mapping with any available 2D or 3D as-built AutoCAD or Orthophoto base mapping, such as Google Earth aerial mapping, City/County GIS mapping, or comparable alternative topo mapping. New mapping, including survey and aerial planimetric topographic mapping, is excluded from this scope of services.
TASK 3: Traffic Assessment/Reporting
1. Existing Traffic Conditions: Traffic operations at the intersections will be evaluated using SimTraffic simulation analysis software. SimTraffic, which is the simulation component of Synchro, is useful for analyzing complex situations that are not easily modeled macroscopically, like closely spaced intersections with blocking problems, closely spaced intersections with lane change problems and the operation of congested corridors. Based on the developed simulation model for this project in 2011, the model will be updated with new traffic counts and traffic signal timing settings, if necessary. Intersection level of service and intersection delay will be based on the SimTraffic analysis. SimTraffic captures the delays associated with queuing patterns resulting from spill backs and blocked turn lanes.
2. Future Traffic Conditions: Future traffic volumes at the intersections will be based on current geometry/lane configurations (under construction from the Hwy 1/9 Intersection Project, and the studied transportation improvement alternative documented in the SLR Bridge Replacement PSR/PDS on Highway 1, which will be assumed as a future, existing condition) and will be estimated based on forecasted growth projected by the Santa Cruz County Travel Forecasting Model. The land use data assumptions for the base year and future year will be reviewed to understand the growth in land use assumed for the areas in the vicinity of the project, specifically for the project area. The simulation model for the No-Project alternative, with future forecasted traffic volumes assuming no development on the site, will be run.
As part of Task 2, we will reach out to city staff to request a potential development plan for the project area, i.e., number of housing units and/or square feet of retail/office should be assumed on the site in the analysis. Based on the development plan, traffic generated by the site will be estimated and we will add those trips to the No-Project volumes.
Assessment will be made as part of a traffic operational solution in designing frontage improvements to provide project access to the roadway system. This will be updated and the simulation model run for up
14.10 April 16, 2023
to three transportation network alternatives (Alternatives 1, 2 and 3); due to the unknowns associated with the mobility hub concept, a qualitative analysis (without a simulation model runs) will be provided for Alternative 4.
The results of the traffic simulation analysis using SimTraffic will include the following performance measures at the intersections:
· Level of Service
· Average Delay
· Queuing
· Demand Volumes versus Volumes Served (Throughput): The number of vehicles that entered and exited (volume served) the system will be compared to the actual demand at the intersections to determine the benefits of the project.
· For each of the alternatives a qualitative analysis of the effects on transit, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation will be developed. Although modal safety and compliance with Caltrans Vision Zero will be considered in traffic assessment and geometric design development, a highway safety manual (HSM) analysis is premature at this phase, and is excluded from this scope of services.
While anticipated frontage design improvements could potentially increase roadway capacity, frontage improvements are not expected to have an effect on VMT. Frontage improvements are intended to provide access to the development and improve traffic operations in the corridor. CEQA VMT per resident and/or VMT per job for the proposed new development will not be analyzed in this phase of the scope/ study.
3. Draft Traffic Assessment Memorandum: A draft traffic assessment memorandum documenting the assumptions, methodology and results of traffic analysis, as summarized above under existing and future traffic conditions, will be prepared.
BKF will review and conduct in-house QA/QC procedures prior to circulating to the City, Caltrans and SCCRTC.
The draft report will be provided electronically in PDF and MS Word format for review/comment.
4. Final Traffic Assessment Memorandum: Following review and receipt of comments and a JRT Meeting, we will respond to comments on the draft and prepare a final report. BKF will review and conduct inhouse QA/QC procedures prior to circulating to the City, Caltrans and SCCRTC.
The final report will be provided electronically in PDF and MS Word format.
TASK 4: Transportation Alternative Assessment/Reporting
1. Geometric/Alternative Development: In conjunction with Meetings #1 and #2, as well as ongoing investigations, gathering of information, base mapping, preliminary traffic assessments, and general coordination conducted under Task 1, 2 and 3, we will develop schematic/conceptual geometric alternative exhibits in order to present transportation solutions and address the purpose and need, including a focus on active transportation, mobility and VMT reduction solutions when feasible.
