Scotts Valley City Council
August 16, 2023

AGENDA
Meeting of the
Scotts Valley City Council
In-Person and Remote Access
Date: August 16, 2023
Time: 6:00 PM

CONTACT

INFORMATION

MEETING LOCATION POSTING
City of Scotts Valley
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
(831) 440-5600
City Council Chambers
1 Civic Center Drive
Scotts Valley, CA 95066
OR
Zoom Video Conference
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83295730901
The agenda was posted on
08-11-2023 at City Hall, SV
Senior Center, SV Public
Works Building, and on the
Internet at
www.scottsvalley.gov.

ELECTED OFFICIALS CITY STAFF MEMBERS
Jack Dilles, Mayor
Randy Johnson, Vice Mayor
Donna Lind, Council Member
Derek Timm, Council Member
Allan Timms, Council Member
Mali LaGoe, City Manager
Kirsten Powell, City Attorney
Stephanie Hill, Administrative Services Director
Steve Jesberg, Interim Public Works Director
Steve Walpole, Police Chief
Scott Garner, Police Captain
Phillip Linarte, Senior Civil Engineer
Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA PACKET MATERIALS
Notice regarding City Council Meetings:

The City Council meets regularly on the 1st and 3rd Wednesday of each month at 6:00 PM in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 1 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, CA 95066, and via Zoom Webinar remote access.

Agenda and Agenda Packet Materials:

The City Council agenda and the complete agenda packet are available for review by 5:00 PM the Friday before the Wednesday meeting on the Internet at the City’s website:
www.scottsvalley.gov and in the lobby of City Hall at 1 Civic Center Drive, Scotts Valley, CA.

Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5, materials related to an agenda item, submitted after distribution of the agenda packet, are available for public inspection in the lobby of City Hall during normal business hours, Monday-Friday, 8am-12 pm and 1-5 pm. In accordance with AB 1344, such documents will be posted on the City’s website at www.scottsvalley.gov.

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 2
Date: August 16, 2023
Public Participation:

The meeting will be available on Zoom and livestreamed to the City of Scotts Valley’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLNTBScelB4wTfidYHrocWA For those wishing to participate via Zoom you can join the following ways:

Zoom Webinar meeting link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83295730901 Or dial one of these numbers: (669) 900-9128 or (669) 444-9171 Webinar ID: 832 9573 0901
Whether attendance is in-person or remote, you will be given opportunities to provide public comment at the appropriate times throughout the meeting. The time limit is up to 3 minutes for an individual, or 5 minutes for someone who is representing a group of three or more, at the discretion of the Mayor. Please note that this is not a question-and-answer time, but simply a time to provide comments to the Council. At the appropriate times during the meeting for public comment, on items not on the agenda, and on specific agenda items, the Mayor will announce that public comment will be accepted.

How to comment via in-person attendance:

Please proceed to the public comment podium when the Mayor opens the item for public comment.

How to comment via Zoom Webinar:

Use the webinar attendee option to “raise hand” when the Mayor opens the item for public comment. The Clerk will unmute you when it is your turn. If you have joined via Zoom phone call, dial *9 or your phone to “raise your hand”, and the Clerk will unmute you when it is your turn.

CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE

ROLL CALL

COMMITTEE REPORTS
Council members are appointed to committees which are either City committees or committees dealing with other jurisdictions. This portion of the agenda allows the committee member to present oral or written reports to the Council regarding their committee assignments. It also allows the Council to make comments and give the committee member direction, as required.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

PUBLIC COMMENT TIME

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 3
Date: August 16, 2023
This is the opportunity for individuals to make and/or submit written or oral comments to the Council on any items within the purview of the Council, which are NOT part of the Agenda. No action on the item may be taken, but the Council may request the matter be placed on a future agenda.

ALTERATIONS TO CONSENT AGENDA
Council can remove or add items to the Consent Agenda.

CONSENT AGENDA
The Consent Agenda is comprised of items which are intended to be non-controversial and are approved without discussion. Persons wishing to speak on any item may request the item be moved to the Regular Agenda by raising their hand to be recognized by the Mayor. An item will only be moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda if a City Council Member requests it to be moved and a majority of the Council agrees.

1. Approve City Council minutes of 08-02-2023

2. Approve check registers dated 07-28-2023 and 08-03-2023

3. Response to Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury Reports on Housing and Continuity

4. Amendment to the Senior Center Advisory Commission Bylaws

5. Side Letter to Memorandum of Understanding, Police Bargaining Units

6. Approve updated salary schedule for 3 positions

7. On-Call Paving and Asphalt Contract Award

ALTERATIONS TO REGULAR AGENDA
Council can remove or add items to the Regular Agenda.

REGULAR AGENDA
Persons wishing to speak on any item may do so by raising their hand to be recognized by the Mayor.

1. Letters of opposition to Senate Bill 423 and Assembly Bill 309

2. Invitation to join the Santa Cruz County Subcommittee on Banning Plastic Filtered Tobacco Products

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 4
Date: August 16, 2023

3. Approval of a budget appropriation and award of contract to Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. for City of Scotts Valley Shaftless Screw Conveyor, WWTP Project No. P23-008

4. Police Body & Fleet Camera Lease

5. Future Council Agenda Items

ADJOURNMENT

ADA NOTICE
The City of Scotts Valley does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. The City Council Chambers is an accessible facility. If you wish to attend a City Council meeting and require assistance such as sign language, a translator, or other special assistance or devices in order to attend and participate at the meeting, please call the City Clerk's office at (831) 440-5600 five to seven days in advance of the meeting to make arrangements for assistance. If you require the agenda of a City Council meeting be available in an alternative format consistent with a specific disability, please call the City Clerk’s Office. The California State Relay Service (TTY/VCO/HCO to Voice: English 1-800-735-2929, Spanish 1-800-855-3000; or, Voice to TTY/VCO/HCO:

English 1-800-735-2922, Spanish 1-800-855-3000), provides Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf and Disabled and will provide a link between the TDD caller and users of telephone equipment.

City Council Meeting Agenda Page 5
Date: August 16, 2023

PROCEDURAL INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC

THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROCEDURE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE IN
APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION:

1. Move the Resolution number for approval.

2. Second the motion.

3. Vote by body, a roll call vote is not required.

THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROCEDURE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE IN
INTRODUCTION/ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE:

1. Move the Ordinance number for introduction (or adoption).

2. Move the Ordinance be introduced by title only and waive the reading of the text.

3. Read the Ordinance title.

4. Second the motion.

5. Vote by body, a roll call vote is not required.

THE FOLLOWING IS THE PROCEDURE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE IN
PUBLIC COMMENT/PUBLIC HEARINGS:

Unless otherwise determined by the presiding officer of the meeting:

1. Three minutes allowed per individual to speak.

2. Five minutes allowed per individual representing a group of three or more. ❖❖❖❖❖❖❖❖
The City of Scotts Valley does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. The City Council Chambers is an accessible facility. If you wish to attend a City Council meeting and require assistance such as sign language, a translator, or other special assistance or devices in order to attend and participate at the meeting, please call the City Clerk's office at (831) 440-5602 five to seven days in advance of the meeting to make arrangements for assistance. If you require the agenda of a City Council meeting be available in an alternative format consistent with a specific disability, please call the City Clerk’s Office. The California State Relay Service (TTY/VCO/HCO to Voice: English 1-800-735-2929, Spanish 1-800-855-3000; Voice to TTY/VCO/HCO: English 1- 800-735-2922, Spanish 1-800-855-3000; or, from or to Speech-to-Speech, English & Spanish 1- 800-854-7787), provides Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf and Disabled and will provide a link between the TDD caller and users of telephone equipment.

CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE

ROLL CALL
CITY STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Mali LaGoe, City Manager
Kirsten Powell, City Attorney
Stephanie Hill, Administrative Services Director
Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

ELECTED OFFICIALS
PRESENT:

Jack Dilles, Mayor
Randy Johnson, Vice Mayor
Donna Lind, Council Member
Derek Timm, Council Member
Allan Timms, Council Member

COMMITTEE REPORTS

MINUTES
Meeting of the
Scotts Valley City Council
Date: August 2, 2023
Time: 6:00 PM

CONTACT

INFORMATION

MEETING LOCATION POSTING
City of Scotts Valley City Council Chambers The agenda was posted 1 Civic Center Drive 1 Civic Center Drive on 07-28-2023 at City Scotts Valley, CA Scotts Valley, CA 95066 Hall, SV Senior Center, 95066 OR SV Public Works
(831) 440-5600 Zoom Video Conference Building, and on the https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83295730901 Internet
at www.scottsvalley.gov.

The City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM.

CM Lind attended a Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO) finance meeting where they discussed updating the routes to increase efficiencies.

CM Lind attended a Criminal Justice Council Executive meeting where they looked at

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: August 2, 2023

CITY MANAGER REPORT
the ongoing behavior health study. An update will go to the full board on August 10th.

CM Lind attended a Paws and Policy meeting where she heard feedback from the public regarding the condition of the dog park.

CM Lind attended the Community Bridges’ fundraising event, Farm to Fork Gala.

CM Lind attended the planning committee meeting for the Art, Wine, and Beer Festival which will be held on August 19th and 20th. The business and non-profit spots are almost full, and the Cops n’ Rodders registration will close this week.

CM Timms attended a meeting of the Area Agency on Aging. The new incoming director of Meals on Wheels, Darren Daley, was in attendance. An agreement has been reached between the Seniors Council and the Live Oak School District regarding the facility, so the eviction will be pushed back two years.

CM Timms attended a meeting of the Youth Action Network. The Childrens Network and the Youth Action Network are merging. There was a discussion about creating a children/youth bill of rights. Santa Cruz County, Santa Cruz City, and Capitola have already adopted this bill of rights; and there was a request for Scotts Valley to consider adopting this at a future session. They also discussed appointing a youth liaison to attend the City Council meetings.

CM Timms attended a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) meeting where they voted to approve the merger of the Scotts Valley Fire Protection District and the Branciforte Fire Protection District. The Measure T funds ($165k/year) that are part of the Branciforte Fire District will be administered by an advisory council. CM Timms has been nominated as a voting member of the California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions (CALAFCO), and the elections will be held later this year in Monterey.

CM Timm attended his first Visit Santa Cruz Board meeting as a Board Member. The new CEO for Visit Santa Cruz is Terence Concannon. CM Timm thanked City Manager LaGoe for serving on the interview search committee. They have a new program that will allow Visit Santa Cruz to view the bookings and hotel rates in real time.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Public Hearing: A public hearing for the CDBG program was scheduled for this meeting and all of the required notifications were published/posted. However, last week we were notified that the state decided to change the eligibility criteria for this current round of funding. The state will only be considering applications that were previously submitted, which means that we are no longer eligible to apply for this round of funding. We will prepare for the January application period, and the public hearing will most likely be rescheduled for

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: August 2, 2023

PUBLIC COMMENT TIME

APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA WITH NO ALTERATIONS
December.

Staffing: This week we welcomed Sergeant Sjon Tol to the Police Department. Gabby Cortez is the new Associate Planner in the Community Development Department.

Congratulations to Allison Pfefferkorn who will start Monday, 8/7 as the new Recreation Division Manager. Allison has been the Recreation Coordinator for the past eight months and had extensive recreation program management prior to coming to the City of Scotts Valley. Thank you to Kim Peterson who has been the Interim Recreation Division Manager for the past few months and has done a great job leading the division and being a liaison to the community. Congratulations to Athena Cheung, who passed her engineer licensing exam.

Operation Safe Passage: The Police Department will be coordinating Operation Safe Passage starting on the first day of school, which is August 10th. They will be doing traffic enforcement for the first couple of days of the school year.

National Night Out: Thank you to everyone who participated in National Night Out at MacDorsa Park last night.

Gun Buyback: The Police Department will be participating in a countywide gun buyback program on September 16th.

Classification and Compensation Study: The Classification and Compensation study will kick off this week and all City positions will be reviewed.

Happy Birthday, City of Scotts Valley: Today is the City's 57th birthday.

Bean Creek Construction: Thank you for everyone's patience driving through that area and adhering to the new 4-way stop.

Pool is Opening this Weekend: The Siltanen Pool is opening this weekend for recreational swimming and will be open on the weekends in August, and possibly into September.

The Mayor and Council Members recognized the City's birthday, and the founding members of the City.

M/S: Timm/Timms
To approve the Consent Agenda.

Carried 5/0 (AYES: Dilles, Johnson, Lind, Timm, Timms)

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: August 2, 2023

CONVENE TO CLOSED SESSION

REGULAR AGENDA

CLOSED SESSION SUBJECT(S)

1. Approve City Council regular meeting minutes of 06-21-2023, special meeting minutes of 06-28-2023, and joint special meeting minutes of 06-28-2023

2. Approve check registers dated 06-22-2023, 06-29-2023, 07-05-2023, 07-12- 2023, 07-13-2023, 07-18-2023

3. Approve Resolution No. 1596.47 authorizing the levy of annual special tax roll for Scotts Valley Drive for Community Facilities District 97-1 for Fiscal Year 2023-24

4. Approve Designation of Voting Delegate for 2023 League of California Cities Annual Conference

5. Approve Resolution No. 514.19 amending the Conflict of Interest Code for designated positions

6. City Council response to the Santa Cruz County Citizen Grand Jury Report regarding Cybersecurity

7. Award Professional Services Agreement: Environmental Innovations

8. Award Quote for Equipment Purchase: Insight

9. Approve Resolution No. 1007.36 revising prior years Gann Initiative appropriations and setting appropriation limits for FY 2023-24.

10. Adoption of Investment Policy for 115 Trust

11. Approve lease agreement between the City of Scotts Valley and the County of Santa Cruz for the Scotts Valley Library

1. Future Council Agenda Items
None.

The City Council convened to closed session at 6:20 PM to discuss the following item:

CONSENT AGENDA

City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: August 2, 2023

RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

REPORT ON ACTION TAKE DURING CLOSED SESSION

ADJOURNMENT

1. Conference with labor negotiator regarding employee negotiations with SEIU Local 521, Scotts Valley Police Bargaining Unit, Scotts Valley Police Supervisors Association, Scotts Valley Mid-Management Association, and Management and Confidential Group
Legal Authority: Government Code 54957.6
Staff Present: City Manager, City Attorney, Administrative Services Director The City Council reconvened to open session at 7:21 PM.

City Attorney Powell announced that there was nothing to report from the Closed Session.

The meeting adjourned at 7:21PM.

Attest:

Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk
Approved:

Jack Dilles, Mayor

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 14:43:28 Check Register GL050S-V08.19 COVERPAGE GL540R
Report Selection:

RUN GROUP... 72723 COMMENT... 06/30/2023 A/P #4

DATA-JE-ID DATA COMMENT
-------------- ------------------------
W-07272023-027 06/30/2023 A/P #4
Run Instructions:

Jobq Banner Copies Form Printer Hold Space LPI Lines CPI CP SP RT L 01 Y S 6 066 10

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 14:43:28 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 1
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT

BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT
000182 A SIGN ASAP 127404 07/27/23 327.06
001670 AT &T 127405 07/27/23 284.97
001659 CALIFORNIA BUILDING 127406 07/27/23 189.00
001553 CARD SHARK INC/THE 127407 07/27/23 252.43
005070 COMCAST 127408 07/27/23 1,050.55
000037 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER CO 127409 07/27/23 73.10
003043 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC 127410 07/27/23 29,885.50
005047 CUMMING MANGEMENT GROUP, 127411 07/27/23 21,443.75 000274 DEPT OF CONSERVATION 127412 07/27/23 593.08
000274 DEPT OF CONSERVATION 127413 07/27/23 2,353.87
005076 DREW DENTAL CORP 127414 07/27/23 51.20
.15969 EAGLE AM 127415 07/27/23 25.00
001881 GRAINGER 127416 07/27/23 176.15
000835 INTERSTATE SALES 127417 07/27/23 9,507.73
004041 INTERWEST CONSULTING GRO 127418 07/27/23 2,316.25 004024 K & D LANDSCAPING, INC. 127419 07/27/23 1,007.00 003292 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES 127420 07/27/23 3,573.53 003331 KOFFLER ELECTRICAL MECHA 127421 07/27/23 14,674.90 006014 MAXINE HELENE MCCARTHY 127422 07/27/23 675.00
000218 MID VALLEY SUPPLY 127423 07/27/23 107.15
000939 NATIONAL COMTEL NETWORK 127424 07/27/23 7.14
000323 NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE G 127425 07/27/23 4,662.50 000101 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC C 127426 07/27/23 32.95
000101 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC C 127427 07/27/23 170.91
001857 PHOENIX GROUP 127428 07/27/23 420.36
005069 QUINN COMPANY 127429 07/27/23 3,145.65
003572 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERV 127430 07/27/23 363.21
004064 S.C. UNDERGROUND & PAVIN 127431 07/27/23 3,991.27 000134 S.V. WATER DISTRICT 127432 07/27/23 11,650.00
.15970 SALINAS VALLEY PRO SQUAD 127433 07/27/23 243.59
001544 SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CONFER 127434 07/27/23 24,603.48 005021 SCOTTS VALLEY ED. FOUNDA 127435 07/27/23 5,000.00 003745 SCOTTS VALLEY HOTEL LP 127436 07/27/23 17,110.58 005038 SECURITY SHORING & 127437 07/27/23 234.00
003757 SWEDBERG ELECTRIC INC. 127438 07/27/23 4,097.50
005086 TUBULAR FLOW, INC. 127439 07/27/23 3,680.00
GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT 167,980.36 ***

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 14:43:28 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 2
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT
REPORT TOTALS: 167,980.36
RECORDS PRINTED - 000048

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 14:43:28 Check Register
GL060S-V08.19 RECAPPAGE

GL540R
FUND RECAP:

FUND DESCRIPTION DISBURSEMENTS
---- ----------------------------
001 GENERAL 123,212.94
004 RECREATION 368.95
005 SMIP 2,946.95
010 WASTEWATER OPERATIONS 254.22
011 TERTIARY TREATMENT PLANT 18,772.40
027 POLICE FACILITY BUILDING 481.25
028 SENIOR CENTER 708.00
035 GREEN BUILDING FUNDING 189.00
112 DENTAL INS INTERNAL SERV 51.20
123 COMMUNITY FACILITY CENTER 32.95
150 GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 3,181.25
155 TRANSPORTATION FUNDS-MEAS D 17,781.25
TOTAL ALL FUNDS 167,980.36
BANK RECAP:

BANK NAME DISBURSEMENTS
---- ----------------------------
BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT 167,980.36
TOTAL ALL BANKS 167,980.36

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 12:14:45 Check Register GL050S-V08.19 COVERPAGE GL540R
Report Selection:

RUN GROUP... 072723 COMMENT... 07/27/23 A/P

DATA-JE-ID DATA COMMENT
-------------- ------------------------
W-07272023-025 07/27/23 A/P
Run Instructions:

Jobq Banner Copies Form Printer Hold Space LPI Lines CPI CP SP RT L 01 Y S 6 066 10

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 12:14:45 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 1
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT

BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT
001055 ADAMSON POLICE PRODUCTS 127352 07/27/23 703.68
001405 AFLAC-FLEX ONE 127353 07/27/23 632.83
003758 ASCANI, PSY.D./CORIE L. 127354 07/27/23 225.00
000998 ASSOCIATED SERVICES CO. 127355 07/27/23 135.90
001670 AT &T 127356 07/27/23 166.03
000097 AT&T 127357 07/27/23 149.95
000437 BRASS KEY LOCKSMITH 127358 07/27/23 6.56
001566 BUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 127359 07/27/23 120.72
002091 COMCAST 127360 07/27/23 359.52
002091 COMCAST 127361 07/27/23 303.66
.15967 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 127362 07/27/23 701.13
001362 DUNCAN AUTO TECH 127363 07/27/23 487.83
000054 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCT 127364 07/27/23 1,307.93 000202 FEDERAL EXPRESS 127365 07/27/23 325.26
003253 FIRST ALARM 127366 07/27/23 289.02
001881 GRAINGER 127367 07/27/23 184.70
003976 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY 127368 07/27/23 2,431.59
004024 K & D LANDSCAPING, INC. 127369 07/27/23 543.00
000409 LC ACTION POLICE SUPPLY 127370 07/27/23 292.87
001673 LINCOLN FINANCIAL GROUP 127371 07/27/23 1,546.23 000078 LLOYD'S TIRE SERVICE INC 127372 07/27/23 234.16
003389 LOCKE/CERINA 127373 07/27/23 34.95
003913 LONG/AMANDA 127374 07/27/23 111.50
003403 MAR-KEN INTERNATIONAL PO 127375 07/27/23 260.00
001926 MICROTECH SCIENTIFIC 127376 07/27/23 245.57
000218 MID VALLEY SUPPLY 127377 07/27/23 728.54
004022 OPENGOV, INC. 127378 07/27/23 109,025.00
003977 PECKHAM & MCKENNEY 127379 07/27/23 8,333.33
000723 PIED PIPER INC./THE 127380 07/27/23 2,450.00
000785 PITNEY BOWES BANK INC. 127381 07/27/23 5,000.00
003503 PURETEC INDUSTRIAL WATER 127382 07/27/23 159.31
000463 RALEY'S 127383 07/27/23 78.91
000111 S V CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 127384 07/27/23 25,000.00 001823 SANTA CRUZ CO ENVIRONMEN 127385 07/27/23 1,110.00 003957 SANTA CRUZ/CITY OF 127386 07/27/23 2,100.00
000133 SCOTTS VALLEY SPRINKLER 127387 07/27/23 215.58
000228 SOIL CONTROL LAB 127388 07/27/23 1,123.00
001844 STERLING WATER TECHNOLOG 127389 07/27/23 2,880.00 003757 SWEDBERG ELECTRIC INC. 127390 07/27/23 5,816.40
001085 SYCAL ENGINEERING INC 127391 07/27/23 7,978.95
006013 THE FREE SPIRIT KITCHEN 127392 07/27/23 2,000.00 000646 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALER 127393 07/27/23 6,598.61 003924 VIRTUAL PROJECT MANAGER 127394 07/27/23 1,000.00 000151 VISION SERVICE PLAN 127395 07/27/23 1,316.70
003145 WAGE WORKS 127396 07/27/23 313.03
000443 WALPOLE/STEVE 127397 07/27/23 250.20
000443 WALPOLE/STEVE 127398 07/27/23 275.20
.15968 WASTEWATER TECHNOLOGY TR 127399 07/27/23 550.00

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 12:14:45 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 2
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT

BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT
003576 WEBER,HAYES, & ASSOCIATE 127400 07/27/23 4,406.85 000154 WINCHESTER AUTO STORES 127401 07/27/23 146.14
003971 WIZIX TECHNOLOGY GROUP, 127402 07/27/23 22.00
001625 YOSHIDA DDS/NOREEN 127403 07/27/23 640.00
GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT 201,317.34 ***

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 12:14:45 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 3
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT
REPORT TOTALS: 201,317.34
RECORDS PRINTED - 000109

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
07/28/2023 12:14:45 Check Register
GL060S-V08.19 RECAPPAGE

GL540R
FUND RECAP:

FUND DESCRIPTION DISBURSEMENTS
---- ----------------------------
001 GENERAL 142,716.84
004 RECREATION 2,070.17
010 WASTEWATER OPERATIONS 14,072.68
011 TERTIARY TREATMENT PLANT 2,472.45
012 WASTEWATER CAPITAL RESERVE 12,138.90
023 SVRDA SUCCESSOR AGENCY 25,000.00
028 SENIOR CENTER 1,559.49
112 DENTAL INS INTERNAL SERV 1,276.90
123 COMMUNITY FACILITY CENTER 9.91
TOTAL ALL FUNDS 201,317.34
BANK RECAP:

BANK NAME DISBURSEMENTS
---- ----------------------------
BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT 201,317.34
TOTAL ALL BANKS 201,317.34

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
08/03/2023 13:36:23 Check Register GL050S-V08.19 COVERPAGE GL540R
Report Selection:

RUN GROUP... 080323 COMMENT... 08/03/2023 A/P

DATA-JE-ID DATA COMMENT
-------------- ------------------------
W-08032023-038 08/03/2023 A/P
Run Instructions:

Jobq Banner Copies Form Printer Hold Space LPI Lines CPI CP SP RT L 01 Y S 6 066 10

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
08/03/2023 13:36:24 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 1
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT

BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT
005060 A.BAGLEY CPA TAX & 127440 08/03/23 112.50
000041 ACC BUSINESS 127441 08/03/23 1,218.93
001818 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVIC 127442 08/03/23 273.00
000652 ANDERSON PACIFIC ENG INC 127443 08/03/23 6,349.82 001631 ART CLEANERS 127444 08/03/23 2,204.83
003978 ARTHUR DEAN SANDERS, JR. 127445 08/03/23 5,000.00 000097 AT&T 127446 08/03/23 1,030.18
001373 BAY TREE, LLC 127447 08/03/23 3,620.38
000018 BRINK'S AWARDS & SIGNS 127448 08/03/23 376.36
003894 BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENS 127449 08/03/23 531.00
001566 BUSINESS WITH PLEASURE 127450 08/03/23 44.78
000389 DASSEL'S PETROLEUM INC 127451 08/03/23 493.30
000389 DASSEL'S PETROLEUM INC 127452 08/03/23 548.35
000389 DASSEL'S PETROLEUM INC 127453 08/03/23 3,237.71
.15971 FRED WILSON 127454 08/03/23 979.24
003976 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY 127455 08/03/23 7,294.75
004024 K & D LANDSCAPING, INC. 127456 08/03/23 720.02
001372 KURATOMI DDS/REED K 127457 08/03/23 321.60
001591 MARKELL/ROD 127458 08/03/23 1,974.00
000083 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 127459 08/03/23 525.04
001418 MONTEREY REGIONAL 127460 08/03/23 6,003.60
001965 MURRAY/DON 127461 08/03/23 296.00
000323 NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE G 127462 08/03/23 3,053.03 006010 OGLE-YOUMANS/BRIAN 127463 08/03/23 18.64
006002 PATZKE/SEAVANA 127464 08/03/23 1,080.00
004045 PDNC, INCORPORATED 127465 08/03/23 35,944.13
.15972 PRESS BANNER 127466 08/03/23 250.00
001097 PRODESSE PROPERTY GROUP 127467 08/03/23 3,523.52 003559 ROBERTS/MEREDITH 127468 08/03/23 296.00
000134 S.V. WATER DISTRICT 127469 08/03/23 6,391.45
000985 SANTA CRUZ/COUNTY OF 127470 08/03/23 5,000.00
001085 SYCAL ENGINEERING INC 127471 08/03/23 23,206.82
005086 TUBULAR FLOW, INC. 127472 08/03/23 470.00
005093 WEX BANK 127473 08/03/23 6,864.40
GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT 129,253.38 ***

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
08/03/2023 13:36:24 Check Register
GL540R-V08.19 PAGE 2
BANK VENDOR CHECK# DATE AMOUNT
REPORT TOTALS: 129,253.38
RECORDS PRINTED - 000061

SCOTTS VALLEY ACCOUNTS PAYABLE

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY
08/03/2023 13:36:24 Check Register
GL060S-V08.19 RECAPPAGE

GL540R
FUND RECAP:

FUND DESCRIPTION DISBURSEMENTS
---- ----------------------------
001 GENERAL 72,544.33
004 RECREATION 108.34
010 WASTEWATER OPERATIONS 19,418.97
011 TERTIARY TREATMENT PLANT 2,300.00
012 WASTEWATER CAPITAL RESERVE 20,906.82
019 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 1,974.00
023 SVRDA SUCCESSOR AGENCY 7,143.90
028 SENIOR CENTER 125.35
077 SKYPARK MAINT ASSESS DIST 1,066.97
090 SV DRIVE A REDEMPTION 3,053.03
112 DENTAL INS INTERNAL SERV 321.60
123 COMMUNITY FACILITY CENTER 290.07
TOTAL ALL FUNDS 129,253.38
BANK RECAP:

BANK NAME DISBURSEMENTS
---- ----------------------------
BA GENERAL CHECKING ACCOUNT 129,253.38
TOTAL ALL BANKS 129,253.38

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Response to Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury Reports on Housing and Continuity

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
On June 2, 2023, the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury published its fourth report this year titled "Housing our Workers" regarding the affordable housing challenges across Santa Cruz County. In addition, the Grand Jury published a fifth report titled "Honoring Commitments to the Public." This report reviews the extent to which responses of Scotts Valley, Santa Cruz, Capitola, Watsonville and Santa Cruz County to the Grand Jury's Fiscal year 2019-2020 reports were addressed and provides additional related findings and recommendations.

The Scotts Valley City Council is required to respond to the Citizen Grand Jury reports within 90 days of the publication date per California Penal Code 933(c).

The tables below summarize the Findings and Recommendations provided by the Grand Jury and the short response by Scotts Valley. The full reports and responses are attached and provide a detailed explanation of the City's responses where appropriate and required.

Report 4 Summary of Findings and Recommendations for Scotts Valley F1. While all city and county planning departments have demonstrated a good understanding of the new State
housing laws and the need to facilitate more housing, the failure to do so in a timely manner has served to further decrease the availability of housing and further increase the need and cost of more housing.

Partially Disagree
F9. The City of Scotts Valley has facilitated the building of market rate housing in recent years, but has made
little effort to develop housing for low income workers Partially Disagree
F10. The City of Scotts Valley has made little progress towards developing the Town Square project which could
accommodate both business and housing.

Partially Disagree

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 8/16/2023
F11. The City of Scotts Valley claims to have significantly fewer resources to attract housing planners and builders than do the bigger municipalities of Santa Cruz,
Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz, but that does not mean the City should be exempt from the need to
construct housing for local low income workers.

Agree
F12. While all local municipalities have voiced support for prioritizing housing for local workers, only some of them have clear local preference guidelines that give some
priority to local workers. Without clear guidelines and incentives, new housing is more likely to be purchased
by those who do not live and work here.

Agree
F13. All municipalities are trying to identify and facilitate the building of housing projects, but most of that is done independently of the other municipalities or with outside partners. Since workforce housing and transportation
gridlock is a county-wide problem, all county
municipalities need to work more closely together and
with property owners to develop housing solutions.

Partially Disagree
R6. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should identify enough parcels of land, zoned appropriately, to meet the new RHNA housing allocations for all income
levels, especially low income housing. (F9)
Has been implemented
R7. By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should show significant progress towards planning and
facilitating the construction of mixed use businesses and housing on identified parcels of land in the City. (F10) Has been implemented
R8. By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate a plan to work with other county
municipalities as well as other for profit and non-profit agencies to develop low income housing for workers in
the City. (F9 – F11)
Has been implemented
R9. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should develop clear, measurable guidelines to ensure that local preference is given to local workers in the construction of low income housing. (F12)
Has been implemented
R10. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular
meetings of a workgroup or other entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
Has been implemented

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 8/16/2023
Report 5 Summary of Findings and Recommendations for Scotts Valley:

F1. The 2022-2023 Grand Jury reviewed responses to
five of the 2019-2020 reports and found that, in general, commitments were kept.

Agree
F2. The evident coordination of responses from agencies leaves the public without independent contributions
across agencies.

Disagree
F6. Although the Cities of Capitola, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville agreed that there appear to be unused or
underutilized parcels of land that could possibly be used for homeless services, it is not clear how this could be done.

Agree
F8. Staffing shortages made automating the process for
updating the website of the City of Santa Cruz and
redesigning the website of the City of Scotts Valley more difficult.

Agree
R1. All agencies should provide their own independent
responses to findings and recommendations instead of
referring to the response of another agency.

Will not be implemented
R2. We continue to recommend that all organizations
create and regularly update formal records of the actions they take to address Grand Jury recommendations, and
to share those records with the public, in accordance
with CA Penal Code Section 933(c).

Has been implemented.

R5. As recommended in the 2022 “Homelessness Action
Plan,” the Cities of Capitola, Scotts Valley, and
Watsonville should collaborate with leaders from the
County of Santa Cruz and the City of Santa Cruz to
identify 20 new locations for shelters across the county.

These cities should report on the status of this
recommendation no later than December 31, 2023.

Will not be implemented.

R6. The County of Santa Cruz and the four cities should plan to provide services for homeless persons at the
sites identified in their plans, including but not limited to supportive housing, case management, and medical
services. The County of Santa Cruz and the four cities
should report to the Grand Jury on the status of providing homeless services at the sites identified no later than December 31, 2023.

Will not be implemented.

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 8/16/2023
R9. The City of Scotts Valley should verify that their
commitment to redesign their website to afford
transparency, accessibility, and ease of use to all
stakeholders has been completed by October 31, 2023.

Has been implemented.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with submitting these Grand Jury report responses.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council direct staff to submit the attached responses on behalf of the City Council to the Santa Cruz County Grand Jury regarding their reports on housing and continuity by September 5, 2023.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. 2023-4_Housing_Report

2. Grand Jury Response 2023-08-16 Housing

3. 2023-1_Continuity_Report

4. 2023 CGJ Continuity ScottsValley Response

Housing Our Workers
Essential Workers Need Affordable Housing!
Summary
The cost of housing has risen dramatically, especially in the past five years, not just in Santa Cruz County but all over the state of California. There were some clear issues, the 2008 recession, the COVID crisis, the rise of Airbnb, but the biggest reason is that municipalities stopped building new housing. The numbers of unhoused people increased, and employers found it harder and harder to find and keep employees. The reason that prospective employees most often gave for not coming to work here was the scarcity and cost of housing. Over the past several years, California has enacted several laws to encourage, and even require, all municipalities to build more housing, especially more affordable housing for essential workers..

The four cities, Capitola, Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley and Watsonville, as well as the County of Santa Cruz, have all begun identifying suitable properties and have begun making zoning changes to build more housing.The five municipalities (the county and the four cities) are at various stages in this process and now face even higher affordable housing goals in the Sixth Cycle Housing Element, which is due to the State at the end of December.

The Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury’s overall findings and recommendations encompass the following:
● How well each of the five municipalities have met current housing goals ● How well the public understands the need for more workforce housing ● How well each municipality is positioned to meet future housing goals ● How each municipality can use housing laws, grants and partnerships to make housing more affordable
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 1 of 38

Table of Contents
Background 3
Scope and Methodology 6
Investigation 7
Examination and Summary of New California Housing Laws 7 Housing Elements, AMI and RHNA … What Does That Mean? 8 City of Capitola 9
City of Watsonville 9
City of Scotts Valley 10
City of Santa Cruz 10
Unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County 10
How is Santa Cruz County Reacting to the New Laws? 11
Housing Laws: Opposition and Support 15
NIMBY and CEQA in Santa Cruz 15
California Cities Ignore RHNA Allocations at Their Own Peril 15 Support for Housing Laws and YIMBY in Santa Cruz 15
Conclusion 17
Findings 18
Recommendations 19
City of Capitola: 19
City of Scotts Valley: 19
County of Santa Cruz: 20
City of Santa Cruz 20
City of Watsonville: 21
Commendations 21
Required Responses 22
Invited Responses 22
Definitions 22
Sources 25
References 25
Additional Resources Not Cited in the Report 32
Appendix A – Progress on 5th Housing Cycle 34
Appendix B – Summary of State Housing Laws 37
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 2 of 38

Background
Over the past few years we have heard a lot about essential workers, those who keep our community running. We depend on these workers to educate our children, take care of our medical and dental needs, keep our communities safe, maintain our food supply, provide public transportation, and keep our streets clean. These workers are being squeezed out of the housing and rental markets in Santa Cruz County. Almost daily there are news reports of teacher and bus driver shortages, police departments that can’t find enough qualified officers, stores and restaurants that have to reduce hours because they can’t find enough workers.

The Santa Cruz area was recently designated the second most expensive place to live in the country with the average home price of $1.5 million and the average rent for an apartment at over $3,000/month.[1] [2] Watsonville is somewhat less expensive at an $800,000 average price for a home and an average rent of $2,000.[1] [2] These prices are beyond the reach of many of our essential middle income workers. In order to buy the average home in the Santa Cruz area, a worker with $50,000 down payment would have to make $400,000/year and the monthly payments would be $8,830/month.[2]In Watsonville, a worker would need to make $200,000/year to afford to buy the average house with monthly payments of $4,345.[2]
Although salaries have gone up in many areas, the average annual teacher salary is only about $70,000.[3] The average full time firefighter makes less than $60,000 and a school custodian makes about $50,000.[3] The average registered nurse makes $100,000.[4] According to the Transparent California website, the average Santa Cruz Metro driver makes about $68,000 in salary and another $60,000 in overtime, still not enough to buy the average house in Watsonville! In a recent survey from the California Association of Realtors, just one in five residents in the Bay Area can afford to buy a home at current prices.[5]
While our communities have programs to help low income residents, (individuals who make less than $35,000/year), there is little to help essential middle income workers who can’t afford the rent or housing prices, yet have jobs in our community.

The report calculates a “housing wage” for Santa Cruz County of $60.35 an hour…. At $3,138 per month for a two-bedroom rental, tenants would need to work four full-time minimum-wage jobs, at $15 an hour, to afford rent….[6] [7]
Figure 1 below shows that in Santa Cruz County many workers are spending nearly 50% of their income on mortgage.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 3 of 38

Figure 1. Percentage of income spent on mortgage.
[8]
Many local employers are reporting difficulty attracting and keeping workers.[9] Cabrillo College reports that 11% of workers commute from outside Santa Cruz County [10], and Pajaro Valley Unified School District reports that over the last two and a half years,

9.24% of those resigning from the district left to move out of state and 11.65% of those resigning left to accept jobs with better salary and housing options outside of the County.
[11] Salary schedules from the City of Santa Cruz show that neither police officers nor firefighters make a salary high enough to comfortably afford housing in this County.
[12] [13]
Figure 2. Where people work in Santa Cruz County.
[14]
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 4 of 38

As Figure 2 above shows, much of our workforce is commuting from south county to jobs primarily located in the central part of the county. Many essential workers make less than the Santa Cruz County housing wage of $60.35/hour. No wonder Hwy 1 is clogged with traffic driving to and from Watsonville and points south and east of here where it is cheaper to live.[15] [16]
The cost of housing in coastal California has outpaced increases in wages and salaries over the same period of time while the supply of affordable housing has decreased relative to the increasing population. According to the Santa Cruz County Planning Department:

The difficulty is not just the cost of housing, but specifically the cost of housing in relationship to local incomes.[17]
How did we get in this predicament? There are many reasons for the lack of housing overall in Santa Cruz County. The 2022 state publication, “A Home for Every Californian”[18]lists several reasons:
● High costs of land, materials and labor
● Insufficient land zoned and available for housing
● Financial support constraints
● Opposition to neighborhood change
● Numerous, varied and opaque regulatory hurdles
● Social pressure to limit population growth
● Lack of federal support and expiring subsidies for affordable homes In addition, after the growth following the construction of the University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC) and the fight over preserving the north coast and Lighthouse Field, a no-growth mentality was pervasive in Santa Cruz County. [19] We just stopped building
enough houses. Figure 3 below shows construction of housing peaked in the 1970s and then fell sharply in the next three decades.