In all cases, conceptual geometric design alternative(s) developed will integrate (future) Hwy 1 mainline geometrics studied in the SLR Bridge PSR/PDS, and include frontage access and ingress/egress solution(s) to support of the City’s intended expansion and development of the Tannery Arts Center and affordable housing. Based on this assumption and common theme, the following geometric/alternatives are scoped, although flexibility is an option and alternative may evolve during early discussions with Caltrans, City, and its partners, as concepts, issues, and information come into focus:
14.11 April 16, 2023
Alternative #1 – Highway 9 Traffic Operational Surface Improvements - Minimized footprint with focus on frontage access, ingress/egress options and lane configuration/optimization primarily along Hwy 9 (between Hwy 1 and Encinal), adjacent to the Central Home Supply, Caltrans Excess Land and Tannery Arts Center.
Alternative #2 – Highway 9 and Hwy 1 Intersection Operational Surface Improvements – Larger footprint with common goals as Alternative #1, but an expanded intersection footprint with a focus to further-address/enhance intersection operational surface safety improvements and surface mobility; expanded protected intersection and complete street surface improvements along Hwy 9 and River Street.
Alternative #3 – Bike/Ped Undercrossing (BPUC) or Overcrossing (BPOC) – As an deviation from Alternative #2, we will look at separating or decoupling bike/ped mobility along River Street/Hwy 9, from vehicular/transit operations. Alternative may include elements of Alternatives #1 and #2, but integrate a BPOC or BPUC within (or adjacent) to public R/W to optimize traffic operations and minimize impacts and footprint associated with the expanded intersection.
Alternative #4 – Mobility Hub Alternative – Mobility hubs are community anchors that enable travelers of all backgrounds and abilities to access multiple travel options — including shared scooters, bicycles and cars, and transit — as well as supportive amenities in a cohesive space.
Alternative 4 will explore City, Caltrans, or privately owned land in the northeast, southeast, and southwest quadrants of the intersection, or potential opportunities at the Santa Cruz Metro maintenance yard along Hwy 9, to consider a mobility hub solution to further promote VMT reductions for modes of traffic and/or reduced footprint at the intersection.
An interchange and an at-grade roundabout geometric alternative were each explored and vetted during prior PID and PA&ED phases, respectively, and are known to have significant operational limitations, and/or direct/indirect footprint issues, which would require significant R/W acquisition of businesses, residences, and civic properties (Homeless Center), as well as major environmental mitigation. Based on the criteria set and agreed upon with the City and Caltrans as part of this Transportation Alternative Analysis scope of services, a qualitative narrative discussing the prior history, decisions, studies, impacts, issues and agreements associated with these 2 alternatives will be included in the memorandum.
Geometric alternatives will generally follow Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) and City of Santa Cruz Public Works/Design Standards, but be developed to a schematic/conceptual level only, primarily using a 2-dimensional level using available project base mapping. The conceptual geometric alternatives will be included as exhibits in the draft and final Transportation Alternative Memorandum. Although modal safety and compliance with Caltrans Vision Zero will be considered in traffic assessment and conceptual geometric design development, highway safety manual (HSM) analysis is premature at this phase, and is excluded from this scope of services. PID, PA&ED and/or GAD-level geometric level of design, including profile, super elevation, typical cross sections, and DSDD assessment, is also premature at this phase, and is excluded from our scope of services.
2. Draft Transportation Alternative Memorandum: Based on the information collected, and geometric alternatives developed, we will prepare a draft Transportation Alternative Memorandum, following the template/structure/format of a Caltrans Design Engineer Evaluation Report (DEER).
The Draft memo will offer qualitative and quantitative discussion and documentation utilizing information developed from the geometric/alternative analysis in Task 4.1, traffic assessment memorandum in Task 3, and newly acquired information (including planning/coordination data and field observations) garnered from Task 2, as well as discussions/minutes from the meetings conducted with Caltrans, SCCRTC, and Santa Cruz Metro.