Figure 3. Housing construction in Santa Cruz County by decade built. [20]
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 5 of 38

The population of UCSC and Santa Cruz County in general continued to grow despite the slow pace of housing construction. The cost of housing continued to rise making it difficult first for low income workers and, eventually, for middle income workers to afford to live in Santa Cruz County municipalities.[8]
What can be done to address housing availability and cost in Santa Cruz County municipalities?
Scope and Methodology
In this investigation the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury examined key elements in providing affordable housing for middle class workers in Santa Cruz County, those that earn more than $35,000/year but less than $100,000/year. It focused on answering the following questions:
● What affordable housing options are available in Santa Cruz County to support middle class workers?
● Are employers offering housing support to their employees? ● What can local city and county planning departments do to provide more housing for these workers.?
● What changes are needed in the planning and permit process to make it easier to build more workforce housing in our cities and unincorporated areas? ● How can local jurisdictions leverage recent State of California bills and initiatives to encourage more housing here?
● How can local agencies work together to help support housing for local workers? ● What changes are needed to plan for the future housing needs of our workforce? ● What is UCSC doing to help house its students, faculty and staff? During this investigation the Jury interviewed county planners from each of the four cities, Capitola, Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley and Watsonville, and the County of Santa Cruz. It also interviewed community members who were housing advocates as well as those who were housing skeptics. It collected information from Civil Grand Jury investigations in Santa Clara County, Marin County and Santa Barbara County. It asked some employers for information regarding employee hiring and retention. It examined the new state housing laws and the 2015 Housing Elements for each of the 5 municipalities in the county. Members attended municipal planning meetings and community meetings regarding proposed housing developments and read numerous articles regarding housing from a variety of local news sources.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 6 of 38

Investigation
Examination and Summary of New California Housing Laws
The Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury began its investigation by examining the new California housing laws that have been passed during the last few years in an effort to galvanize cities and counties into building more housing. California passed a series of laws to boost housing production beginning in 2017 in an effort to:
● Streamline the building of new homes
● Break down barriers to build more affordable housing
● Address systematic bias by elevating fair housing principles ● Hold governments more accountable to approve housing construction The more well-known laws include:
● Senate Bill 9 (SB9) signed in 2022 which allows ministerial approval to convert homes into duplexes and split lots to allow up to 4 units on a lot. ● SB10 which allows “up to 10 dwelling units on any parcel within a transit-rich area or an urban infill site.”
● SB290 which ‘grants bonuses, concessions, waivers and parking reductions to projects with qualifying affordable housing.”[21] Usually market rate allows for only 20% affordable units. A builder can qualify for more than 20% affordable units (density bonus) by meeting some of the criteria for SB290. ● Nonprofit Housing Organizations can qualify for increased density bonuses when purchasing a property under SB728.[21]
● Other laws that make it easier to construct Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

The laws that much of the public has already heard about are the laws that permit zoning changes to allow up to 10 units per residential lot (SB10) and the laws that permit cities to ease the process for building ADUs.[22] The streamlined process for building ADUs has been popular, and many cities, particularly Capitola with less buildable land, have encouraged the construction of ADUs.[23] The City has even provided building code approved plans for construction.[24] While the Capitola guidelines state that ADUs cannot be used as vacation rentals, it is unknown whether or not those guidelines are enforced.[24]
One of the most important laws that was passed was SB330 in 2019, later extended by SB8, that limits the ability of local municipalities to prolong the housing application process through repeated hearings and shifting requirements. Many people may have seen the term “objective standards.” SB35 passed in 2017 and clarified by AB1174 in 2021, allows for streamlined approval of a housing project that meets a set of objective standards for zoning, subdivision and design review.
[21]
See Appendix B for more detailed information about relevant Housing Laws Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 7 of 38

Housing Elements, AMI and RHNA … What Does That Mean?
Not only have there been dozens of new state laws designed to increase housing production, but California has also required that every municipality (cities and counties) meet specific housing goals.[25] Every eight years since 1969, California has required cities and counties to submit detailed Housing Element plans that show how they would accommodate the building of a number of homes across a range of affordability levels.

For years, most communities, including many of those in Santa Cruz County have paid very little attention to the Housing Element.[26] [27]
That all changed with the passage of the new housing laws. Beginning with the 2015-2022 Housing Element, municipalities were required to build a specific amount of housing for each income level calculated as a percentage of the Area Median Income (AMI). Figure 4 below shows the calculated income level for each category in Santa Cruz County.

Figure 4. Calculated income category levels for 2021 in Santa Cruz County. [28]
Based upon this chart from 2021, a family of four would be considered moderate income if they earned $134,300/year, median income if they earned $111,900/year, low income if they earned $111,500/year, very low income if they earned $69,500/year and extremely low income if they earned $41,700/year.

The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for each major metropolitan area based upon the AMI for the area and the projections for population growth and additional housing that would be needed over each 8 year period. Santa Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 8 of 38

Cruz County is part of the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG).

Our area is in the final year of the 5th Housing Element Cycle, and area municipalities are beginning to work on the 6th Housing Element Cycle due December 31, 2023.

So…how are we doing? The Jury’s interviews with the different planning directors and housing advocates in our community show some clear signs of progress, and a lot of room for improvement. In the 5th Housing Element Cycle, AMBAG cities in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties were expected to permit roughly 10,430 housing units from January 2014 to December 2023. The snapshot from September 3, 2021 below shows the progress of Santa Cruz, Watsonville, unincorporated Santa Cruz County, Capitola and Scotts Valley towards that goal.[29]
See Appendix A for more information on 5th Housing Cycle progress As of last year, only the City of Santa Cruz[30]is on track to meet the RHNA goals for housing during the 5th Housing Element Cycle, and the City of Watsonville[31] will come close.[32] [33] Scotts Valley and Capitola made almost no attempt to build housing for low income or extremely low income workers. Santa Cruz County has approved zoning changes to support construction of mixed use projects along Portola Drive.[34] Last spring, the state of California set the housing goals for each region. AMBAG, our region, set the 6th Housing Element construction goals for each local municipality.

Those goals have quadrupled from the previous 5th Cycle goals, which most municipalities did not meet as of May, 2022.[35]
The draft goals for housing development from Dec. 31, 2023 to Dec. 15, 2031 are outlined below by jurisdiction followed by their progress towards the 5th Element goals as reported in May, 2022.[35]
City of Capitola
● 1,336 new homes are targeted to be built by 2031. More than half of the new homes would be required to be affordable for people with “low” or “very low” incomes. Income limits are set by the state. The new housing construction goal is more than nine times Capitola’s current goal.
● The current goalーwhich the City has not met--calls for Capitola to permit 143 new homes between Dec. 31, 2015 and Dec. 31, 2023. The City has permitted 53 homes in that period. Planners have issued one of 34 required permits for “very low income” units and zero of 23 required permits for “low income” units.

City of Watsonville
● 2,053 new homes are targeted by the end of 2031, including 469 affordable units for people with “low” or “very low” incomes. That’s nearly three times Watsonville’s current goal, which the City has not met. ● Since Dec. 31, 2015, Watsonville has issued 302 of 700 permits required by the end of 2023. To meet the current goal, the City must permit 148 “very low income” units, 100 “low income” units, 113 “moderate income” units and 37 market-rate units by the end of 2023.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 9 of 38

City of Scotts Valley
● 1,220 new homes are targeted by the end of 2031, including 649 affordable homes for people with “low” or “very low” incomes. That goal is nearly nine times Scotts Valley’s current goal, which the City has not met. Since Dec. 31, 2015, Scotts Valley has issued 18 of 82 permits for “moderate,” “low” and “very low income” units required by the end of 2023. The City has exceeded the state’s goal for market-rate unit development.

City of Santa Cruz
● 3,736 new homes are targeted by 2031, including about 1,400 affordable homes for people with “low” or “very low” incomes. That goal is five times Santa Cruz’s current goal.
● The City must still permit 123 of 180 required permits for “very low income” affordable units by Dec. 31, 2023 to meet its current RHNA goals. Santa Cruz has exceeded state development goals for market-rate and affordable units for other income categories.

Unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County
● 4,634 new homes are targeted by 2031, including 1,492 affordable units for people with “very low” incomes. unincorporated Santa Cruz County includes the San Lorenzo Valley, the North Coast, Live Oak, Aptos, La Selva Beach, Freedom and other areas. That goal is about three times the area’s current goal, which has not been met.
● The County of Santa Cruz must issue 335 permits for “very low” and “low income” units and 267 permits for market-rate units by the end of 2023 to meet the state’s goal.

The Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury’s research has found that all Santa Cruz County municipalities are aware of the new state housing laws as well as the new RHNA housing allocations, although there is some disagreement about feasibility. It found much agreement with the need to construct more housing as well as the desire to do so within the existing urban areas rather than expanding into existing green spaces.

Urban areas are closer to jobs and transportation hubs and less costly to maintain roads and utilities compared to areas like the Santa Cruz Mountains.[27] Most county municipalities have already identified properties along transportation and urban corridors and made the necessary zoning and building code changes to build more housing. Figure 5 below is hard to read, but it shows the areas in pink that the County of Santa Cruz has designated for more housing. Note that the County is only proposing housing (pink areas) in the center of the County, the area where many jobs are located.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 10 of 38

Figure 5. Santa Cruz County Focused Growth Areas 2020 – 2040. [36]
How is Santa Cruz County Reacting to the New Laws?
Nearly 8 years have passed since our local municipalities submitted their 5th Housing Element Cycles, and as we approach the submission of the 6th Housing Element Cycle, housing costs continue to rise steeply, pricing even more middle income workers out of the housing market.

School districts are actively looking for ways to house workers. By using district owned land, districts can reduce the cost of rent for their teachers and classified workers. Los Gatos Union School district has recently completed a housing complex.[37] Live Oak School District has proposed construction of teacher housing,[38] and the Santa Cruz City School District has successfully passed a bond measure to construct housing on one of its properties.[39] Figure 6 below is an artist’s rendering of what the Santa Cruz City Schools housing might look like.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 11 of 38

Figure 6. Renderings of 80 units of workforce housing for Santa Cruz City Schools, located on a parcel of land owned by the district off of Swift Street on the Westside, near the old Natural Bridges Elementary School campus. (via Santa Cruz City Schools
[39]
)
Pajaro Valley Unified School District is looking at a similar bond measure in south county to finance employee housing.[11] Peace United Church on the westside of Santa Cruz is proposing a 40 unit housing project on their land.[40] County municipalities are responding as well:
● Santa Cruz County has rezoned part of Portola Drive near 41st Avenue for mixed use housing that combines ground floor businesses with apartments above. ● There is more housing construction in Aptos Village.[36] ● Watsonville has continued to build housing in recent years, pursuing joint housing projects with the county planners and non-profits. The City has a rehabilitation program for existing houses.[32]
● Capitola has eased requirements for ADUs.[41]
● Scotts Valley just approved a mixed use housing development.[42] ● The City of Santa Cruz has taken a lead in housing production within the City’s urban core, beginning the construction of multi-story apartment complexes.[43] ● Santa Cruz City has passed a measure to construct a mixed use project that includes a new library, low income housing, a day care center and parking.[44] Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 12 of 38

Figure 7. City of Capitola showing areas identified as buildable parcels. [45]
Capitola claims to be mostly built out, although it has identified some areas in which to build housing, as shown in Figure 7 above. The small City has chosen instead to focus on ADUs as additional housing.[41] Capitola has not added low income housing.[29] Scotts Valley has also added very little low income housing. A proposed rule by the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH)[46] may make it mandatory under the Fair Housing Act of 1968[47]to “proactively take meaningful actions to overcome patterns of segregation, promote fair housing choice, eliminate disparities in opportunities, and foster inclusive communities free from discrimination.”[46] Scotts Valley and Capitola need to do their part to add more low income housing in our County.

The areas that the City of Santa Cruz has designated for multi-use zoning, including multi-story housing, are shown in.Figure 8 below. The letters, colors and legend indicate the location and size of each identified parcel. There is a redesign of the bus station in the works that includes multi story housing, and a possible collaboration with the Santa Cruz Warriors to construct a permanent arena and housing in the south end of the urban area.[48] [49]
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 13 of 38

Figure 8. Areas that the City of Santa Cruz has designated for multi-use zoning, including multi-story housing.
[49]
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 14 of 38

Housing Laws: Opposition and Support
NIMBY and CEQA in Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz has had a no-growth mindset for over 40 years.[19] That mindset, “Not in My Back Yard,” often referred to as NIMBY, still exists, and it is hard for members of the community to envision housing as anything other than neighborhoods of single family homes. Many homeowners rely on rising property values to build wealth, and resist new developments which might impact them. Changing zoning to allow duplexes and apartments within a single family home neighborhood is a rude awakening, but so is the construction of high rise apartments in downtown Santa Cruz. Removing existing buildings will displace tenants for years while new housing is built.[50] Citizens and local organizations in Santa Cruz have tried to use elements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to fight housing developments. The most recent example is a lawsuit filed against UCSC by a group called Habitat and Watershed Caretakers to try to stop the construction of additional student housing on campus. A judge recently ruled in favor of the university, but the lawsuits have held up the construction approval process for two years.[51] [52]
California Cities Ignore RHNA Allocations at Their Own Peril For California communities that have ignored the need to build more housing for years, the newest RHNA allocations have come as a shock. Some have ignored the mandate or continued to place roadblocks in the way of builders. ● The town of Woodside tried to have their entire town designated as a mountain lion habitat to avoid building duplexes (SB9) prompting a swift response from California Attorney General Rob Bonta.[53]
● The City of Orinda tried to designate unbuildable slivers of land as the sites for affordable housing.[54]
● Santa Monica, which approved the construction of only 1,600 homes in the last eight years, is the first City to be subjected to “builders remedy” based on a 1990 law called the Housing Accountabilities Act (HAA).

Santa Monica failed to adopt a Housing Element and under the HAA residential zoning was suspended, freeing builders to design any housing project they wanted without needing City approval. Within one week developers officially filed plans for 4,797 homes.[55] The same thing could happen in Palo Alto.[56] Several Bay Area cities did not file their 6th Housing Element Cycles and RHNA allocation plans by the January 31, 2023 deadline,[57] and three pro-housing groups have already filed lawsuits against eleven cities for failing to take significant steps to prepare for more housing.[58] Support for Housing Laws and YIMBY in Santa Cruz
There is no question that the new RHNA housing allocations for the 6th Housing Element Cycle are daunting. As Figure 9 below shows, the amount of housing that Santa Cruz municipalities will need to construct in the next 6-7 years is much higher than in the previous cycle.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 15 of 38

Figure 9. Number of housing units for each income group needed to be built by each Santa Cruz municipality, extracted from the tables in the AMBAG RHNA Plan. [59]
It is especially difficult to construct Low Income and Extremely Low Income housing in this community due to the price of land and cost of construction. Builders claim that It is not financially profitable to include more than 20% affordable units in normal market-rate construction[60], and the majority of middle class workers cannot afford market rate housing. The housing market is actually upside down…only about 20% of the population can afford market rate housing, and 80% of the population needs more affordable units.[2] All cities and the County of Santa Cruz need to find ways to increase the number of affordable housing units in new construction.

The University of California at Santa Cruz (UCSC) is a large contributor to the need for more affordable housing.[61] The university is already a large contributor to the scarcity and cost of housing, as it only houses about 9,300 students or 50% of the student population, and the campus is expected to grow to a total of 28,000 students in coming years.[62] The local preference guidelines considered by many Santa Cruz County cities, would also benefit UCSC students who would be competing with the local workforce for less expensive housing. Cabrillo College and UCSC have embarked on their first ever collaboration to construct student housing on the Cabrillo campus.[63] They are applying jointly for a California grant to cover the cost.[64] [65] More collaborations between the university and local agencies would be beneficial in constructing housing that will benefit all.

The cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville have taken steps to build higher density, more affordable housing in their downtown areas.[66] Pro-housing groups such as Housing Santa Cruz County, and Yes In My Backyard (YIMBY) have organized in Santa Cruz County municipalities to advocate and provide more vocal support for affordable housing[67]. Opposition to housing growth still exists, but reactions to housing proposals are more constructive.[68] Public comments to projects show an understanding of the need for more housing, especially low income housing, in our community. [69] [70] There is
support for mixed use housing along urban corridors, and while residents are Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 16 of 38

somewhat daunted by multi-story buildings above 4 stories, there is acknowledgement that urban downtown areas are a better place to build than expanding into the coastal zone, hillsides or green spaces.[27] [71]including the Santa Cruz mountains. Santa Cruz municipalities recognized this during the 5th Housing Element as their maps show, making zoning changes and identifying housing sites only in the urban areas.[29] [36] [49] [72] Figure 10. BDE Architecture’s revised rendering of the proposed five-story 351-unit housing complex on the 900 block of Ocean Street.
[73]
As Figure 10 shows, the proposed 351-unit apartment building for the 900 block of Ocean Street is large and multi-story. It is also a good illustration of the public perception and concerns about the size of housing needed to meet the demand in Santa Cruz. It is huge, beginning next to Marianne’s Ice Cream and continuing all the way to Togo’s. Public comments at a recent meeting included concerns about the height and size, a desire for the architecture to fit into the small town look of Santa Cruz and relief that a much nicer looking building would replace the vacant lots and dilapidated houses that make up that block.[74] The public offered constructive criticism instead of automatic opposition. More multi-unit projects are moving through the planning process in Santa Cruz.

Conclusion
There is no doubt that the small, charming coastal City of Santa Cruz and the surrounding county municipalities are going to have to change. We can no longer ignore the fact that our highways and city streets have become gridlocked; rents and housing prices are beyond the reach of most; and many businesses are unable to find and keep the employees that they need. School enrollment is dropping as families move away to Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 17 of 38

find more affordable places to live, and businesses are moving to other locations.

Perhaps the state laws and high housing goals are unattainable, but living in an area that only the wealthiest can afford is untenable without access to the businesses and services that all communities expect. It is too early to tell if it is possible to build all of the housing that the state demands, but it is undeniable that more housing, especially more affordable housing, needs to be built for the essential workers in Santa Cruz County. If that affordable housing is built near jobs and along transportation corridors, it will also alleviate traffic gridlock.

Findings
F1. While all city and county planning departments have demonstrated a good understanding of the new State housing laws and the need to facilitate more housing, the failure to do so in a timely manner has served to further decrease the availability of housing and further increase the need and cost of more housing.

F2. With the planned growth of UCSC to 28,000 students, the potential demand for off campus housing for students, faculty and staff has the potential to make the affordable housing problem even worse.

F3. The County of Santa Cruz has identified several sites for higher density housing, identified sites along transportation corridors for housing and changed zoning laws to allow more mixed use developments, however in the past several years, few low income homes have been built or approved.

F4. Capitola has made little progress towards achieving housing goals, particularly for low income housing. Although the City identified sites for mixed use developments, they have made little progress towards developing those sites.

F5. Capitola has focused primarily on streamlining the construction of ADUs as a means to increase housing. However, there is little evidence that ADUs are prioritized for rental to local workers, and there is little chance that ADUs alone can meet the housing needs for the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

F6. Capitola and the County of Santa Cruz need to work together to facilitate significant housing in the mid-county area where a large percentage of jobs are located.

F7. The City of Capitola has made little progress towards facilitating the development of the Capitola Mall as a mixed use project which could accommodate both business and housing.

F8. The City of Capitola claims to have significantly fewer resources to attract housing planners and builders than do the bigger municipalities of Santa Cruz, Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz, but that does not mean the City should be exempt from the need to construct housing for local low income workers.

F9. The City of Scotts Valley has facilitated the building of market rate housing in recent years, but has made little effort to develop housing for low income workers.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 18 of 38

F10. The City of Scotts Valley has made little progress towards developing the Town Square project which could accommodate both business and housing.

F11. The City of Scotts Valley claims to have significantly fewer resources to attract housing planners and builders than do the bigger municipalities of Santa Cruz, Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz, but that does not mean the City should be exempt from the need to construct housing for local low income workers.

F12. While all local municipalities have voiced support for prioritizing housing for local workers, only some of them have clear local preference guidelines that give some priority to local workers. Without clear guidelines and incentives, new housing is more likely to be purchased by those who do not live and work here.

F13. All municipalities are trying to identify and facilitate the building of housing projects, but most of that is done independently of the other municipalities or with outside partners. Since workforce housing and transportation gridlock is a county-wide problem, all county municipalities need to work more closely together and with property owners to develop housing solutions.

Recommendations
City of Capitola:

R1. By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should identify enough parcels of land, zoned appropriately, to meet the new RHNA housing allocations for all income levels, especially low income housing. (F4 – F6, F8)
R2. By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should show significant progress towards planning and facilitating the construction of mixed use businesses and housing on identified parcels of land in the City. (F4, F6 – F8) R3. By the end of 2023, the City of Capitola should demonstrate a plan to work with the County of Santa Cruz as well as other for profit and non-profit agencies to develop housing close to transportation corridors along Hwy 1 and 41st Avenue. (F6, F7, F13)
R4. By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should develop clear, measureable guidelines to ensure that local preference is given to local workers in the construction of ADUs as well as low income housing. (F12) R5. By the end of 2023 the City of Capitola should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular meetings of a workgroup or entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
City of Scotts Valley:

R6. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should identify enough parcels of land, zoned appropriately, to meet the new RHNA housing allocations for all income levels, especially low income housing. (F9)
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 19 of 38

R7. By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should show significant progress towards planning and facilitating the construction of mixed use businesses and housing on identified parcels of land in the City. (F10) R8. By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate a plan to work with other county municipalities as well as other for profit and non-profit agencies to develop low income housing for workers in the City. (F9 – F11) R9. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should develop clear, measureable guidelines to ensure that local preference is given to local workers in the construction of low income housing. (F12)
R10. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular meetings of a workgroup or other entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
County of Santa Cruz:

R11. By the end of 2023 the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate progress towards identifying sites and planning for increased housing along the transportation corridors in mid-county. (F6)
R12. By the end of 2023 the County of Santa Cruz should develop clear, measureable guidelines to ensure that local preference is given to local workers in the construction of low income housing. (F12)
R13. By the end of 2023, the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate a plan to work with other county municipalities as well as other for profit and non-profit agencies to develop low income housing for workers in the county, (particularly on properties such as the old drive-in theater acreage which is adjacent to transportation corridors. (F3, F6)
R14. By the end of 2023, the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate progress in working collaboratively with UCSC to develop housing sites that are affordable for UCSC students and essential workers. (F2)
R15. By the end of 2023 the County of Santa Cruz should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular meetings of a workgroup or other entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
City of Santa Cruz
R16. By the end of 2023 the City of Santa Cruz should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular meetings of a workgroup or other entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
R17. By the end of 2023, the City of Santa Cruz should develop clear, measureable guidelines to ensure that preference is given to local workers in the construction of low income housing. (F12)
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 20 of 38

R18. By the end of 2023, the City of Santa Cruz should demonstrate progress in working collaboratively with UCSC to develop housing sites that are affordable for UCSC students and essential workers. (F2)
City of Watsonville:

R19. By the end of 2023 the City of Watsonville should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular meetings of a workgroup or other entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
R20. By the end of 2023, the City of Watsonville should develop clear, measureable guidelines to ensure that local preference is given to local workers in the construction of low income housing. (F12)
Commendations
C1. By acquiring and using City owned property, and seeking State grants and other outside funding, Santa Cruz is developing projects that are more affordable for tenants. With projects already underway and in the pipeline, Santa Cruz is on track to meet its 5th Cycle Housing goals, though the 6th cycle will present a larger challenge.

C2. The City of Watsonville has continued to build housing during the years when other municipalities were not. They have collaborated well with non-profits and Santa Cruz County to build housing at all affordability levels.

C3. All county municipalities have made a concerted effort to identify housing sites in the urban corridors in order to preserve the local coastal zones, mountains and green spaces in the rest of the County.

C4. County school districts, Peace United Church, Cabrillo College and UCSC are working collaboratively to design and build affordable housing for teachers, staff and students.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 21 of 38

Required Responses
Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond Within/
Respond By
Santa Cruz County
Board of Supervisors
F1, F3, F6, F12,
F13 R11 – R15 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Capitola
City Council
F1, F4 – F8, F12,
F13 R1 – R5 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Santa Cruz
City Council F1, F2, F12, F13 R16 – R18 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023 Scotts Valley
City Council F1 ,F9 – F13 R6 – R10 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023 Watsonville
City Council F1, F12, F13 R19, R20 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023 Invited Responses
Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond Within/
Respond By
Assistant Director,
Santa Cruz County
Community Development
F1, F3, F6,
F12, F13 R11 – R15 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Director, Capitola
Community Development
F1, F4 – F8,
F12, F13 R1 – R5 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Director, Santa Cruz
Community Development
F1, F2, F12,
F13 R16 – R18 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Director, Santa Cruz
Economic Development F13 R17 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Director, Scotts Valley
Community Development
F1,
F9 – F13 R6 – R10 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Director, Watsonville
Community Development
F1, F12,
F13 R19, R20 90 DaysAugust 31, 2023
Definitions
Accessory Dwelling Unit: Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are also known as “in-laws” or“granny-flats.” The legislature greatly expanded homeowners' ability to add ADUs in a series of laws from 2016-2019, and now 1 in 5 new homes built in California are ADUs.

Affordable Housing: When used by city staff and consultants, the term "affordable Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 22 of 38

housing" refers to housing that is available at rents and prices below the market rate, usually defined relative to the income level of residents. This form of housing typically receives some form of government subsidy to keep rents low and residents must qualify to rent or buy the units based on their household income.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH): State and local governments must not only outlaw housing discrimination, they must also proactively work to eliminate discriminatory practices and reduce segregation. All Housing Element revisions adopted after 1/1/21 must include an AFFH analysis: addressing significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, including more investments in higher income areas.

Affordability density bonus: A density bonus provides an increase in allowed dwelling units per acre (DU/A), Floor Area Ratio (FAR) or height which generally means that more housing units can be built on any given site. Typically programs allow increases of between 10 percent and 20 percent over baseline permitted density in exchange for the provision of affordable housing.

AMBAG: As the Council of Governments for Santa Cruz County and Monterey County, AMBAG holds responsibility for regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) for our region.

Area Median Income(AMI): A value determined on an annual basis by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development that represents the household income for the median household in a specified region.

Builders Remedy: The builder’s remedy requires cities without a compliant housing plan to approve any housing project that meets affordability requirements of reserving 20% of homes for low-income households or 100% for moderate-income households. Specifically, if a California city does not have a “substantially compliant” housing element, the California Housing Accountability Act indicates that the jurisdiction cannot use its zoning or general plan standards to disapprove any housing project that meets the affordability requirements.

CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), intended to preserve the environment, has been blamed for worsening the state's housing crisis. The lengthy and costly environmental review process required under CEQA, even for housing that complies with local General Plans and zoning codes and the hundreds of applicable environmental, health, safety, and labor laws and regulations, can derail projects. Even after new housing is finally approved, any party can file a CEQA lawsuit seeking to block the housing for "environmental" reasons, resulting in costly, multi-year delays. Recent State legislation seeks to exempt certain affordable housing projects from CEQA review.

Density Bonus: For more than forty years, California’s Density Bonus Law has been a mechanism to encourage developers to incorporate affordable units within a residential project in exchange for density bonuses and relief from other base development standards (e.g. setback rules, parking spaces). Under the Density Bonus Law, developers are entitled to a density bonus corresponding to specified percentages of units set aside for very low income, low-income, or Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 23 of 38

moderate-income households.

General Plan: A General Plan is a broad, long-range policy document that guides future development, transportation, and conservation. It is a comprehensive collection of goals and policies related to a multitude of aspects of community life.

In California, cities and counties are required by State law to have a General Plan.

It is the local government’s long-term blueprint for future development. Pursuant to State law, the General Plan must accommodate the required amount of projected population growth the State of California estimates for each city.

Essential Workers: Those workers who are necessary to ensure continuity of functions critical to public health, safety and well being as well as economic security.

Fair Housing Act: Part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, it guarantees the right to housing and prohibits discrimination in housing.

HCD: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) that develops housing policy and building codes and administers community development programs.

Housing Element: A Housing Element is a local plan, adopted by a city, town or county that includes the goals, policies and programs that direct decision-making around housing. Local jurisdictions look at housing trends, zoning and market constraints, and evaluate various approaches to meeting housing needs across income levels Every eight years, every city and county must update their Housing Element and have it certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. All jurisdictions in Santa Cruz County must update their Housing Element for the 2023-2031 planning period.

HUD: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Income Limits: are one of the determining factors in determining eligibility for housing assistance. Definitions are set forVery Low, Low, and Moderate income and are determined by the gross household income and household size.

Inclusionary Zoning (IZ): also known as inclusionary housing, is a policy that requires a share of new housing development to be affordable to low- or moderateincome households. By including affordable housing in a market-rate housing development, inclusionary housing policies promote mixed-income development projects.

Local Preference: The right or opportunity to select a person from an identified target group that is considered more desirable than another in a constituency, city, urban area or county.

Market-rate housing: Residential units that are rented and sold at market rates, not subjected to sales or rental restrictions, and not typically benefiting from any public subsidy intended to change rental rates or sale prices.

Ministerial approval: A streamlined permit process for development approval involving little or no personal judgment by the public official. As opposed to "Discretionary review process" that allows for public hearings which brings a lot of Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 24 of 38

uncertainty and months or years long approval process, Ministerial approval is as short as 90 days.

Municipalities: Municipalities is used in this document to refer to the 4 cities, Capitola, Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley and Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz together. Santa Cruz County is unique in that a large proportion of the population (above 40%) lives in unincorporated areas under Santa Cruz County jurisdiction.

NIMBY: Not in My Backyard, a term for people who have a no-growth mindset regarding high density housing in their neighborhoods.

Objective Standards: State law defines objective standards as those that “involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant and public official prior to submittal.” The State of California has adopted legislation requiring cities to approve certain housing proposals through ministerial processes based on objective standards.

The result of these laws is to encourage localities to create quicker, more accessible pathways for housing to be built.

Regional Housing Needs Analysis (RHNA): Housing-element law requires a quantification of each jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need as established in the RHNA-Plan prepared by the jurisdiction’s council of governments. The RHNA is a minimum projection of additional housing units needed to accommodate projected household growth of all income levels by the end of the housing-element’s statutory planning period. Each locality’s RHNA allotment must be segmented into four income categories.

Workforce housing: also known as middle-income or moderate-income housing, is housing for residents typically earning less than 120 percent of the area’s median income. This category often includes first responders, teachers, and government employees, as well as healthcare, construction, and retail workers.

YIMBY: Yes in My Backyard, a term for housing advocates who seek to increase the supply of housing, particularly infill and multifamily affordable housing developments.

Zoning: Zoning is the system of rules that local jurisdictions use to determine how land is used within their boundaries. Land use policy establishes the basic type and intensity of uses permitted under a city’s General Plan for each land use category, such as maximum density for residential development and maximum intensity for commercial or industrial uses. Effective land use policy uses zoning to adapt to changing environmental, social and economic conditions.

Sources
References

1. February 2023. rental availability website. Accessed March 28, 2023. http://www.rentcafe.com/
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 25 of 38

2. February 2023. Housing availability website. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://www.redfin.com/how-much-house-can-i-afford

3. 3/23/22. Salary Schedule for Teacher Employees. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://pps-pajaro-ca.schoolloop.com/file/1500178971614/1377669227702/882 8261534611747004.pdf

4. Nov. 19, 2022. “Dominican Hospital Salaries in Santa Cruz, CA.” Glassdoor.

Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Dominican-Hospital-Santa-Cruz-Salaries-EI_ IE3142116.0,18_IL.19,29_IM767.htm

5. Ethan Varian. February 3, 2023. “Housing Costs a Worry for Bay Area Residents.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=82 00bca2-55cd-44fd-b602-0abf29a112b6&appcode=SAN252&eguid=2e2cdb29-2 33b-4187-9771-4092cdd674fd&pnum=1#

6. Max Chun. July 28, 2022. “Santa Cruz is now the 2nd most expensive rental market in the country.” Lookout Santa Cruz. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://lookout.co/santacruz/civic-life/story/2022-07-28/housing-affordability-san ta-cruz-county-now-second-most-expensive-in-country-out-of-reach-report

7. 2022. Out of Reach Report. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://nlihc.org/oor

8. May, 2022. “2022 Santa Cruz County State of the Workforce Report.” BW Research Partnership. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.datasharescc.org/content/sites/santacruz/Local_Reports_/Santa-Cr uz-County-SoW-Final-2022.pdf#page=21

9. Stephen Baxter. May 27, 2022. “Reports Explain Labor Shortage in Santa Cruz County.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2022/05/27/reports-explain-labor-shortage-in-santa-cr uz-county/

10. Confidential Grand Jury document.

11. Confidential Grand Jury document.

12. Mar. 5, 2022. “Salary Compensation Plans.” City of Santa Cruz Compensation Plans. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/88304/637823 306517630000

13. Sept. 18, 2021. “Salary Compensation Plans.” City of Santa Cruz Compensations Plans. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/90855/638000 639668600000
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 26 of 38

14. Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. June 16, 2022.

Chapter 3 Travel Patterns. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://sccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Chapter%203%20Travel%20Patt erns.pdf#page=4

15. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

16. Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. June 16, 2022.

Chapter 3 Travel Patterns. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://sccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Chapter%203%20Travel%20Patt erns.pdf

17. 4/28/2016. 2015 Santa Cruz County Housing Element. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.sccoplanning.com/Portals/2/County/Planning/housing/Housing%20 Element%20Approved%204.28.16%20for%20web.pdf

18. March 2022. A Home for Every Californian 2022 Statewide Housing Plan.

Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/94729ab1648d43b1811c1698a748c136

19. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

20. Feb. 9, 2016. County Housing Element Chapter 4 of the Santa Cruz County General Plan. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.sccoplanning.com/Portals/2/County/Planning/housing/Housing%20 Element%20Approved%204.28.16%20for%20web.pdf#page=23

21. Chelsea Mcclean et al. October 13, 2021. “California's 2022 Housing Laws:

What You Need to Know.” Holland and Knight. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2021/10/californias-2022-housin g-laws-what-you-need-to-know

22. Updated July, 2022. Accessory Dwelling Unit Handbook. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-07/ADUHandbookUpdate.pdf

23. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

24. Community Development Department. Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.cityofcapitola.org/communitydevelopment/page/accessory-dwelling -units#:~:text=In%20Capitola%2C%20the%20development%20standards%20f or%20building%20an,an%20existing%20or%20proposed%20single-family%20 or%20multifamily%20dwelling.

25. Technical Assistance for Local Planning Housing. February 18, 2021. What is a Housing Element?. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021-02/What_is_a_housing_ element.pdf

26. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 27 of 38

27. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

28. Housing Authority. April 26, 2021. “Santa Cruz County Income Limits for State Programs.” Housing Authority of the County of Santa Cruz. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://hacosantacruz.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/State-Income-Limits-202

1.pdf

29. Kara Meyberg Guzman. September 5, 2021. “State Aims to Triple Housing Production in Santa Cruz Monterey Counties.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2021/09/03/state-aims-to-triple-housing-production-insanta-cruz-monterey-counties/

30. Aric Sleeper. April 6, 2023. “City Seeks Feedback on Housing Plan.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed April 11, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=c6 639873-02da-4f4b-bcd3-594072c08dc3&appcode=SAN180&eguid=4c0934d5-f 463-40cf-9310-29b00110c438&pnum=15#

31. Nick Sestanovich. April 6, 2023. “Housing Report Receives Approval.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed April 11, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=ed 5c4ab0-984a-4c27-862b-821f08d44162&appcode=SAN180&eguid=4c0934d5-f 463-40cf-9310-29b00110c438&pnum=17#

32. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

33. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

34. P. K. Hattis. Nov. 2022. “Santa Cruz County Supervisors Discuss Rezoning Maps.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=2f 46a782-0a82-4408-984b-eda1dff37289&appcode=SAN180&eguid=b7006df9-4 b0d-4d8e-8738-a3885cab5274&pnum=5#

35. Jesse Kathan. October 14, 2022. “Housing Goals Quadruple in Santa Cruz County.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2022/10/14/housing-goals-quadruple-in-santa-cruz-co unty/

36. Jesse Kathan. January 31, 2023. “Housing Production Plan Kicks Off in Santa Cruz County.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://santacruzlocal.org/2023/01/31/housing-production-plan-kicks-off-in-sant a-cruz-county/
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 28 of 38

37. Hannah Kannik. October 24, 2022. “Teacher Housing Ready for Tenants.” BayArea NewsGroup. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=5b bbd9fa-710d-4926-b5d6-ddccb776ec23&appcode=SAN252&eguid=5d8ea24ed75b-4056-a2fb-da669aa7d17e&pnum=29#

38. Grace Stetson. February 1, 2023. “Live Oak Senior Center Leaders Seek Space in Teacher Housing Project.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2023/01/30/live-oak-senior-center-leaders-seek-spac e-in-teacher-housing-project/

39. Hillary Ojeda. February 28, 2023. “Santa Cruz City Schools' Workforce Housing Could Be Completed in Three Years if All Goes to Plan, District Says.” Lookout Santa Cruz. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://lookout.co/santacruz/education/story/2023-02-24/santa-cruz-city-schools -workforce-housing-could-be-completed-in-three-years-if-all-goes-as-planned-di strict-says

40. Aric Sleeper. February 10, 2023. “Church Restarts Process to Develop Housing.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=57 49e3fb-2692-4eac-b791-fbd21570890a&appcode=SAN180&eguid=3b9a52f5-9 c54-4a1c-8d56-40186faaece0&pnum=15#

41. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

42. Aric Sleeper. December 9, 2022. “Construction of Scotts Valley mixed-use development moves forward.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2022/12/08/construction-of-scotts-valley-mix ed-use-development-moves-forward/

43. Santa Cruz Local Staff. February 26, 2023. “Housing and Construction Projects in Santa Cruz County.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://us20.campaign-archive.com/?e=cae590735d&u=6a68750b2e4bbdcaddf e0b7fd&id=d5536c053d

44. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

45. November 25, 2015. City of Capitola Housing Element. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.cityofcapitola.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_dev elopment/page/2402/adopted_capitola_housing_element.pdf#page=80

46. HUD. February 9, 2023. “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH).” HUD US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.hud.gov/AFFH
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 29 of 38

47. HUD. 1968. “Housing Discrimination Under the Fair Housing Act..” HUD US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/fair_housing_act _overview

48. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

49. September 16, 2022. Notice of Preparation of a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/90740/637988 532645930000#page=9

50. Aric Sleeper. January 2023. “Council Attempts to Make Expansion More Palatable.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=82 faa2ff-bc32-48c8-9c98-c1bcb34f93e8&appcode=SAN180&eguid=e212ce6c-12 89-4665-89b6-53752c3f4f18&pnum=18#

51. Jessica A. York. Dec. 2022. “U.C. Santa Cruz Housing Project Judge: Benefits Outweigh Impact.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=19 63b88f-ed86-43c8-a796-8f3d37145d86&appcode=SAN180&eguid=8aa3aa40- 09bd-49bf-a7f5-5d0da4edc0c4&pnum=2#

52. Hilary Ojeda. February 2023. “UCSC Inches Closer to Moving Forward with Controversial Housing Projects.” Lookout Santa Cruz. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://lookout.co/santacruz/ucsc-cabrillo/story/2022-11-08/uc-santa-cruz-gettin g-closer-to-moving-forward-with-controversial-housing-project

53. Maria Cramer and Alan Yuhas. February 7, 2022. “California Town Says Mountain Lions Don't Stop Housing After All.” New York Times. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/07/us/woodside-mountain-lion-housing.html

54. Katie Lauer. February 1, 2023. “Orinda Backs Off Property Claims.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=25 2ad7f4-4785-4928-841e-11a84b4f86ee&appcode=SAN252&eguid=74ae0f0c-2 21d-4206-8889-d15aa7419397&pnum=43#

55. Darrell Owens. January 31, 2023. “Bay Area Cities to Lose All Housing Zoning Power Within 2 Days.” The Discourse Lounge. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://darrellowens.substack.com/p/ca-cities-to-lose-all-zoning-powers

56. Ethan Varian and Aldo Toledo. February 13, 2023. “Revenge Through Builder's Remedy.” Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=fbc 08f07-15a1-4194-bac6-5be66797d63c&appcode=SAN252&eguid=47545044-df 9d-4384-ae47-a83ec95a3256&pnum=2#
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 30 of 38

57. Ethan Varian. February 2, 2023. “Most Bay Area Cities Missed Deadlines to Submit Housing Plans.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=ec b8993b-e9f2-46db-a9cd-527a4e42a1e0&appcode=SAN252&eguid=6e33ebb8- 9cd0-4373-b647-8d7f5eec276e&pnum=4#

58. Ethan Varian. February 8, 2023. “3 Pro-Housing Groups Sue 11 Cities, County.” San Jose Mercury News. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=f9 51100d-1343-4645-9775-0a81a5cd5aad&appcode=SAN252&eguid=70c3e6ec8523-4427-9665-1d22b636bccd&pnum=4#

59. April, 2022. Draft 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://ambag.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/PDFAAMBAG%20RHNP%202023 -2031_Draft_rev.pdf#page=30

60. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

61. Mikhail Zinshteyn. January 19, 2023. “UC Housing Problem Persists.” Cal Matters. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=31 f201c8-5965-416d-90a2-8a3ca34f5ed6&appcode=SAN252&eguid=22d36e81-e 846-43ef-b3bd-a1468a7cffd2&pnum=35#

62. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

63. Mark Conley. March 21, 2022. “Plan for 300 On Campus Beds for Cabrillo College Students? Here's How That is Taking Shape.” LookOut Santa Cruz.

Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://lookout.co/santacruz/education/higher-ed/story/2022-03-21/cabrillo-colle ge-on-campus-housing-plan-uc-santa-cruz

64. Tyler Maldonado. February 14, 2023. “Cabrillo College Proposal Seeks State Money.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2023/02/14/cabrillo-college-housing-proposal-seeks-s tate-money/

65. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

66. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

67. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

68. September 21, 2022. “Planning Commission Agenda.” Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us//planning/plnmeetings/ASP/Display/ASP X/DisplayAgenda.aspx?MeetingDate=9/21/2022&MeetingType=1&bgcolor=whit e&HighLight=1&SearchText=mixed%20use%20zoning%20map

69. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 31 of 38

70. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

71. Feb. 9, 2016. County Housing Element Chapter 4 of the Santa Cruz County General Plan. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.sccoplanning.com/Portals/2/County/Planning/housing/Housing%20 Element%20Approved%204.28.16%20for%20web.pdf

72. Ethan Varian. March 26, 2023. “YIMBYs Support Slow Build Measure.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=7c 137528-f0d4-4044-bfbc-0c2d9126b19f&appcode=SAN252&eguid=fa3472c6-c6 d8-45cd-a33c-93943d1a5f13&pnum=2#

73. Jesse Kathan. February 3, 2023. “Ocean Street Apartment Plans Revised in Santa Cruz.” Santa Cruz Local. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://santacruzlocal.org/2023/02/03/ocean-street-apartment-plans-revised-insanta-cruz/

74. Aric Sleeper. February 10, 2023. “Ocean Street Housing Development Gets a Fresh Start.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2023/02/10/ocean-street-housing-developm ent-gets-a-fresh-start/

75. 2023. California Legislative Information website. Accessed 4/24/2023. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/home.xhtml
Additional Resources Not Cited in the Report
Aldo Toledo. “Community College District Opens New Staff Housing.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=72983 6f7-99f7-4ee8-909d-4e39654bfb04&appcode=SAN252&eguid=f25f747a-b0ed-41d 6-b324-0803e169fa83&pnum=36#
Jones Lang LaSalle IP Inc. October 4, 2021. Cabrillo College Housing Demand and Feasibility Study. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/cabrillo/Board.nsf/files/C7BQKA695895/$file/Cabrillo %20Oct%20BOT%20meeting%20FINAL.pdf
Aric Sleeper. January 2023. “Council Attempts to Make Expansion More Palatable.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=82faa 2ff-bc32-48c8-9c98-c1bcb34f93e8&appcode=SAN180&eguid=e212ce6c-1289-466 5-89b6-53752c3f4f18&pnum=18#
Ethan Varian. October 3, 2022. “Build More Housing to Ease Crisis? Poll Shows How Bay Area Residents Resist.” San Jose Mercury News. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/10/03/build-more-housing-to-ease-crisis-poll-s hows-how-bay-area-residents-resist/
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 32 of 38

George Avalos. January 2023. “Developer Proposes Affordable Homes, Self Storage Complex to be Constructed Near 3 Schools.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.as Dustin D. Peterson. September 30, 2022. 2022's New State Housing Laws. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.ceqachronicles.com/2022/09/2022s-new-state-housing-laws/px?guid=f bcb5707-5ddd-4480-94a0-5ea0516acced&appcode=SAN252&eguid=baef90d7-9b 07-4689-a0b7-6b244925c548&pnum=26#
Aric Sleeper. February 3, 2023. “Renewed Housing Projects Announced.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=25c62 e5e-90e9-4a8a-a575-119605e05039&appcode=SAN180&eguid=d3c79ecb-9eff-47 94-a2d6-b0e6af2a8782&pnum=16#
Santa Clara 2021 Civil Grand Jury. December 16, 2021. Affordable Housing: A Tale of Two Cities. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2021/Affordable%20Housing%20 Final%20Report.pdf
2021-22 Marin County Civil Grand Jury. June 24, 2022. Affordable Housing: Time for Collaboration in Marin. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://www.marincounty.org/-/media/files/departments/gj/reports-responses/2021- 22/affordable-housing--time-for-collaboration-in-marin.pdf?la=en P. K. Hattis. February 4, 2023. “Cabrillo College Finds Partners for Housing Projects.” Santa Cruz Sentinel. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=1fdfa0 01-0594-456d-bbc8-e11acf4bef14&appcode=SAN180&eguid=25d49b41-9e1b-4dd 8-ac24-a084778e6494&pnum=4#
Ethan Varian and Aldo Toledo. February 15, 2023. “Why is State Pushing the Bay Area for New Homes?.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023. https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=37627 b87-e5a5-40e4-a01b-6de14fc0878d&appcode=SAN252&eguid=2ab6247b-e633-4 239-ad96-c9b7e6645966&pnum=4#
Marisa Kendall. March 5, 2023. “Housing Still Lags in Spite of Laws.” Bay Area News Group. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=b0ccf d52-6785-42cf-ae69-f69c422a4a45&appcode=SAN252&eguid=9da05b09-3f38-4f6 9-97a6-8b175d857db5&pnum=4#
Marisa Kendall. March 9, 2023. “Teacher Housing on Apple Owned Site?.” San Jose Mercury News. Accessed March 28, 2023.
https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=17acc 690-d3be-4c76-9062-190f0bea96d5&appcode=SAN252&eguid=d1e21bfa-afe5-45 60-b978-489cc0b89ee3&pnum=2#
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 33 of 38

Appendix A – Progress on 5th Housing Cycle[29]
City of Santa Cruz
City of Watsonville
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 34 of 38

Unincorporated Santa Cruz County
City of Capitola
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 35 of 38

City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 36 of 38

Appendix B – Summary of State Housing Laws
The descriptions given below paraphrase the legal definitions found on the California Legislative Information website.[75] Search for Prop 13 under the “California Law” tab and the rest under the “Bill Information” tab.

Law Description
PROP 13
(1978)
Under Proposition 13, property tax assessments can increase by no more than 2% each year, and property tax rates are limited to 1% of the assessed value (plus additional voter-approved taxes). After Proposition 13, all California properties—even vacant ones—are taxed based on the original purchase price, not their current value.

SB 35
(2017)
In 2017, Governor Brown signed into law Senate Bill (SB) 35 as part of a package of bills created to address California's housing shortage. This law provides a streamlined review process for eligible multifamily projects in cities and counties that have not built their share of housing to accommodate the region's population growth.

AB 1771
(2018)
AB 1771 revises statutory objectives of RHNA plan to include an AFFH requirement, to address disparities in housing needs and access to opportunity. Also requires improved regional jobs-housing relationship, and allocates lower proportion of housing need to jurisdictions already disproportionately high in any income category.

SB 330
(2019)
SB 330 allows accessory dwelling units and further accelerates the permitting process. Only five public hearings may be called for a housing project. Cities cannot raise fees or change permit requirements if the applicant has submitted all necessary documents. Building standards cannot be changed after submittal, nor can projects be downzoned.

SB 8
(2021)
SB 8 is a follow-up SB 330, which extended the streamlined review process. SB 330 was set to expire in 2025. SB 8 now extends that sunset to 2030. SB 8 also clarifies language in SB 330 to further streamline the creation of housing and protect low-income tenants against displacement.

SB 10
(2021)
SB 10 allows cities to rezone a parcel for smaller developments of up to 10 units and streamline government permitting in urban infill or areas near transit. By enabling cities to increase the density of these lots up to 10 units without triggering an environmental review, this bill makes it easier to build housing.

AB 215
(2021)
AB 215 requires the state to check in with cities and come up with a game plan if they are not on track to meet their RHNA numbers.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 37 of 38

Law Description
AB 2345
(2021)
Amends the Density Bonus Law to expand and enhance development incentives for projects with affordable and senior housing components.

Under the Density Bonus Law, developers are entitled to a density bonus corresponding to specified percentages of units set aside for very low income, low-income, or moderate-income households. AB 2345 amends the Density Bonus Law to increase the maximum density bonus from thirty-five percent (35%) to fifty percent (50%).

SB 6
(2022)
SB 6 allows housing to be built in underutilized commercial sites currently zoned for retail, office, and parking uses. SB 6 gives local governments the option for an expedited development process to avoid the property remaining vacant.

SB 9
(9/2022)
SB 9 allows lot splits and/or the development of duplexes on single-familyzoned parcels to be approved ministerially (i.e., without discretionary approval or hearings) if certain requirements are met. Consequently, such projects bypass the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.

Theoretically, this allows for up to four residences where there was historically only one (if an applicant receives ministerial approval for both a lot split and the development of duplexes on each parcel).

AB 2011
(2022)
This legislation allows for ministerial, by-right approval for affordable housing to be built in infill areas currently zoned for office, retail, and parking uses. Also allows such approvals for mixed-income housing along commercial corridors, as long as the projects meet specified affordability, labor, and environmental criteria.

Housing Our Workers published June 2, 2023 Page 38 of 38

Housing Our Workers Published on June 2, 2023 Page 1 of 13 The 2022–2023 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Invites the
City of Scotts Valley
to Respond by August 31, 2023
to the Findings and Recommendations listed below
which were assigned to them in the report titled
Housing Our Workers
Essential Workers Need Affordable Housing!
Responses are invited from appointed agency and department heads, appointed committees, and non-profit agencies contracted to the county which are investigated by the grand jury. You are not required to respond by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c); if you do, PC §933(c) requires you to make your response available to the public.

If you choose to respond, your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in the report.

Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 2 of 13 Instructions for Respondents
Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations.

Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05:

1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information:
a. AGREE with the Finding, or
b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why.

2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information:
a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable.

3. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both
The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati [email protected] and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury [email protected].

If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to [email protected].

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 3 of 13 Findings
F1. While all city and county planning departments have demonstrated a good understanding of the new State housing laws and the need to facilitate more housing, the failure to do so in a timely manner has served to further decrease the availability of housing and further increase the need and cost of more housing.
__ AGREE
_X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

With respect to Scotts Valley, the City follows all new State housing laws and will continue to facilitate housing production under such laws. With the many annual housing bills, cities and developers alike must be diligent in understanding the latest legislative changes. The City will continue to stay knowledgeable about the latest legislative changes, interpretations, and case law. It is unclear in the wording of this finding what the “failure to do so” refers to. The City has not taken action to “decrease the availability of housing” and the “need and cost of more housing” are primarily driven by market forces, not City actions.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 4 of 13 F9. The City of Scotts Valley has facilitated the building of market rate housing in recent years, but has made little effort to develop housing for low income workers.
__ AGREE
_X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Historically, the City had more tools to encourage and facilitate affordable housing but with the elimination of the Redevelopment Agency, those funds have been significantly reduced. The City works closely with housing developers to encourage more diversity in the City’s overall housing inventory, including more rentals, multifamily, mixed use, and smaller units. Chapter 14 of the Scotts Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) outlines the City’s inclusionary zoning requirements that apply to the production of both market rate and below market rate housing production. Residential developments of seven or more dwelling units are required to deed restrict 15 percent of the units for sale/rental to low income households on- or off-site. Residential developments of six or fewer dwelling units are required to pay an in-lieu affordable housing fee. As such, new residential development projects of seven or greater units are required to provide affordable housing for low-income workers. The City’s Affordable Housing Subcommittee reviews proposed housing projects and often advocates for even more low and very-low affordable units.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 5 of 13 F10. The City of Scotts Valley has made little progress towards developing the Town Square project which could accommodate both business and housing.
__ AGREE
_X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The development of Town Center has faced a complex set of challenges, many of which are outside of the City’s control. For the last two years, the City has been actively engaged in characterizing and removing environmental contamination from the site and has initiated a Town Center Specific Plan update to encourage the development of the Town Center. The site continues to be included in the City’s Housing Element and in the most recent draft, the number of housing units is proposed to increased significantly which should improve the economic viability of the project.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 6 of 13 F11. The City of Scotts Valley claims to have significantly fewer resources to attract housing planners and builders than do the bigger municipalities of Santa Cruz, Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz, but that does not mean the City should be exempt from the need to construct housing for local low income workers.
_X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The City agrees that smaller jurisdictions have fewer resources to attract affordable housing developers. Scotts Valley has never claimed to be exempt from the need for housing and continues to be committed to encouraging the construction of housing for local low income workers. However, the City does not construct housing nor can the City compel private property owners to develop properties. (Please see responses to F9 above F12 below)

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 7 of 13 F12. While all local municipalities have voiced support for prioritizing housing for local workers, only some of them have clear local preference guidelines that give some priority to local workers. Without clear guidelines and incentives, new housing is more likely to be purchased by those who do not live and work here.
_X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The City agrees that clear local preference guidelines that give priority to local workers is important and thus has a preference system to ensure residents and workers are prioritized. Applicants are prioritized in the order listed below:

1. Live and work in Scotts Valley: A household which includes at least one adult whose primary work location is within the city limits of the City of Scotts Valley and they have been working in Scotts Valley for a minimum of six (6) months, and the household has resided in the City of Scotts Valley for a minimum of six (6) months prior to the date of application to purchase the unit.

2. Live in Scotts Valley: A household which has resided within the city limits of the City of Scotts Valley for a minimum of six (6) months prior to the date of application to purchase the unit.

3. Work in Scotts Valley: A household which includes at least one (1) adult who has worked within the city limits of the City of Scotts Valley for a minimum of one (1) year prior to the application to purchase the unit and at least one (1) adult shall be working in Scotts Valley at the time of occupancy of the unit.

4. Live and work in Santa Cruz County: A household which contains at least one (1) adult who works within the County of Santa Cruz and the household has resided in the County of Santa Cruz for a minimum of one (1) year prior to the date of application to purchase the unit.

5. Live in Santa Cruz County: A household which has resided in the County of Santa Cruz for a minimum of six (6) months prior to the date of application to purchase the unit.

6. Work in Santa Cruz County: A household which includes at least one (1) adult has worked in the County of Santa Cruz for a minimum of one (1) year prior to the date of application to rent the unit and at least one (1) adult shall be working in the county of Santa Cruz at the time of occupancy of the unit.

7. All Others: A household which does not meet any of the above listed Preference Criteria.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 8 of 13 Historically most affordable housing units are purchased or rented by persons in the top 3 ranking categories.

F13. All municipalities are trying to identify and facilitate the building of housing projects, but most of that is done independently of the other municipalities or with outside partners. Since workforce housing and transportation gridlock is a county-wide problem, all county municipalities need to work more closely together and with property owners to develop housing solutions.
__ AGREE
_X_ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Representatives from the different jurisdictions regularly learn from one another and collaborate on the best ways to grow across the region, particularly when it comes to planning for and requiring increased densities in areas close to transit and other daily needs. Individual projects are typically best handled by the jurisdiction in which they are located.

Planning Directors throughout the County also meet at least five times per year to collaborate on housing and other related issues. The Planning Department staff from countywide jurisdictions also collaborate through AMBAG meetings, trainings, discussions of state legislation, joint presentations, and various other communication streams.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 9 of 13 Recommendations
R6. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should identify enough parcels of land, zoned appropriately, to meet the new RHNA housing allocations for all income levels, especially low income housing. (F9)
_X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The City has submitted a draft of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. The City plans to adopt the Housing Element by December 2023. The draft Housing Element includes a sites inventory/analysis and draft housing policy program which adequately plans for and accommodates its RHNA obligation. The policy program provides various strategies to assist the City in planning for additional low income housing units.

The draft sites inventory/analysis identifies enough parcels of land, zoned appropriately, for the City to meet its RHNA housing allocation of 1,220 housing units The inventory includes adequate capacity to meet RHNA allocations at all income levels (very-low, low, moderate, and above moderate).

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 10 of 13 R7. By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should show significant progress towards planning and facilitating the construction of mixed use businesses and housing on identified parcels of land in the City. (F10) _X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The City has recently approved mixed use projects and continues to be committed to processing mixed use development applications. The City has submitted a draft of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. The City plans to adopt the Housing Element by December 2023. The draft Housing Element includes a sites inventory analysis and housing policy program so that the City can adequately plan for and accommodate its RHNA obligation.

Some draft strategies include rezoning specific parcels along Scotts Valley Drive and Mount Hermon Road to allow mixed use residential development projects at higher residential densities.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 11 of 13 R8. By the end of 2023, the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate a plan to work with other county municipalities as well as other for profit and non-profit agencies to develop low income housing for workers in the City. (F9 – F11) _X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

Planning Directors from throughout the County meet regularly to collaborate on housing and other related issues. The Planning Department staff from the countywide jurisdictions also collaborate through AMBAG meetings, trainings, discussions of state legislation, joint presentations, and various other communication streams. While the City has created incentives to facilitate development, and helped facilitate discussions among property owners, the City is not able to compel private property owners to develop properties. The City will continue to maintain relationships with for profit and non-profit agencies to develop low income housing for workers in the City.

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 12 of 13 R9. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should develop clear, measureable guidelines to ensure that local preference is given to local workers in the construction of low income housing. (F12) _X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

Note that the wording of this recommendation is a bit confusing. For purposes of this response, it has been interpreted to mean that local workers should be preferred when it comes to their ability to buy or rent low-income housing, the City has regulations in place to achieve that goal (Please see Response F12).

Invited Response from the City of Scotts Valley
Housing Our Workers Due by August 31, 2023 Page 13 of 13 R10. By the end of 2023 the City of Scotts Valley should demonstrate that they have reestablished regular meetings of a workgroup or other entity that would allow planners from all 5 county jurisdictions to share ideas on housing development and develop joint projects. (F13)
_X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

Planning Directors throughout the County meet at least five times per year to collaborate on housing and other related issues. The Planning Department staff from countywide jurisdictions also collaborate through the AMBAG meetings, trainings, discussions of state legislation, joint presentations, and various other communication streams.

Honoring Commitments to the Public
County Agency Actions in Response to
2019–2020 Grand Jury Recommendations
Summary
The 2022–2023 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury reviewed local government responses to five of the nine 2019–2020 Grand Jury reports to determine whether local government officials honored their commitments in compliance with California Penal Code 933.05. The reports reviewed were: DeLaveaga Golf Course; Fail in the Jail; Homelessness: Big Problem, Little Progress; The Tangled Web; and Voter Data. The Grand Jury evaluated whether the agencies followed through with the commitments made in these reports.

The Grand Jury also reviewed Ready? Aim? Fire!; however, follow-up responses to this 2019-2020 investigation were not pursued, since over the past three years there has been a major wildfire and three more fire-related Grand Jury investigations.

The value of the Grand Jury’s reports is realized when government agencies apply the recommendations to improve transparency and efficiency for county residents.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 1 of 21

Table of Contents
Summary 1
Background 3
Scope and Methodology 3
Investigations 4

1. DeLaveaga Golf Course 4

2. Fail in the Jail 6

3. Homelessness: Big Problem, Little Progress 7

4. Tangled Web 9

5. Voter Data 12
Notable Missing Responses 14
Conclusion 14
Findings and Recommendations 15
General 15
DeLaveaga Golf Course 15
Fail in the Jail 15
Homelessness 16
Tangled Web 16
Voter Data 17
Required Responses 17
Definitions 17
Sources 18
References 18
Appendix A 21
Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 2 of 21

Background
Each year the Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury (Grand Jury) investigates local government operations and issues reports with the goals of improving government efficiency and effectiveness, and promoting accountability and transparency. The Grand Jury reports make recommendations for improvements. When called for in the report, elected local government officials are required to respond to the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.

Each investigated organization receives a copy of the Grand Jury’s report and a response packet that includes the instructions shown in Appendix A. They send their responses to the presiding judge of the Superior Court with a copy to the Grand Jury.

Elected officials must respond within 60 days and governing bodies are required to respond within 90 days.

Only governing bodies and “elected county officers or agency heads” are required to respond to Grand Jury reports.[1] There is no requirement that any individual other than an elected official respond. However, the Grand Jury may invite a response from other “responsible officers” such as the chief administrative officer of a government function.

Readers interested in a more comprehensive look at the Grand Jury reports and responses are encouraged to read the original reports and responses. All may be found on the County’s Grand Jury web page in the Reports section.[2] Scope and Methodology
For this Honoring Commitments report, the 2022-2023 Grand Jury reviewed responses to the following five 2019-2020 reports:
● DeLaveaga Golf Course–How City Policies and Practices Have Affected the Bottom Line
● Fail in the Jail–No Lights, No Camera, No Action?
● Homelessness: Big Problem, Little Progress–It's Time To Think Outside The Box
● The Tangled Web–Oh, What a Mangled Web We Weave...
● Voter Data–Registering Concerns–Keeping a Closer Eye on the Distribution of County Voter Registration Data
The 2022-2023 Grand Jury has followed up with the responding agencies for some of the above reports. This report summarizes the government responses to each report's recommendations that fell under the categories “Has Not Been Implemented but Will Be Implemented in the Future” and “Requires Further Analysis.” The Grand Jury wanted to know whether the agencies actually did implement recommendations that they said they would in the future, or that they did the further analysis and what its outcome was.