14.12 April 16, 2023
Following a DEER template, the memorandum and narrative sections will include:
a. Intro/Project Description
b. Background/History - Discuss the history of the project to-date. Discuss how it got to where it is in the project development process.
c. Purpose/Need - Discussion on the purpose-and-need of the project proposal, supplemented by the geometric alternative exhibits.
d. Deficiencies/Impacts – Summary of project constraints, deficiencies and impacts, as well as considerations such as anticipated major non-standard design or policy features, right of way, utility and other engineering/site conditions and impacts. e. Traffic, Maintenance and Operations Impact Summary – Based significantly on information, assessment and findings extracted from the Traffic Assessment Memo, this section will summarize operational, traffic, safety and modal elements of the project and its alternatives, including an overview of the performance measure analysis conducted under Task 3.3. f. Alternative Analysis Narrative – Compilation and summary of geometric and conceptual alternatives considered in this analysis:
i. New Alternatives under consideration in this memo
1. Alt 1 through Alt 4
ii. Prior Alternatives not under consideration in this memo (including qualitative history)
1. Roundabout
2. Interchange
Since this memorandum is intended to be used for qualitative discussions and consensus building between the City and Caltrans in order to move forward with a path to address excess land, preliminary or PID-level “planning cost estimates” for build alternatives are not believed to be needed at this phase, and are excluded from this scope of services.
BKF will review and conduct in-house QA/QC procedures prior to circulating the Draft Transportation Alternative Memorandum to the City, Caltrans and SCCRTC for review.
The draft report will be provided electronically in PDF and MS Word format for review/comment.
3. Final Transportation Alternative Memorandum: Following review and receipt of comments and a JRT Meeting, we will respond to comments and prepare a final Transportation Alternative Memorandum.
It is assumed comments to the conceptual geometric alternatives are minimal, and minor adjustments/refinements will be implemented into the exhibits (if required).
BKF will review and conduct in-house QA/QC procedures prior to circulating the final report to the City, Caltrans and SCCRTC.
The final report will be provided electronically in PDF and MS Word format.
Final source files (including AutoCAD, PDF, MS Word, and Excel), can be provided to the City at the end of the contract.
SCOPE QUALIFICATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS
BKF Engineers’ services are limited to those expressly set forth in the scope. We understand that BKF will have no other obligations or responsibilities for the project except as provided in this proposal letter, or as otherwise
14.13 April 16, 2023
agreed to in writing. BKF will provide the scope of services consistent with, and limited to, the standard of care applicable to such services. Any participation in non-adversarial procedures, or other right to repair items, is considered as additional services. For the scope of work identified, we have assumed the following:
1) Basis of Design and Site Information
a) Mapping, base sheets, Right of Way, and Existing Utilities: Based on available data/information in possession from Hwy 1/9 Intersection PS&E Project (BKF) and San Lorenzo River PSR/PDS Project (provided by others). Right of Way mapping and engineering, as well as utility investigations, research, potholing is excluded from this scope of services.
2) Responsibilities
a) Civil Engineering and Traffic Scope Items: BKF’s (and Hexagon) responsibilities are limited to this proposal and the development of preliminary traffic and conceptual design evaluations and reporting in conjunction with a Traffic Assessment Memorandum and Transportation Alternative Memorandum; Caltrans Project Initiation Document (PID), Project Approval & Environmental Document (PA&ED), and design or Plans, Specification and Estimate (PS&E), as well as supporting technical studies and reports, are all excluded from this scope of services.
3) Meetings
a) Meetings: Meetings are assumed to be held via remote conference (telephone, zoom, MS Teams, etc.).
Meetings/time requested beyond what we have budgeted is not included in this proposal. 4) Deliverables
a) Submittals: All submittals, and the coordination thereof, will be facilitated by the City. b) Drawings: All drawings will be prepared in AutoCAD format. We will submit copies of all drawings in both electronic and paper format.
SCHEDULE
We understand that the design phase will commence in 2023, and is anticipated to be completed 3-4 months, beginning in mid-May 2023.
April
4/3 4/10 4/17 4/24 5/1 5/8 5/15 5/22 5/29 6/5 6/12 6/19 6/26 7/3 7/10 7/17 7/24 7/31 8/7 8/14 8/21 Project Management, Meetings and Coordination - Task 1
Investigations, Research and Compile Information - Task 2 Traffic Assessment/Reporting - Task 3
Transportation Alternative Assessment/Reporting - Task 4 2023
May June July August
14.14 April 16, 2023
COMPENSATION
1. BASE SCOPE OF WORK
BKF proposes to provide the services on a not to exceed, lump sum basis. We will invoice for our services on T&M, task basis as summarized as follows:
Task Description BKF Hexagon*
1 Project Management, Meetings and Coordination $ 14,080 $ 6,840 2 Investigations, Research and Compile Information $ 4,824 $ 2,580 3 Traffic Assessment/Reporting $ 3,871 $ 56,085
4 Transportation Alternative Assessment/Reporting $ 44,668 $ 0 RE Reimbursable + Other Direct Costs (Traffic Counts) $ 500 $ 2,120 Subtotal $67,943 $67,625
Total $ 135,568
* BKF has waived its cost plus 10-percent markup basis on its subconsultant, Hexagon.