Without follow-up, these are the most susceptible to falling by the wayside and dropping out of public view.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 3 of 21

Each report section that follows covers the key findings and recommendations that we evaluated. Each section then describes the local agency commitments and actions taken to address those findings and recommendations.

Investigations
The Key Findings and Key Recommendations sections within the below investigations provide context for the Response section. The Response section describes agency responses to the investigation report, including recent agency actions. Findings and recommendations where the agencies said they had already implemented, or declined to take action, or which do not seem to the Grand Jury to be critical to improving government functions at this time, are not included.

1. DeLaveaga Golf Course[3]
Summary: The 2019-2020 Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury investigated the history, governance, use, costs and revenue related to the City of Santa Cruz’s DeLaveaga Golf Course. The Grand Jury’s intention was to provide insight and clarity on fiscal responsibility along with recommendations for improvements to City of Santa Cruz management of the DeLaveaga Golf Course.

Key 2020 Findings:

F4. The City of Santa Cruz’s failure to conduct thorough, regular on-site inspections of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge resulted in excessive renovation costs to the City of Santa Cruz. This contributed to more than doubling the original estimates to bring the building up to code.

F5. The new draft Operations Plan lacks the necessary robustness to communicate how major golf course operations will be managed at DeLaveaga Golf Course, including but not limited to facility inspections, water use policies, variable pricing policies, charitable policies, operations review, and basic roles, responsibilities, and authority.

Key 2020 Recommendations:

R5. The City of Santa Cruz City Manager should perform a lessons learned activity and then update the City’s relevant policies and operating procedures to avoid a future repeat of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge shutdown and renovation no later than second quarter 2021. (F4) R6. The City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation Department and the City of Santa Cruz City Manager should add a formal process to the Operation Plan by addressing needed capital improvements, maintenance schedules, facility inspections, water use, variable pricing, charitable policies, operations review, and basic stakeholder roles and responsibilities. Stakeholders include the Santa Cruz City Council, the City’s Parks and Recreation Department, the City’s Parks & Recreation Commission, the Operator, the DeLaveaga Golf Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 4 of 21

Course Superintendent, the City’s Building Department and the City’s Public Works Department. (F5)
Requested 2020 Responses:
[4]
The City of Santa Cruz partially disagreed with Finding 4 as related to Recommendation 5, that there was a failure to conduct thorough, regular on-site inspections of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge, resulting in excessive renovation costs to the City of Santa Cruz. This contributed to more than doubling the original estimates to bring the building up to code. They stated that many of the issues discovered during the golf lodge renovation were interior to the building (e.g. electrical, plumbing, rotting wood, etc.). These issues were not evident in general facility inspections. The fundamental cause of the facility issues and exorbitant costs to renovate was a lack of ongoing capital improvement investment into the building over time. Due to limitations of City budgets, and to some degree, the local political will to invest in the golf course, funding was not sufficiently appropriated to maintain the golf lodge over time. Therefore, the result was a costly repair due to years of virtually no maintenance.

The City of Santa Cruz stated that this is an important lesson as other facilities at the golf course including the maintenance facility, golf cart barn, and driving range, among others, are in desperate need of investment. Otherwise they may face similarly expensive capital needs in the future. This is also true of many City-owned buildings such as the Civic Auditorium, Public Works Corp Yard and the Parks Yard, Market Street Senior Center, Harvey West Park facilities, and many more. Investment in an aging portfolio of City-owned assets is critical for the future.

Regarding Finding 5, as related to Recommendation 6, the City of Santa Cruz felt that they needed further analysis on whether or not the City Manager should perform a lessons learned activity and then update the City’s relevant policies and operating procedures to avoid a future repeat of the DeLaveaga Golf Course’s restaurant/lodge shutdown and renovation no later than second quarter 2021. The City of Santa Cruz stated that as of July 2020, there are no specific plans to do this, although it would be a helpful exercise and the Parks and Recreation Department would support it. The Parks and Recreation Department responded, indicating it would discuss with the City Manager’s Office a plan to chart a course of action related to this recommendation before the end of calendar year 2020.
2022-2023 Update: Were Commitments Kept?
In response to this jury’s request for an update, the Parks and Recreation Department indicated budgeting, and the Santa Cruz City Council approved funding to assess facilities and develop a long-term Capital Investment Plan as outlined in Budget, Fiscal Years 2023-2027.[5] Additionally, the City Council appropriated funding for critical infrastructure and facility upgrades in FY 2023.[6] The Parks and Recreation Department will initiate these projects in 2023. The completion of the study is estimated to be in June 2023, and the improvements to the driving range and golf course assets are estimated to be in October 2023.[7]
Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 5 of 21

2. Fail in the Jail[8]
Summary: On September 28, 2019 an unplanned power failure at the Santa Cruz County Main Jail resulted in the loss of critical capability to provide safe and secure operation of the jail. While the risks were known well in advance of the failure event, steps to manage and mitigate the risks were not taken. Established, comprehensive policies for management in a power failure emergency were in place, but those policies were not followed. Evidence of process improvement and risk management practice after the event was lacking.

Key 2020 Findings:

F3. While an emergency generator has been procured, adequate testing of methods of connection and operation has not been done yet.

F5. The County was non-compliant with policy regarding emergency power backup at the jail and remained non-compliant for months, including fueling, maintenance, testing, and emergency backup power generation.

Key 2020 Recommendations:

See below under “2022-2023 Update: Were Commitments Kept?” Requested 2020 Responses:
[9]
The Santa Cruz County Sheriff/Coroner agreed with Finding 5. They had previously requested that this work be done by the Santa Cruz County’s General Services Department. The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors also agreed with Finding 5. 2022-2023 Update: Were Commitments Kept?
There was no specific recommendation to upgrade the existing generator system to power all of the areas critical to ensure safe and secure operation of the jail during an unexpected power outage, but it was confirmed during our 2022 jail tour that a new generator was purchased in 2020 with an estimate of 1 to 1 ½ years to have it installed and operational. However, due to component shortages resulting from COVID/supply chain issues, the new generator system will not be operational until May or June of 2023.[10] They stated that the old generator should have enough power to operate a good portion of the facility.
[11] While it will not fully power the facility, certain functions have been prioritized to receive generator power to minimize any risk to both inmates and staff. For security reasons, they did not want to identify any specific vulnerabilities.

The new generator will have much more capacity. They are in constant communication with the County and subcontractors to prioritize this project. Therefore, they are working toward keeping their commitment on improving their functionality during an unexpected power outage to provide safe and secure operation of the jail.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 6 of 21

3. Homelessness: Big Problem, Little Progress[12]
Summary: The 2019-2020 Santa Cruz Civil Grand Jury investigated the County’s response to homelessness. The report highlighted the considerable money, time and effort devoted to reducing the County’s ever-growing number of homeless persons, and the lack of real progress towards solutions. Most of the recommendations in this report received the Response “Will Not Be Implemented”. This year’s Civil Grand Jury decided to examine two recommendations that received mostly “Requires Further Analysis” responses. It should be noted that since the 2019-2020 report was written, much has happened on the homelessness issue, including a $14.5 million grant in 2021 to the City of Santa Cruz to improve and expand services to people experiencing homelessness.

This changes the landscape and overtakes some of the report’s recommendations.

In several cases, the responses were not compliant. It is also clear the various agencies coordinated their responses, with several identical explanations provided.

Key 2020 Findings:

F12. There are parcels of land throughout the county that appear to be unused or underutilized, and could possibly be used to build housing for the homeless.

F21. If underutilized parcels of land throughout Santa Cruz County were identified, such as the area near Coral Street in Santa Cruz and the parcel adjacent to the County Mental Health Building in Watsonville, these parcels could potentially be used to increase the number of beds and services to support the homeless.

Key 2020 Recommendations:

R6. The Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer (CAO) and the County’s City Managers should identify parcels of land within their jurisdictions that could be utilized to supply homeless services and/or temporary or permanent housing, and report such sites to their governing bodies by December 31, 2020. (F12) R9. By December 31, 2020, the City of Santa Cruz should evaluate whether closing Coral Street permanently to thru traffic, to make more space available for additional housing and services for the homeless, would be a viable option. (F13 was cited in the 2019-2020 Grand Jury report, but this probably should have been F12 and/or F21)
Requested 2020 Responses:
[13]
F12. The Board of Supervisors, the cities of Capitola, Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley and Watsonville, and the City Manager of Watsonville all agreed with Finding 12, that there are parcels of land throughout the County that could potentially be used to provide services to homeless people. The City Managers for Capitola, Santa Cruz and Scotts Valley responded that their responses were included in their unified response from the City Council.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 7 of 21

F21. The Board of Supervisors, the Cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville, the Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer and the Watsonville City Manager all agreed with Finding 21, that if underutilized parcels were identified, they could potentially be used to increase the number of beds and services to support homeless people. The Cities of Capitola and Scotts Valley partially disagreed, saying that zoning may not allow such use. Using identical text for their explanation for their responses, they both describe the partnership between the County, the City of Santa Cruz and Housing Matters to evaluate potential reconfiguration and expansion of the services for homeless people provided around Coral Street. The Human Services Agency and the planning Department responded that their input was included with the CAO response. The city managers of Santa Cruz, Capitola and Scotts Valley responded that their responses were included in their unified response from the City Council.

R6. The only required response to Recommendation 6 was from the Board of Supervisors. They responded that the recommendation required further analysis, questioning the feasibility of the approximate three month timeline to identify parcels of land suitable for temporary or permanent housing for homeless people.

Responses to Recommendation 6 were requested from the Santa Cruz County Administrative Officer, the Santa Cruz County Human Services Agency, and the city managers of the four Santa Cruz cities. Of these, the CAO provided the same response, using the same text as the BoS’s required response described above. The HSA responded that their input was included with the CAO response. The city managers of Santa Cruz, Capitola and Scotts Valley responded that their responses were included in their unified response from the City Council. The Grand Jury noted that the City Councils were not assigned R6 and thus we do not have a response from these city managers. The Watsonville City Manager responded that R6 ‘Requires Further Analysis” and gave an explanation that they have 416 acres of land zoned for potential shelters or housing. They did not indicate any ongoing effort to provide shelters or housing for homeless people.

R9. Responses to Recommendation 9 were required from the Board of Supervisors, and the four City Councils. The BoS provided no response to Recommendation 9. The City of Santa Cruz responded that the recommendation requires further analysis, with the explanation that the City, County and Housing Matters are working collaboratively to evaluate increasing access to services and shelter on Coral Street and adjacent private property. The Cities of Capitola and Scotts Valley also responded that the recommendation requires further analysis, using the same text as the City of Santa Cruz to describe collaboration with Housing Matters. They further add they have no authority over Coral Street, which is within Santa Cruz City limits. Watsonville responded “Will not be Implemented” with the explanation that the recommendation is not within their jurisdiction.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 8 of 21

2022-2023 Update: Were Commitments Kept?
R6. In March 2021, the Board of Supervisors adopted a “Three Year Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness” which includes consideration of using county-owned and unincorporated county areas for temporary housing for the homeless.[14] The plan calls for 600 emergency shelter and transitional housing beds, 120 of which would be in unincorporated county areas. Santa Cruz Local’s article on the plan refers to the Civil Grand Jury’s recommendation to identify suitable unincorporated parcels, but it is not clear if the Jury’s recommendation influenced creation or adoption of the plan.[15] In March 2022, The Santa Cruz City Council unanimously approved the “Homelessness Action Plan” which aims to eliminate unsanctioned homeless camps and move people to managed shelters in the city and throughout the County. [16] The plan calls for
collaboration with leaders from the County of Santa Cruz, and the Cities of Watsonville, Scotts Valley and Capitola to identify 20 new locations for shelters across the county. [17]
Again, whether the Grand Jury’s recommendation influenced this is unknown.

R9. The City of Santa Cruz is currently working on a Master Plan for Coral Street including newly acquired property, the existing shelters and housing, and the planned “Harvey West Project” of 120 units of supportive housing.[18]In December 2022, the City held a “Community Design Charrette” to solicit input on the Coral Street Master Plan.

This included a group discussion of limiting vehicle access to Coral Street, and a suggestion to build a pedestrian and bicycle overpass bridge over it.[19] The Grand Jury assumes that the Master Plan preempts any recommendation to close Coral Street, but hopes that suggestions such as limiting vehicle access or building a bridge be considered as part of the Master Plan.

4. Tangled Web[20]
Summary: The public relies on current, accurate information to conduct its business with government agencies and offices. When the 2019-2020 Grand Jury accessed county and city websites to gather data and contact government officials, they found that website information was sometimes inaccurate and out-of-date. In fulfilling our charter as an advocate for the public to improve government operations, they pointed out where these errors exist and directed those responsible to provide an up-to-date and accurate information platform to the public.

Key 2020 Findings:

F1. County and City website information is sometimes missing, out-of-date, and inaccurate; links may be broken. Thus, many city and county departments aren't updating their websites often enough to keep citizens informed.

F2. County and City administrations lack a process to review content accuracy and currency and thereby assure timely correction and revision of content.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 9 of 21

F3. County and City goals for website redesign or quality improvement are not sufficiently “SMART”: Specific + Measurable + Attainable + Relevant + Time-Bound.

F4. The County does not have a notification system by which users can be alerted to updated web content. The County's website would be enhanced by the addition of a site-wide notification system.

F5. County and City website content providers do not provide an explanation in content for incorrect or out-of-date information, even though they appear to know the reasons.

Key 2020 Recommendations:

R1. The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. (F1, F2, F5) R3. The County Administrative Officer and the City Managers should establish ‘SMART’ goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021. (F3, F4, F5)
Requested 2020 Responses:
[21]
City of Capitola
The City of Capitola partially disagreed with Findings 1, 2, and 3. They update information on a regular basis. There have been occasions when old data did not get removed after updated data was added. Stale and inaccurate data is corrected and replaced whenever found. The City is in the process of updating its website platform to make this task easier for departments. They also stated that SMART (Specific + Measurable + Attainable + Relevant + Time-Bound) is not a methodology that the City of Capitola has adopted.

The City of Capitola disagreed with Finding 5.They stated that If data is determined to be incorrect or out-of-date, they remove or correct the data. The City does not knowingly keep incorrect or out-of-date information on the City website.

The City of Capitola, addressing Recommendation 1, agreed to implement in the future a formal process by December 31, 2020, for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information.

Regarding Recommendation 3 the City of Capitola felt that establishing SMART goals for website quality assurance and managing these goals beginning in 2021 needed further analysis.

City of Santa Cruz
The City of Santa Cruz agreed with Findings 1, 2, and 5.[22] Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 10 of 21

The City of Santa Cruz addressing Recommendation 1 agreed to implement a formal process by December 31, 2020 for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information.[22]
City of Scotts Valley
The City of Scotts Valley partially disagreed with Findings 1 and 2. The City of Scotts Valley responded in 2020 that they post all City Council, Committee and Commission agendas on the City website’s Agenda Center. Some commissions/committees meet only as needed and a committee’s last meeting may have been a year or more in the past. Thus, even though these agendas and minutes may appear out of date, the content is current. Similarly, the City maintains various plans and documents on its website and although they may be dated years in the past, the posted documents are still the most current. The City updates its website content regularly. They do not have the resources for a dedicated webmaster and staff manages the website on a departmental level. City staff reviews and updates City webpages on a regular, although not regimented, schedule.

The City of Scotts Valley partially disagreed with Finding 3. They implemented a major upgrade to their website in May 2018, moving from an antiquated website to the current, highly functional and easy-to-navigate site. The City of Scotts Valley has not adopted the formal goal paradigm of Specific + Measurable + Attainable + Relevant + Time-Bound. However, the City maintains the goal, as an operational prerequisite, to provide current, timely and useful information to the public.

The City of Scotts Valley disagreed with Finding 5. When the City identifies outdated or inaccurate information on its website, it is rectified as soon as is practically feasible.

They view their website as an important communication and engagement tool with the community and do not allow erroneous information to persist on their website.

The City of Scotts Valley felt that they needed further analysis regarding Recommendation 1, the establishment of a formal process for their departments to validate and verify the accuracy and currency of website information. They routinely update information and maintain current agendas and notices.

The City of Scotts Valley also felt that they needed further analysis regarding Recommendation 3, the establishment of SMART goals for website quality assurance and manage these goals beginning in 2021.
2022-2023 Update: Were Commitments Kept?
In response to this Grand Jury’s request for information, the City of Capitola said they kept their commitment to complete a content clean-up and overall update of their website in 2021. The website is now more logically organized, provides users with easier access to information, and is easier to update than the prior website.[23] The City of Capitola also kept their commitment to analyze the creation of SMART goals for website quality assurance, but determined that they were not necessary at this time.[23] In response to this Grand Jury’s request for information, the City of Santa Cruz said they kept their commitment to clean up their website. In December 2020 the City of Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 11 of 21

Santa Cruz coordinated with departments to do a thorough departmental website review and to edit the contents. This included checking the accuracy of the content, repairing broken links, and archiving unused contents. They also updated the City’s meeting agenda, minutes, video and audio recordings. This was completed by October 2021.[24] To maintain an updated Website, the City of Santa Cruz plans to implement a more automated way to audit the content to allow departments to edit more frequently and efficiently. It is estimated that this more automated system will be implemented in the calendar year 2023, depending on funding and staffing of their Information Technology Department. At the time of their response to our follow-up inquiry they had a 35% shortage of employees.[24]
In response to this Grand Jury’s request for information, the City of Scotts Valley said they kept their commitment to analyze Recommendations 1 and 3. Regarding recommendation 1 the City decided to redesign their website to afford transparency, accessibility, and ease of use to all stakeholders. With the goal of having as many of the processes automated as practicable, the City will have much better tools available to track website usage and functionality. Due to the COVID pandemic and staffing issues the initiation of the new website project was delayed. An improved staffing level was achieved by June 2022 and the redesign of their website was started.[25] The City is fully committed to having this completed by the spring of 2023.[26] Regarding recommendation 3, when the City of Scotts Valley developed its 2021-22 Strategic Plan in the Spring of 2021, they had a discussion of the SMART goals paradigm. Due to the upcoming redesigned website it was felt that adopting SMART goals was not necessary at this time.[26]

5. Voter Data
[27]
Summary: Data Security has become a major concern to our community. There are many articles which chronicle, in painful detail, the destruction of lives caused by the theft of millions of confidential records. The 2019-2020 Grand Jury discovered that California elections code requires county elections departments to share voter data, including a key piece of data that would assist hackers: an individual’s complete date of birth. While date of birth has not been clearly defined as personally identifiable information in the California Elections Code, date of birth is often used in identity theft, as well as social engineering and phishing attacks. State law requires each county to provide access to data collected during the voter registration and election processes.

This data contains Personally Identifiable Information (PII) as defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). There are reports of voter registration data being offered for sale on hacker websites. County election departments were recommended to examine their processes to make sure that best practices are being employed, and all precautions are being taken to ensure that voter registration data is secure.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 12 of 21

Key 2020 Findings:

F1. Risk of misuse of voter registration data acquired by ELEC_2194 (1994) could be mitigated by stronger security measures at the County of Santa Cruz level.

F2. County applicants are not informed of recent amendments to ELEC_2188 (1994), and thus may not be taking all reasonable precautions to protect voter registration data, avoid data breaches, and report breaches if they occur.

Key 2020 Recommendations:

R1. In Distributed Data that is provided to county recipients, the County Elections Department should replace voter full date of birth with year of birth only. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021.

R4. The County Elections Department should incorporate amendments to ELEC 2188 (1994), as specified in AB 1678 and AB 1044, in the county application and website information, namely that county recipients must inform the Secretary of State of a data breach, and that County Applicants may be subject to data security training.

R5. The County Elections Department should provide county applicants with data security training, consistent with any guidance from the Secretary of State, with the goal of implementing best practices aimed at protecting voter registration data. This action should be implemented before the end of FY2021.

Requested 2020 Response:

County Elections Department
The Santa Cruz County Elections Department agreed with Findings 1 and 2 in 2020.[28] The Santa Cruz County Elections Department agreed to implement in the future Recommendation 1 about replacing the voter’s full date of birth with year of birth only, Recommendation 4 regarding incorporating amendments to ELEC 2188 (1994), as specified in AB 1678 and AB 1044, in the County Application and website information, and Recommendation 5 regarding providing County Applicants with data security training, consistent with any guidance from the Secretary of State, with the goal of implementing best practices aimed at protecting voter registration data.[29] 2022 Update: Were Commitments Kept?
We sent multiple inquiries to the County Elections Department to verify that these recommendations were implemented. Unfortunately, no response was received.

Since we did not receive a response from the County Elections Department, we could not determine if the County honored the commitments made in their response to the 2019-2020 Grand Jury Report.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 13 of 21

Notable Missing Responses
Nearly all required responses to the 2019-20 investigative reports were submitted to the Grand Jury; the Board of Supervisors’ required response on the Homelessness Investigation Recommendation 9 on evaluating closure of Coral Street was the lone exception. Far fewer invited responses were received. In many cases, the agency the response was invited from said their response was included with a required response.

Thus some invited responses were missed because the agency providing the response was not invited to respond to each finding and recommendation. Additionally, there was evident coordination of responses from some agencies. This Grand Jury believes the public would be better served by the agencies providing their own responses to our recommendations rather than saying their response was given by others, or colluding to provide duplicates.

This Grand Jury made several attempts to ascertain whether the Elections Department had implemented the recommendations they said they would implement, but received no response.

Conclusion
The 2022-2023 Grand Jury reviewed responses to five of the 2019-2020 reports and found that, in general, commitments were kept. In some cases, the agencies are implementing recommendations but it’s not clear if the actions are in response to the Grand Jury or whether they were instigated by the agencies.

The Grand Jury also reviewed Ready? Aim? Fire!, however we did not evaluate whether commitments were kept. Over the past three years there have been a major wildfire and three other fire-related investigations;[30] [31]therefore, it would be difficult to gauge whether or not the studied entities fulfilled any of the recommendations specifically from the 2019-2020 Grand Jury report.

The Grand Jury continues to recommend that all organizations create and regularly update formal records of the actions they take to address Grand Jury recommendations, and to share those records with the public, in accordance with CA Penal Code Section 933(c).[32]
Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 14 of 21

Findings and Recommendations
General
Findings
F1. The 2022-2023 Grand Jury reviewed responses to five of the 2019-2020 reports and found that, in general, commitments were kept.

F2. The evident coordination of responses from agencies leaves the public without independent contributions across agencies.

Recommendations
R1. All agencies should provide their own independent responses to findings and recommendations instead of referring to the response of another agency. (F2) R2. We continue to recommend that all organizations create and regularly update formal records of the actions they take to address Grand Jury recommendations, and to share those records with the public, in accordance with CA Penal Code Section 933(c). (F1, F2)
DeLaveaga Golf Course
Finding
F3. The City of Santa Cruz delayed the timeline rather than proceeding as outlined in their 2020 response to the Grand Jury. Instead, the City budgeted for a more comprehensive assessment of system-wide facilities and a capital investment plan to be completed in 2023.

Recommendation
R3. The City of Santa Cruz should report to the Grand Jury on the completion status of the Facilities Assessment and capital investment plan no later than December 31, 2023. (F3)
Fail in the Jail
Finding
F4. The safe and secure operation of the County Jail remains vulnerable during an unexpected power outage.

Recommendation
R4. The Santa Cruz County Sheriff should verify that the new generator system is operational by August 31, 2023. If not, the reasons for the further delay should be explained. (F4)
Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 15 of 21

Homelessness
Findings
F5. The adoption of multi-year plans by both the City and County of Santa Cruz offer the public some assurance that locations can be found within the County where homeless services will be provided.

F6. Although the Cities of Capitola, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville agreed that there appear to be unused or underutilized parcels of land that could possibly be used for homeless services, it is not clear how this could be done.

F7. The master plan for Coral Street being worked by the City of Santa Cruz includes consideration of limiting vehicle access to Coral Street, but the grants received by the City and the plan to build 120 units of supportive housing preempt the original Grand Jury recommendation to consider closing it.

Recommendations
R5. As recommended in the 2022 “Homelessness Action Plan,” the Cities of Capitola, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville should collaborate with leaders from the County of Santa Cruz and the City of Santa Cruz to identify 20 new locations for shelters across the county. These cities should report on the status of this recommendation no later than December 31, 2023. (F6)
R6. The County of Santa Cruz and the four cities should plan to provide services for homeless persons at the sites identified in their plans, including but not limited to supportive housing, case management, and medical services. The County of Santa Cruz and the four cities should report to the Grand Jury on the status of providing homeless services at the sites identified no later than December 31, 2023. (F5, F6)
R7. The City of Santa Cruz should complete and then implement their Master Plan for Coral Street, including consideration of limiting vehicle access. The City of Santa Cruz should report to the Grand Jury on the status of Coral Street no later than December 31, 2023. (F7)
Tangled Web
Findings
F8. Staffing shortages made automating the process for updating the website of the City of Santa Cruz and redesigning the website of the City of Scotts Valley more difficult.

Recommendations
R8. The City of Santa Cruz should verify that their commitment to automate the Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 16 of 21

process for updating their website has been completed by October 31, 2023. (F8) R9. The City of Scotts Valley should verify that their commitment to redesign their website to afford transparency, accessibility, and ease of use to all stakeholders has been completed by October 31, 2023. (F8)
Voter Data
Finding
F9. Data security is an important issue, including the security of voter registration data and it is unknown if measures have been taken in this area.

Recommendation
R10. The Santa Cruz County Clerk should outline steps that have been taken to make voter registration data more secure by September 30, 2023. (F9) Required Responses
Respondent Findings Recommendations Respond Within/
Respond By
Santa Cruz County
Board of Supervisors
F1, F2, F4, F5,
F9 R1, R2, R4, R6, R9 90 DaysSeptember 5, 2023
Santa Cruz County Sheriff F4 R4 60 Days
August 7, 2023
Santa Cruz County Clerk F9 R10 60 Days
August 7, 2023
Capitola City Council F1, F2, F6 R1, R2, R5, R6 90 Days September 5, 2023
Santa Cruz City Council F1, F2, F3, F5,
F7, F8
R1, R2, R3, R6, R7,
R8
90 Days
September 5, 2023
Scotts Valley City Council, F1, F2, F6, F8 R1, R2, R5, R6, R9 90 Days September 5, 2023
Watsonville City Council F1, F2, F6 R1, R2, R5, R6 90 Days September 5, 2023
Definitions
County Applicant: A person or persons applying to the Santa Cruz Elections Department to receive voter registration data.

County Recipient: A person or persons who have been approved by the Santa Cruz County Elections Department to receive voter registration data.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 17 of 21

Sources
References

1. Website. Penal Code 933c. “Investigation of County, City, and District Affairs [925 - 933.6].” Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum= 933.&lawCode=PEN

2. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. April 1, 2021. 2019-2020 Grand Jury Reports and Responses. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Departments/GrandJury/2019-2020GrandJuryR eportsandResponses.aspx

3. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. June 16, 2020. DeLaveaga Golf Course How City Policies and Practices Have Affected the Bottom Line.

Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/DeLa veagaGolf_Report.pdf

4. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. Sept 14, 2020. City of Santa Cruz City Council Respond to the Findings and Recommendations Specified in the Report Titled DeLaveaga Golf Course How City Policies and Practices Have Affected the Bottom Line. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/2aR_ DeLaveagaGolf_SCCityCouncil_Response.pdf#page=33

5. Confidential Grand Jury document.

6. Confidential Grand Jury document.

7. Confidential Grand Jury document.

8. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. June 19, 2020. Fail in the Jail No Lights, No Camera, No Action?. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/JailInf rastructure_Report.pdf

9. Mitchell Medina, Undersheriff. Sept 17, 2020. County of Santa Cruz Response to: Fail in the Jail: No Lights, No Camera, No Action?. Accessed May 7, 2023. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/2019- 2020ConsolidatedResponses.pdf#page=308

10. Confidential Grand Jury document.

11. Confidential Grand Jury interview.

12. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. June 30, 2020. Homelessness: Big Problem, Little Progress It's Time To Think Outside The Box. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/Micro Homes_Report.pdff
Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 18 of 21

13. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. Sept 28, 2020. 2019-2020 Consolidated Report Responses. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/2019- 2020ConsolidatedResponses.pdf#page=515

14. County of Santa Cruz
Human Services Department. “Agenda Item Submittal for June 9, 2021 Board of Supervisors Meeting.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20500357-focus-strategies-homeless -report-march-2021

15. Stephen Baxter. March 6, 2021. “County land for temporary housing included in homeless proposal.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://santacruzlocal.org/2021/03/06/county-land-for-temporary-housing-include d-in-homeless-proposal/

16. City of Santa Cruz. March 3, 2021. “City Council Agenda Report for Meeting March 8, 2022.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21352451/santa-cruz-homelessness-ac tion-plan.pdf

17. Kara Meyberg Guzman. March 9, 2022. “Santa Cruz plan for unhoused includes shelters and county coordination.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023. https://santacruzlocal.org/2022/03/09/santa-cruz-plan-for-unhoused-includes-shel ters-and-county-coordination/

18. Sarah Neuse, Senior Planner. No Date. “Coral Street Visioning Report.” Website.

Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/Home/Components/Topic/Topic/11943/

19. Jessica A. York. December 13, 2022. “Santa Cruz gathers input on Coral Street future.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2022/12/13/santa-cruz-gathers-input-on-coral -street-future/

20. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. June 16, 2020. The Tangled Web Oh, What a Mangled Web We Weave.... Accessed May 7, 2023. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/Tangl edWeb_Report.pdf

21. Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. Sept 14, 2020. Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Respond to the Findings and Recommendations Specified in the Report Titled. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/2019- 2020ConsolidatedResponses.pdf#page=10

22. Ralph Dimarucut. Sept 14, 2020. “Santa Cruz City Council Response Packet - The Tangled Web.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/1cR_ TangledWeb_SantaCruzCityCouncil_Response.pdf#page=9

23. Confidential Grand Jury document.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 19 of 21

24. Confidential Grand Jury document.

25. Confidential Grand Jury document.

26. Confidential Grand Jury document.

27. 2019-20 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. June 19, 2020. Voter Data – Registering Concerns Keeping a Closer Eye on the Distribution of County Voter Registration Data. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/Voter Data_Report.pdf

28. David Brown, Senior Administrative Analyst. October 20, 2020. “19-20 Grand Jury Report Responses.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/6aR_ VoterData_CountyClerk_Response.pdf#page=5

29. David Brown, Senior Administrative Analyst. October 20, 2020. “19-20 Grand Jury Report Responses.” Website. Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2020_final/6aR_ VoterData_CountyClerk_Response.pdf#page=7

30. 2021-22 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. 2021. Reducing Our Community’s Risk from Wildfire It Will Take Money, Time, and Serious Cooperation. Accessed March 9, 2023.
https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2022_final/2022- 5_CZUFire_Report.pdf

31. 2020-21 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury. 2020. Wildfire Threat to the City of Santa Cruz Promote Policies to Prevent and Protect. Accessed March 9, 2023. https://www.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/Portals/0/County/GrandJury/GJ2021_final/2_City Wildfire_Report.pdf

32. Website. 933(c). “Investigation of County, City, and District Affairs [925 - 933.6].” Accessed February 23, 2023.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum= 933.&lawCode=PEN

33. Website. “Investigation of County, City, and District Affairs [925 - 933.6].” Accessed May 7, 2023.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PE N&sectionNum=933.05
Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 20 of 21

Appendix A
Instructions for Respondents
California law PC §933.05[33]requires the respondent to a Grand Jury report to comment on each finding and recommendation within a report. Explanations for disagreements and timeframes for further implementation or analysis must be provided. Please follow the format below when preparing the responses.

Response Format

1. For the Findings included in this Response Packet, select one of the following responses and provide the required additional information:
a. AGREE with the Finding, or
b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding and specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons therefor, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding and provide an explanation of the reasons therefore.

2. For the Recommendations included in this Response Packet, select one of the following actions and provide the required additional information:
a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED, with a summary regarding the implemented action, or
b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE FUTURE, with a timeframe or expected date for implementation, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for that analysis or study; this timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report, or
d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore.

Honoring 2019-2020 Commitments published June 7, 2023 Page 21 of 21

Honoring Commitments to the Public Published on June 7, 2023 Page 1 of 11 The 2022–2023 Santa Cruz County Civil Grand Jury
Requires the
Scotts Valley City Council
to Respond by September 5, 2023
to the Findings and Recommendations listed below
which were assigned to them in the report titled
Honoring Commitments to the Public
County Agency Actions in Response to
2019–2020 Grand Jury Recommendations
Responses are required from elected officials, elected agency or department heads, and elected boards, councils, and committees which are investigated by the Grand Jury. You are required to respond and to make your response available to the public by the California Penal Code (PC) §933(c).

Your response will be considered compliant under PC §933.05 if it contains an appropriate comment on all findings and recommendations which were assigned to you in this report.

Please follow the instructions below when preparing your response.

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 2 of 11 Instructions for Respondents
Your assigned Findings and Recommendations are listed on the following pages with check boxes and an expandable space for summaries, timeframes, and explanations.

Please follow these instructions, which paraphrase PC §933.05:

1. For the Findings, mark one of the following responses with an “X” and provide the required additional information:
a. AGREE with the Finding, or
b. PARTIALLY DISAGREE with the Finding – specify the portion of the Finding that is disputed and include an explanation of the reasons why, or c. DISAGREE with the Finding – provide an explanation of the reasons why.

2. For the Recommendations, mark one of the following actions with an “X” and provide the required additional information:
a. HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – provide a summary of the action taken, or b. HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – provide a timeframe or expected date for completion, or c. REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – provide an explanation, scope, and parameters of an analysis to be completed within six months, or d. WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – provide an explanation of why it is not warranted or not reasonable.

3. Please confirm the date on which you approved the assigned responses:

We approved these responses in a regular public meeting as shown in our minutes dated August 16, 2023.

4. When your responses are complete, please email your completed Response Packet as a PDF file attachment to both
The Honorable Judge Syda Cogliati [email protected] and The Santa Cruz County Grand Jury [email protected].

If you have questions about this response form, please contact the Grand Jury by calling 831-454-2099 or by sending an email to [email protected].

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 3 of 11 Findings
F1. The 2022-2023 Grand Jury reviewed responses to five of the 2019-2020 reports and found that, in general, commitments were kept. _X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 4 of 11 F2. The evident coordination of responses from agencies leaves the public without independent contributions across agencies.
__ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
_X_ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

The Scotts Valley City Council independently reviews Grand Jury reports and drafts responses to specific findings or recommendations as accurately as we can.

Depending on the topic, coordination improves the response we are able to provide.

In addition, the City Council approves responses at a public meeting where the public can weigh in on the City’s responses if they so choose to.

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 5 of 11 F6. Although the Cities of Capitola, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville agreed that there appear to be unused or underutilized parcels of land that could possibly be used for homeless services, it is not clear how this could be done.
_X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 6 of 11 F8. Staffing shortages made automating the process for updating the website of the City of Santa Cruz and redesigning the website of the City of Scotts Valley more difficult.
_X_ AGREE
__ PARTIALLY DISAGREE
__ DISAGREE
Response explanation (required for a response other than Agree):

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 7 of 11 Recommendations
R1. All agencies should provide their own independent responses to findings and recommendations instead of referring to the response of another agency. (F2) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done
__ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
_X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

There are topics that it may be appropriate for the City to refer to other agencies where another agency has responsibility regarding the topic.

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 8 of 11 R2. We continue to recommend that all organizations create and regularly update formal records of the actions they take to address Grand Jury recommendations, and to share those records with the public, in accordance with CA Penal Code Section 933(c). (F1, F2)
_X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The actions the City takes are already public records. The City’s responses are provided to the public within the timelines as required by the cited Penal Code.

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 9 of 11 R5. As recommended in the 2022 “Homelessness Action Plan,” the Cities of Capitola, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville should collaborate with leaders from the County of Santa Cruz and the City of Santa Cruz to identify 20 new locations for shelters across the county. These cities should report on the status of this recommendation no later than December 31, 2023. (F6) __ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done
__ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
_X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The 2022 Homeless Action Plan is not a Scotts Valley adopted plan, however the City is willing to collaborate and assist where possible.

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 10 of 11 R6. The County of Santa Cruz and the four cities should plan to provide services for homeless persons at the sites identified in their plans, including but not limited to supportive housing, case management, and medical services. The County of Santa Cruz and the four cities should report to the Grand Jury on the status of providing homeless services at the sites identified no later than December 31, 2023. (F5, F6)
__ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done
__ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
_X_ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The City of Scotts Valley does not have a homeless services plan. However, the City’s draft housing element includes a variety of action to address the needs of persons experiencing homelessness, or at risk for homelessness in Program H-3.9 Emergency Shelters. These programs are proposed to be implemented by January 2026.

Required Response from the Scotts Valley City Council
Honoring Commitments to the Public Due by September 5, 2023 Page 11 of 11 R9. The City of Scotts Valley should verify that their commitment to redesign their website to afford transparency, accessibility, and ease of use to all stakeholders has been completed by October 31, 2023. (F8) _X_ HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED – summarize what has been done __ HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED BUT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE – summarize what will be done and the timeframe
__ REQUIRES FURTHER ANALYSIS – explain the scope and timeframe (not to exceed six months)
__ WILL NOT BE IMPLEMENTED – explain why
Required response explanation, summary, and timeframe:

The launch of the redesigned website occurred on March 14, 2023. This redesign modernized the website layout and reorganized the homepage for transparency, accessibility, and ease of use for all stakeholders. Additionally, on May 17, 2023, a new agenda management platform was added to the website which offers significant improvements to the online processes of streamlining the meetings, agenda management, agenda publication and recording minutes. The new platform ensures transparency for residents and other stakeholders and ensures that all documents are ADA accessible.

The maintenance of the website is a priority and is completed regularly with the understanding that, in this digital world, constant review and adjustment to the website is necessary.

AGENDA ITEM 4.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Senior Center Advisory Commission Bylaws

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The Scotts Valley Senior Center Advisory Commission Bylaws dictate how the Commission, known as the Senior Center Board of Directors, operates. Per Article VII, Section 3, the Board of Directors unanimously voted to recommend amendments to the bylaws at their August 1, 2023 regular meeting. These changes address:

1. Interim vacancies of board members
The current Bylaws are silent in regard to filling a mid-cycle vacancy for the two member-nominated directors. In 2023, both of these seats were vacated due to resignations without a formal process in place for replacing the directors, outside of scheduling a full member meeting. Staff and the Senior Board recommend adding language to allow the Board to nominate an interim board appointee to the memberrecommended seats until the next regularly scheduled Member Meeting where a full vote can take place. Once the Board nominates a new director to fill the vacancy, the recommendation will be presented to the City Council for consideration. Once formally appointed by the City Council, the interim board member would then serve until replaced. (Article IV. Section 5)

2. Off cycle Officer appointments
Similar to the issue identified above, the bylaws state that a Chairperson and ViceChairperson are to be elected by the Board of Directors at the October Board Meeting.

Staff and the Senior Board recommend additional language to address a mid-term vacancy in the case where an officer is unable to serve their full year term. (Article IV Section 4)

3. The Bylaws dictate the Board of Directors meet monthly on the first Tuesday of each month at 1:00pm. Staff and the Senior Board recommend amending this section to schedule meetings every two months, rather than every month. This change would allow staff and board members to focus on committee work or special projects rather than preparing for meetings each month. A special meeting could still be called if needed between regularly scheduled board meetings. (Article III Section 1)

AGENDA ITEM 4.

DATE: 8/16/2023

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to amending the bylaws as recommended.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approve Resolution 1228.7 amending the Senior Advisory Commission Bylaws as drafted.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Resolution 1228.7

2. Resolution 1228.7 Exhibit A - Senior Center ByLaws

RESOLUTION NO. 1228.7

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY

AMENDING THE SENIOR CENTER ORGANIZATION BYLAWS
WHEREAS, by Resolution Nos. 1228, 1228.1 and 1228.2, the City of Scotts Valley formed a senior center organization under the auspices of the City of Scotts Valley to be called the “Scotts Valley Senior Center Organization” (The “Senior Organization”); and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 1228.3, Resolutions 1228, 1228.1, and 1228.2 were repealed and replaced, thereby creating new bylaws; and WHEREAS, by Resolution Nos.1228.4 and 1228.5, the bylaws created in Resolution 1228.3 were amended to provide clarity on qualifying criteria and election of at large members; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 1228.6, the bylaws were amended in their entirety and replaced the bylaws previously created and amended; and WHEREAS, some clarifications in the bylaws are needed to address the process of filling vacancies on the Board; and
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2023, the Board of Directors unanimously approved the proposed amendments for recommendation to the City Council.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Scotts Valley does hereby amends the bylaws created by Resolutions 1228.6 attached and incorporated hereto as Exhibit A.