2. OPTIONAL SERVICES (Upon Request):
At your request (and upon written authorization), BKF can provide optional scope, fee and services:
· Funding Pursuits, Support and Management - BKF provides a full suite of grant development, writing, and administration services, including state and federal fund pursuits (such as SB1, RAISE, INTRA), with over $200m successfully secured project funding in the past 5 years. This brings much needed resources and support to the public agencies, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector. BKF continues to help communities strengthen existing programs, or implement new ideas with our funding resources. Our structured approach to grant writing cultivates our clients’ innovative ideas and matches them to the appropriate federal, state, or private funding opportunities. Working across a broad range of service areas, we help our clients identify funding strategies that target specific needs and develop competitive grant applications to meet them. · Feasibility Study – Additional level alternative design development, cost estimating and project planning
· Project Initiation Document (PID) – Planning/Programming Level Design and Processing through PSR/PDS or PSR, including Traffic through the TEPA process · Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) – Caltrans and public environmental clearance and design approval process, through PSR/PR or PR, including Traffic through the Traffic Forecasting and Operational Analysis (TOAR) Report processes · Plans, Specification and Estimate (PS&E) – Final design and construction document through Caltrans approval/permit process
For tasks requested by the City not defined in this scope of services, BKF will identify them as potential extra work.
We can provide a scope and fee for these items or they may be tracked separately as extra work and billed on a time and materials per our attached rate schedule.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this proposal. We look forward to discussing our scope/fee further and assisting the City in developing this project, as part of BKF and Hexagon’s legacy at the intersection of Hwy 1/9.
Respectfully,
BKF Engineers
Gordon Sweet, PE
Principal/Vice President
cc:
· Mr. Christophe Schneiter, City of Santa Cruz
· Ms. Kathryn Mintz, Development Manager, City of Santa Cruz
14.15 4670 Willow Road, Suite 250, Pleasanton, CA 94588 | 925.396.7700 BKF No. 20157008-10
January 30, 2023
Mr. Joshua Spangrud
City Engineer
City of Santa Cruz
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Transmitted Via Email to [email protected]
Subject: Additional Service Request (ASR) #3
Highway 1-9 Intersection Project
Dear Mr. Spangrud:
Per our discussions with you and Mr. Chris Schneiter, we have prepared the following additional service request (ASR) for the City of Santa Cruz (City) that addresses BKF Engineers’ (BKF’s) work outside of the original limits of our current contractual scope of work over the course of final design/RTL, advertisement/addenda, and construction support, including several major design changes, addenda, and/or construction change orders (CCOs) since 2020. To summarize our out of scope work, we have identified each item with the approximate level of effort necessary to address the changes/additional work; this has been broken down into seven (7) additional service request categories for BKF and our subconsultant team, that include:
(A) Landscape Architecture and Biological - Plant Palette Revisions for Permit/Impact Mitigation (B) Biological/Permitting/Monitoring - Updated BA/BO and Steelhead Relocation Plan (C) Structural - Existing Masonry Block Wall Assessment (D) Structural/Geotechnical - Extension of Retaining Wall #2 (E) Right of Way – Supplemental Support/Services during Condemnation Process (F) Civil – Costs to Complete (RTL)/Addenda/Bid Support and Construction Support (G) Right of Way Engineering - Right of Way Closeout
Scope of Services – ASR #3
TASK A: Landscape Architecture and Bio - Plant Palette Revisions for Permit/Impact Mitigation: August 2021 – During construction, the city urban forester had concerns regarding the planting palette of the approved plans, and requested changes to the planting design. The City authorized (1) investigations and coordination with the resource agencies regarding the feasibility/implications of adjusting the project’s approved/permitting mitigation planting plan, and (2) complete all work necessary design to make the construction change order design adjustments requested if the plant palette revisions were deemed acceptable by the Regulatory Agencies. This investigation included coordination with regulatory agencies, development of a memo to the
14.16 City of Santa Cruz
Highway 1/9 Intersection Project – ASR #3
January 30, 2023
Project Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, and a construction change order (CCO) design package to implement the plant palette revisions. See attached ASR request from HT Harvey & Associates (HTH), dated August 13, 2021, along with BKF’s support/coordination efforts expended - $11,616 TASK B: Biological/Permitting/Monitoring - Updated BA/BO and Steelhead Relocation Plan:
October 2021 – Based on the observations and existence of steelhead during construction activities located in the Arroyo, HTH was authorized by the City to prepare an updated Biological Assessment (BA) to be reviewed/approved by the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS), in order to issue an updated Biological Opinion (BO) on potential take, of the Project. Additionally, HTH coordinated with the NMFS/City/Contractor, including taking water quality measurements in support of the updated BA/BO and to prepare and implement a Steelhead Relocation Plan. See attached ASR request from HTH, dated October 5, 2021, along with BKF’s support/coordination efforts expended - $21,903
TASK C: Structural - Existing Masonry Block Wall Assessment: July 2021 – As a value engineering and potential construction cost-savings of nearly $80,000, the City authorized the assessment of the existing masonry block wall between the two Santee properties (residence and Central Home Supply), to ascertain if the existing masonry block wall could remain (in lieu of constructing retaining wall #3). Requested services included preparation of a letter/assessment report summarizing the findings and disposition (and recommendations) of the leaving the existing masonry block wall in place, including review of available project data, site visit/measurements/inspections, and structural assessment. See attached ASR request from Biggs Cardosa Associates (BCA), dated July 9, 2021, along with BKF’s support/coordination efforts expended - $5,280
TASK D: Structural/Geotechnical - Extension of Retaining Wall #2: August 2021 – The City authorized the preparation of a CCO to redesign/extend Retaining Wall No. 2 southward as part of a construction phase environmental mitigation minimization/avoidance solution. Due to the unexpected appearance of steelhead during the dewatering process for the extension of the 72-inch RCP culvert, a field decision was made between Caltrans, City, BKF Team, and the Resource Agency to span the retaining wall alignment across the existing 72-inch RCP, in order to help minimize/avoid impacts to fish. The CCO required updated geotechnical and structural design calculations/recommendations, and project specific modifications of the Caltrans Standard Type 1 (Case 1) Retaining Wall. The CCO included the civil, geotechnical and structural plans, specifications, details, and estimate in support of the contractor’s efforts to construct. See attached ASR request from Biggs Cardosa Associates (BCA), dated October 4, 2021, along with BKF’s support/coordination efforts expended under Task F2 - $27,115 (BCA) and $5,500 (PCI).
TASK E: Right of Way – Supplemental Support/Services during Condemnation Process: July 2020 through December 2022 – During the course of the condemnation process with Central Home Supply (CHS), Universal Field Services (UFS) was called upon and asked to provide additional or supplemental R/W support services beyond their original scope, duration, and projections provided in Addendum No 8. BKF and its subconsultants endeavored to absorb the minor work within
14.17 City of Santa Cruz
Highway 1/9 Intersection Project – ASR #3
January 30, 2023
addendum budget, however, were unable to complete its full scope of work within the current contracted dollars, and request an additional minor R/W task budget augmentation to complete the efforts requested by the City to support the R/W process - $2,640 · Prepared relocation claims for Central Home Supply relocation · Discussions with owners regarding relocation claims and obtaining signature of claims · Completing relocation file, and review of any outstanding acquisition/relocation issues TASK F: Design/RTL/Addenda/Bid Support and Design Services During Construction (DSDC)/Construction Support - July 2020 through December 2022 – Due in part to the R/W acquisition process (which necessitated condemnation) and the Caltrans District 5 approval/encroachment permit process required prior to advertisement, award, and construction, some schedule delays and additional efforts/work was expended during extended Ready to List (RTL), Bid Support (Advertise and Award), and Construction Support phases of the project.
As part of the last Amendment (No 8), the amended schedule assumed RTL by summer 2020, advertisement/award by late summer/early fall 2020, and construction over 12 months between roughly fall 2020 and fall 2021, during 2 dry seasons.
However, the final PS&E/RTL process was not completed until December 2020, and advertisement (including addenda) spanned into spring 2021, with construction beginning in earnest in June 2021; although construction is virtually complete with closeout anticipated shortly or spring 2023, it is expected the duration will be approaching 18-20 months.
While BKF endeavored to absorb additional work within the budgets amended in May 2020, BKF was unable to complete the remaining scope of work within the current contracted dollars during the combined finals PS&E/RTL, bid support, and construction support phases, due in part to the R/W acquisition process, late changes to comply with the Caltrans D5 approval/encroachment permit process, and overall project duration which has extended 6-8 months.
The following subtasks were conducted during final design (RTL) and bid support/advertisement (addenda), and following award, including an extended construction period requiring additional effort to support:
1. Costs to Complete (RTL)/Bid Support – Task F1 – BKF has provided some additional design services during the RTL/Advertise/Award period with Caltrans, which exceeded the scope, duration and budget originally proposed in 2020:
a. Draft Final PS&E – March 2020 (scoped)
b. Final PS&E – June 2020 (scoped)
c. RTL PS&E Package #1 – August 2020 (scoped)
d. Additional RTL PS&E Package #2 – December 2020
e. Bid (advertise) Package – February 2021 (scoped)
14.18 City of Santa Cruz
Highway 1/9 Intersection Project – ASR #3
January 30, 2023
f. Addendum Package #1 – March 2021 (scoped)
g. Additional Addendum Package #2 – March 2021
h. Conform Package – April 2021 (scoped)
The two additional packages required response to comments, design coordination/meetings with Caltrans D5 and City, and revisions, including plans, specs and estimate. - $25,364
2. Design Services During Construction – Task F2 – The following key/critical tasks summarized have been conducted during the construction support process (June 2021 into 2023), but have exceeded the original/anticipated scope, schedule and budget projected for design services during construction.
a. DSDC/Project Management – Task F2.a – Additional construction meetings, correspondence, coordination with City, RE, Caltrans and subconsultants, site visits and project management to address the items in this ASR, including the extended construction period of approximately 6-8 months. - $9,332 b. R/W and Construction Staking – Task F2.b – As authorized by the City, BKF was requested to provide survey and R/W reference information (stakes for property lines, acquisition limits and TCEs), as well as review/verify construction grades, primarily related to the following 2 requests/efforts:
i. Santee – Property Line and TCE Stakes - Layout acquisition or new roadway property line, and limits of the temporary construction easement as requested by the property owner. – February 2021 - $3,105
ii. Drainage – R/W Stakes – Provided layout “show-me” stakes for drainage improvements/retaining wall #2, including finish grade and storm drain work along River Street and the creek – May 2021 - $6,197
c. PG&E Coordination – Tasks F2.c – In February 2020, as part of coordination with PG&E to finalize the utility relocation, BKF was notified that the original PG&E coordinator/contact was no longer working on the Project. Additional meetings and coordination with the new PG&E coordinator/contact was necessary from 3/2020 to 11/2020 to get the PG&E relocation plans developed. In 11/2020, BKF was notified yet again that the original PG&E coordinator/contact was back on the Project; additional coordination was once against required to get that PG&E coordinator/contact back up to speed so that the PG&E design plans could be finalized for RTL, and support the R/W Certification. The contract plans were eventually revised to incorporate the revised design by PG&E, however, an additional effort in design, coordination, and management was expended to support the PG&E utility relocation/design. - $4,744 d. RWQCB Post Construction Stormwater Quality Treatment – Task F2.d – In October 2020, BKF was notified that one of the conditions of the RWQCB 401 permit was to provide for post construction stormwater quality treatment (permanent stormwater BMP’s),
14.19 City of Santa Cruz
Highway 1/9 Intersection Project – ASR #3
January 30, 2023
though the Caltrans NPDES General Construction Permit (GCP) does not have this requirement. To comply with the 401 permit conditions, new storm water treatment analysis of the project site, calculations of post treatment requirements, determination of viable stormwater BMP locations, and development of plans and details for the stormwater treatment and incorporation of the additional plans into the existing contract package was required. Additionally, a technical memorandum was required and prepared by BKF for Caltrans and RWQCB to substantiate the post construction stormwater quality treatment design. - $11,492
e. Encroachment Permit Rider for Additional Temporary Chain Link Fencing – Task F2.e – As part of the process of clearing the encampments within the Project limits prior to construction, the need to install additional temporary chain link fence (CLF) around the cleared areas was required. An encroachment permit rider was also required and prepared, along with a plan showing the locations of the new temporary CLF. Upon approval of the rider, the temporary CLF plan was incorporated into the contract documents as part of an bid addendum during the advertise and award process. - $1,654 f. CCO to Remove Retaining Wall #3 – Tasks F2.f – Upon BCA’s assessment of the existing masonry block wall discussed under Task B, the City decided that the proposed retaining wall #3 can be eliminated. The civil plans were revised via a CCO to reflect this revision and eliminate the design-improvements, and realize the $80,000 capital savings of the value engineering exercise. - $3,900
g. CCO to Revise/Extend Retaining Wall #2 – Tasks F2.g – Due to the unexpected appearance of steelhead during the dewatering process for the extension of the 72” RCP culvert, BKF was directed to resurrect a concept design of constructing a retaining wall on the east side from the intersection of Hwy 1/9, to the Central Home Supply property line.
The redesign would revise the currently designed retaining wall No. 2 and extend the beginning of the wall to the Hwy 1/9 intersection, bridging the existing 72” RCP. The retaining wall extension work focused on the roadway plans included coordination with the structural engineer and Caltrans environmental on the revalidation of the retaining wall extension. - $13,844
h. CCO for Revision of Drainage System #2 to Remove Junction Structure – Task F2.h – Due to a conflict with an unforeseen existing PG&E gas line and other utilities within the junction structure footprint, the City’s RE requested that the storm drain design be revised to remove the junction structure entirely. The civil drainage plans were redesigned and revised to connect to the existing system through a CCO; Caltrans reviewed and concurred with the redesign and CCO package before it was constructed. - $12,220 i. CCO for Revision of Sewer Line at Rebele Family Center – Task F2.i – During the removal of the existing sound wall at the Rebele Family Center, an existing sewer manhole and main was encountered. The civil plans were revised to relocate the sewer line away
14.20 City of Santa Cruz
Highway 1/9 Intersection Project – ASR #3
January 30, 2023
from the proposed sound wall realignment location. A revised CCO addressed the plan revisions before it was constructed - $9,762
j. Revision to Adjust SB Route 9 Overhead (OH) Sign – Task F2.j – The original design for the existing SB Overhead (OH) sign was to remain in place, and adjust the roadway improvements to maintain the vertical clearance. The City RE contacted BKF and proposed that adjusting the OH sign would be a better alternative in order to avoid additional roadway work, which would include a new inlet, at a location with underground utilities.
The analysis of revising the current design and minimum height adjustment was performed, and the revision of the plans via CCO was completed. - $5,664 k. Revision to Staging Plans/Traffic Handling – Task F2.k – In October 2021, the City RE contacted BKF to discuss the proposal to switch the current design of Stage 2 and Stage 3 to support the construction activities and site requirements. Based on the discussion, BKF revised the staging plans to switch Stage 3 to Stage 2, and vice versa, as part of a CCO.
In April 2022, the City RE once again contacted BKF to discuss consolidating Stage 4 and Stage 5. Due to the schedule delay from steelhead found in the creek along with PG&E relocation, the City RE was looking to accelerate the project and consolidate stages to makeup some construction time. Additional revisions to the staging plans via CCO were requested by the RE, and prepared by BKF. - $9,248
l. Revision to Drainage Design – Task F2.l – During construction of the drainage at the NW corner of Highway 1 and Highway 9, the City RE contacted BKF in June 2022 to discuss the proposal to revise the drainage due to the additional utility impacts encountered during excavation. A proposal to utilize the existing storm drain lines as well as reducing the number of inlets was developed and submitted to Caltrans for review. However, Caltrans preferred the system replaced, so the storm drainage was redesigned via CCO, with new storm drain lines and manholes further away from the utility conflicts.
Additionally Caltrans requested revised calculations showing the drainage spread-width results of the relocation, and/or removal of the revised inlets. The revised design and calculations were developed and resubmitted and approved by Caltrans, before the CCO was constructed. - $7,304
TASK G: Right of Way Closeout - As authorized by the City, BKF will provide the following anticipated R/W closeout as required by the State, and completion of the original R/W engineering work in support of the project’s land acquisitions, recordation, and transfer to Caltrans, as summarized in the services below.
1. R/W Monumentation & Record of Survey (Post Construction) – Task G1 · In support of concurrent construction activities by the Contractor and City/County R/W requirements, BKF will set iron pipe(s) or applicable monuments at all new property corners along each take and prepare a Record of Survey map that will be filed with the
14.21 City of Santa Cruz
Highway 1/9 Intersection Project – ASR #3
January 30, 2023