The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Scotts Valley at a regular meeting held on the 16th day of August, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Approved: ____________________________
Jack Dilles, Mayor
Attest: ___________________________
Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

Scotts Valley Senior Center Bylaws
1 SCOTTS VALLEY SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION
BYLAWS
ARTICLE I. NAME
Section 1. NAME: The name of this organization is the Scotts Valley Senior Center Advisory Commission, hereinafter referred to as the Senior Organization.

Section 2. PLACE OF BUSINESS: The principal place of business of this Senior Organization shall be the Scotts Valley Senior Center located at 370 Kings Village Road, Scotts Valley, California 95066.

ARTICLE II. PURPOSE
Section 1. OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE: The purposes for which this organization is formed are:

A. The specific and primary purposes of the Senior Organization are to advise the City Council on issues affecting the senior population of the City of Scotts Valley and to provide an opportunity to persons 50 years of age or older to pursue their interests in educational, recreational, and craft activities and to promote the welfare of the senior citizenry of the City.

ARTICLE III. MEETINGS
Section 1. MEETINGS OF THE SENIOR ORGANIZATION: The Senior Organization shall hold meetings follows:

A. Annual Meeting. One (1) meeting of the Board of Directors shall be held yearly. If there is an at-large member vacancy on the Board of Directors, the Board of Directors shall hear recommendations on who shall fill that vacancy and all the people attending the annual meeting shall vote on that vacancy. The person receiving the most votes of the Board of Directors and the people attending the meeting shall be recommended to the City Council for appointment to the Senior Organization Board of Directors.

B. Regular Meetings. The Board of Directors shall meet bi-monthly on the first Tuesday of each monthJanuary, March, May, July, September, and November at 1:00pm at the Senior Center.

Section 3. SPECIAL MEETING: Special meetings may be called by written notice and posted not less than ten (10) days or no more than sixty (60) days to the date fixed for said meeting.

Said notice shall specify the date, time and place of the meeting and the matters to be considered.

Section 4. NOTICE OF MEETINGS
A. Regular Meetings: Notice shall be given each member of the Board of Directors seventy-two (72) hours notice, by email, mail and/or telephone, for any change in meeting time or place. The agenda for the meeting shall be posted in accordance with State law.

Scotts Valley Senior Center Bylaws
2 B. Special Meetings: Notice must be posted in accordance with State law, at the Senior Organization and each member of the Board of Directors shall be given email and/or telephone notice of the time and place of all meetings at least twenty-four (24) hours
Section 5. QUORUM: A majority of the Board of Directors shall constitute a quorum. Any motion receiving the affirmative vote of a majority when a quorum is present shall be a binding act of the Senior Organization unless a greater number is required by law or by these bylaws.

ARTICLE IV. BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS
Section 1. BOARD OF DIRECTORS: The affairs of the Senior Organization shall be managed and supervised by a seven (7) member Board of Directors five of whom shall be appointed by the City Council in the manner provided for the appointment of Commissioners and Committee members in the Scotts Valley Municipal Code. Two (2) of the seven (7) appointments shall consist of members recommended for appointment in accordance with the terms of Article III, Section 1 to serve for a four (4) year term.

Section 2. AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD: The Board of Directors shall be responsible for the Senior Organization's compliance with its Bylaws. The Board shall advise the City on all matters pertaining to the maintenance of the Senior Organization, its physical properties and its activities. The Board shall advise the City with respect to the conduct of the affairs and business activities of the Senior Organization, as well as with respect to matters of policy.

It is specifically recognized that the authority of the Board of Directors under this Section and under these Bylaws is subject to and limited by the provisions of Resolution Nos. 1228.3, 1228.4 and 1228.5 of the City of Scotts Valley.

It is specifically recognized, notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, that the use of any Senior Organization building that is owned by the City of Scotts Valley, shall be subject to all rules and regulations of the City of Scotts Valley and that no alteration of any such building may occur without the approval, first had and obtained, of the City Council.

Section 3. TERM OF OFFICE: Each appointed Board Member shall serve for a term as appointed by the City Council. Board Members shall assume duties when directed by the City Council. If a Board Member is unable to complete their term of office, they shall notify the Board of Directors in writing. The Chair Person shall notify the City of said vacancy.

The Board may make a recommendation to the City Council for an interim appointee to temporarily fill a vacant at-large board seat. Once approved by the City Council, the interim appointee serves until the next Annual Meeting. A Board Member may be removed from office by the City Council as provided in the Scotts Valley Municipal Code.

Section 4. OFFICERS: The officers of the Senior Organization shall be the Chairperson and ViceChairperson. All officers shall be elected by the Board of Directors and shall serve a term of one year. All the aforesaid officers shall be elected by the Board of Directors from among its own ranks at the October Board of Directors Meeting to take effect at the following January Board of Directors Meeting. In the event an officer is unable to fulfill their term as Chair, the Vice Chair shall become Chair and the Board of Directors may elect a new Vice Chair to full the remainder of the annual term.

Scotts Valley Senior Center Bylaws
3 Section 5. NOMINATIONS: If required, at the annual meeting, nominations for the two at-large members of the Board of Directors Members may be made by the Board of Directors and/or members from the floor as discussed in Section 1 of Article IV. All nominees must have previously agreed to serve.

Section 6. BALLOTING: In the event that more nominees are named than there are vacancies, secret balloting shall be conducted. Names on the ballot shall be listed in the order of a random drawing.

Section 7. PANEL OF CANDIDATES: The candidates shall also be made known through the Senior Center newsletter two months prior and the usual posted notice in the Senior Center at least two weeks prior the election for recommendation.

Section 8. DUTIES OF THE CHAIR:

A: The Chair shall preside at meetings of the Board of Directors and at members meetings. The Chair shall, with the approval of the Board of Directors appoint chairpersons of all committees; shall sign all documents on behalf of the Senior Organization as authorized by the Board; shall act as ex-officio member and advisor of all committees other than the nominating committee. The Chair shall exercise general supervision of the activities of the Senior Organization.

Section 9. DUTIES OF THE VICE-CHAIR: The Vice-Chair, in the absence of the Chair, shall perform their duties and carry out such other duties as authorized by the Board of Directors.

ARTICLE V. COMMITTEES
Section 1. STANDING COMMITTEES: The Board of Directors has the authority to form committees to further the purposes of the Senior Organization. All committees and committee members will be on a volunteer basis with prior approval of the Board after consultation with the Coordinator. Standing committees may be, but not limited to, Balloting, Entertainment, Kitchen, Membership, Property, Publicity, Senior Care, Social, Sunshine, Ways and Means or other committees as may be deemed necessary and approved by the majority of the Board. Liaisons to the Board of Directors may be appointed by the Board for any committee. Meetings of Standing Committees shall be subject to the requirement of the Brown Act.

Section 2. SPECIAL COMMITTEES: Ad-Hoc committees may be appointed from time to time for a limited purpose and limited duration by the Chair with the approval of the majority vote of the Board.

ARTICLE VI. FEES AND DUES
Section 1. The City Council, in consultation with the Board of Directors, shall establish dues for participation in events at the Senior Center.

ARTICLE VII. MISCELLANEOUS
Section 1. RULES OF ORDER: Robert's Rules of Order shall be adhered to at all meetings of the Board of Directors and members.

Scotts Valley Senior Center Bylaws
4 Section 2. SOLICITORS OF AGENTS: No solicitors or agents shall be allowed to display their ware, conduct or transact their business in the Senior Center at any time unless requested to do so by the Coordinator with Board of Directors’ approval.

Section 3. AMENDMENTS OF BYLAWS: The Board of Directors may recommend that these bylaws may be amended, altered or repealed by the City Council. Further, no amendment of these bylaws shall be effective for any purpose unless and until the same is approved by the City Council

AGENDA ITEM 5.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Stephanie Hill, Administrative Services Director
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Side Letter to Memorandum of Understanding, Police Bargaining Units

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Scotts Valley (the City) for the Scotts Valley Police Bargaining Unit (PBU) and the Scotts Valley Police Supervisors Association Bargaining Unit (SVPSA) includes language defining hours of work, overtime, and payment of overtime. During the implementation of the new payroll system, it was determined that some of the language was inconsistent with the pay practices. It is deemed in the best interest of both parties to amend certain language.

For the Hourly Rate Side Letters, the MOU includes language establishing the patrol division base pay to be based on 2,184 hours. However, this change was not implemented by the City. The increased hours were not factored into the salary schedule, meaning if the change in calculation was implemented, it would have resulted in a 5% pay reduction, which was not the intention of the City.

For the Definition of Overtime Side Letters, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) language was modified to allow for bi-weekly payments of overtime, going from a 28- day work period to a 14-day work period. Additionally, while the FLSA 7k exemption allows for police and fire to have excess non-overtime hours, it was modified to add that the City agrees to pay overtime for anything above the standard patrol officer 84-hour work period.

City staff is recommending that the City Council approve an amendment to the MOU for the SVPSA and the PBU.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost for these adjustments is expected to be absorbed within the current Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

AGENDA ITEM 5.

DATE: 8/16/2023
It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2031 approving the amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Scotts Valley and Police Supervisor Association and the Police Bargaining Unit.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. RESOLUTION 2031 - SVPOA & PBU MOU Amendment 2023

2. SVPSA - Definition of Overtime Payment of Overtime Side Letter

3. PBU - Definition of Hourly Rate Side Letter

4. PBU - Definition of Overtime Payment of Overtime Side Letter

5. SVPSA - Definition of Hourly Rate Side Letter

RESOLUTION NO. 2031

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY

APPROVING THE AMENDMENTS TO THE MEMORANDUMS OF

UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY AND THE

POLICE SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION AND THE POLICE BARGAINING UNIT
WHEREAS, the City of Scotts Valley (hereinafter referred to as the “City”) approves all wage and benefit adjustments for the City employees, including the Police Supervisors Associate (hereinafter referred to as “PSA”) and the Police Bargaining Unit (hereinafter referred to as “PBU”); and
WHEREAS, the City and PSA and PBU entered into certain Memorandums of Understanding, each dated June 16, 2021, where certain commitments and obligations of the parties including, but not limited to, the compensation paid to members was agreed upon; and
WHEREAS, technical language and application of pay practice changes were identified and the parties desire to amend the Memorandums of Understanding for PBU and PSA to update hourly rate and overtime calculations; and
WHEREAS, the PSA and PBU approved the proposed amendments on August 9, 2023.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Scott Valley hereby approves the amendments to the Memorandums of Understanding for PSA and PBU attached hereto as Exhibit A. The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Scotts Valley at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 16th day of August, 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Approved:_________________________
Jack Dilles, Mayor
Attest:

Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk

AGENDA ITEM 6.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Stephanie Hill, Administrative Services Director
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approve updated salary schedule for 3 positions

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The labor market continues to make positions difficult to retain and to fill with qualified candidates. As a result, City staff is recommending that the City Council approve an amended salary schedule for the positions of Accountant II, Senior Accountant, and Recreation Coordinator.

These positions were compared to other local agencies as outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding, as well as against other comparable positions within the current salary schedule. The proposed monthly salary schedule for each respective position is shown below:

Accountant II Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Existing 5,852 6,145 6,452 6,775 7,114 7,470 7,844
Proposed 6,776 7,115 7,471 7,845 8,237 8,649 9,081
Sr Accountant Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Existing 6,776 7,115 7,471 7,845 8,237 8,649 9,081
Proposed 8,037 8,439 8,861 9,304 9,769 10,257 10,770
Recreation
Coordinator Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Existing 3,762 3,950 4,147 4,354 4,572 4,800 5,040
Proposed 5,008 5,258 5,521 5,798 6,088 6,392 6,712

FISCAL IMPACT
Costs for these positions will be absorbed in the current FY 2023-2024 budget. Future costs will be included in subsequent budgets, subject to consideration and approval by the City Council during the annual budget process.

AGENDA ITEM 6.

DATE: 8/16/2023

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 1955.26 approving the Salary Schedules for the Accountant II, Senior Accountant, and Recreation Coordinator positions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. RESOLUTION 1955.26 - Salary Schedule

RESOLUTION NO. 1955.26

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY

APPROVING THE AMENDED SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE

ACCOUNTANT II, SENIOR ACCOUNTANT, AND RECREATION

COORDINATOR JOB CLASSIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, City staff continues to analyze the organization’s evolving needs; and WHEREAS, staff have identified the Accountant II, Senior Accountant, and Recreation Coordinator as key positions to lead special projects in the current Fiscal Year and in the future; and
WHEREAS, approving the amended salary schedule for these positions will assist in recruiting staff to fulfill to the City’s needs; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to the salary schedule for these positions is in the best interest of the City to recruit and retain top-tier talent; and WHEREAS, City Council approval is needed to amend the Salary Schedule.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED by the City Council of the City of Scotts Valley that the Salary Schedule is hereby approved as follows:

The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Scotts Valley at a meeting held on the 16th day of August 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Approved: _
Jack Dilles, Mayor
Attest:

Cathie Simonovich, City Clerk
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7
Accountant II 6,776 7,115 7,471 7,845 8,237 8,649 9,081 Sr Accountant 8,037 8,439 8,861 9,304 9,769 10,257 10,770 Recreation Coordinator 5,008 5,258 5,521 5,798 6,088 6,392 6,712

AGENDA ITEM 7.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steve Jesberg, Interim Public Works Director
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: On-Call Paving and Asphalt Contract Award

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The intention of the On-Call Asphalt and Concrete Services project is to repair existing streets, sidewalks, curb and gutters as a result of development impacts, weather, and general use.

The call for bids for the On-Call Asphalt and Concrete Services project was advertised July 14th, 2023 as a formal bid. The project was bid on a unit price basis, allowing the contractor to perform work in the on-call asphalt and concrete services up to the amount budget for the duration of the program. The budgeted amount for the year duration of the program is proposed to be $250,000.

Staff received one bid from responding companies that have a general competency for performing work covered by this bid. The low bid in the amount of $116,900.00 from the Johnson & Company, Inc., was found to be both responsive and responsible.

Staff reviewed the bid and took into consideration the company and estimated cost to perform the work. The company has been operating since 1992 and specializes in underground construction of all types. Work experience includes earthwork, grading, paving, compaction of building pads, parking lots, driveways and various other construction related activities. The bid also lists reputable contractors, for subcontracting scopes of work, which include FMG, Granite Rock Co., Chrisp Co., and Graham Contractors.

Public Works received the following bids:

Johnson & Company, Inc. $116,900.00
Based on the bids received, staff recommends that the City enter into a contract with Johnson & Company, Inc., the lowest responsive bidder, to perform the work.

FISCAL IMPACT

AGENDA ITEM 7.

DATE: 8/16/2023
This project is funded in the Capital Improvement program fund (Project #17). The following is a breakdown of the funding available:

SB1 (RMRA) $220,000
Gas Tax $205,000
Total program funding $425,000

Remaining funds in the account will be available for future road projects.

There is no impact on the general fund.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into agreements with Johnson & Company, Inc. for the On-Call Asphalt and Concrete Servicesin a form approved by the City Attorney.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. On-Call Asphalt and Concrete Services_ Bid Attachment

AGENDA ITEM 1.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Letters of opposition to Senate Bill 423 and Assembly Bill 309

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The League of California Cities is asking for support from cities to oppose two new bills that would further erode local control in regard to community development.

Senate Bill 423 (Weiner) would greatly expand SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017), extend the Jan. 1, 2026 sunset date to Jan.1, 2036, and allow the Department of General Services (DGS) to control housing developments on state-owned or -leased property, regardless of the locally required zoning or development standards.

Assembly Bill 309 (Lee) would create the Social Housing Program within the Department of General Services (DGS) to facilitate the construction of governmentowned housing on leased state property or excess state-owned property. Cities would have no ability to regulate zoning or development standards, including floor area ratios, height limitations, or density requirements.

These bills would force cities to approve certain housing projects without regard to the needs of the community, opportunities for environmental review, or public input. While it may be frustrating for some developers to address neighborhood concerns about traffic, parking, and other development impacts, those directly affected by such projects have a right to be heard. Public engagement also often leads to better projects. Not having such outlets will increase public distrust in government and result in additional ballot measures limiting housing development.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact of opposing these two bills.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend the City Council consider directing staff to submit the letters of opposition as drafted to our State legislative representatives.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AGENDA ITEM 1.

DATE: 8/16/2023

1. SB 423 Oppose

2. AB 309 Oppose

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY

1 Civic Center Drive • Scotts Valley • California • 95066 Phone (831) 440-5600 • Facsimile (831) 438-2793 • www.scottsvalley.gov August 16, 2023
The Honorable Gail Pellerin
Member, California State Assembly
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0028
RE: SB 423 (Wiener) By-right housing approvals: multifamily housing developments: SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017) expansion.

Notice of Opposition
Dear Assemblymember Pellerin:

The City of Scotts Valley writes to express our opposition to SB 423, which would greatly expand SB 35 (Chapter 366, Statutes of 2017), extend the Jan. 1, 2026 sunset date to Jan.1, 2036, and allow the Department of General Services (DGS) to control housing developments on state-owned or -leased property, regardless of the locally required zoning or development standards.

The City of Scotts Valley intimately understands the affordable housing and homelessness crisis as it plays out in our community every day. Local leaders are working to find creative solutions so homes of all income levels can be built. They’re taking on these difficult and complex tasks, and in many cases successfully planning for more than 2.5 million new homes statewide, all while navigating the state’s annual barrage of overreaching housing bills that have thus far demonstrated limited success.

SB 423 is the latest overreaching bill. This measure would double-down on the recent trend of the state overriding its own mandated local housing plans by forcing cities to approve certain housing projects without regard to the needs of the community, opportunities for environmental review, or public input. While it may be frustrating for some developers to address neighborhood concerns about traffic, parking, and other development impacts, those directly affected by such projects have a right to be heard. Public engagement also often leads to better projects. Not having such outlets will increase public distrust in government and result in additional ballot measures limiting housing development.

Instead of continuing to pursue top-down, one-size-fits-all legislation, lawmakers should partner with local officials. That’s why the League of California Cities continues to call on the Governor and lawmakers to annually invest $3 billion to help cities prevent and reduce homelessness and spur housing development. Targeted, ongoing funding is the only way cities can find community-based solutions that get our residents off the streets and keep them in their homes. California will never produce the number of homes needed with an increasingly state driven, by-right housing approval process. What is really needed is a sustainable state investment that matches the scale of this long-term crisis.

For these reasons, the City of Scotts Valley respectfully opposes SB 423.

Sincerely,
Jack Dilles
Mayor
City of Scotts Valley
Cc: Deanna Sessums [email protected]
League of California Cities [email protected]

CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY

1 Civic Center Drive • Scotts Valley • California • 95066 Phone (831) 440-5600 • Facsimile (831) 438-2793 • www.scottsvalley.gov August 16, 2023
The Honorable John Laird
Member, California State Senate
1201 O Street, Suite 8720
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: AB 309 (Lee) Social Housing Program
(as amended 7/13/2023)
Notice of Oppose Unless Amended
Dear Senator Laird:

The City of Scotts Valley writes to express our opposition to AB 309 (Lee), unless it is amended to address our concerns. AB 309 would create the Social Housing Program within the Department of General Services (DGS) to facilitate the construction of government-owned housing on leased state property or excess stateowned property. Cities would have no ability to regulate zoning or development standards, including floor area ratios, height limitations, or density requirements.

The City of Scotts Valley strongly supports the intent of AB 309, which is to produce more housing as housing affordability and homelessness are among the most critical issues facing California cities. Affordably priced homes are out of reach for many people and housing is not being built fast enough to meet the current or projected needs of people living in the state. Cities lay the essential groundwork for housing production by planning and zoning new projects in their communities based on extensive public input and engagement, as well as state housing laws. Importantly, cities are currently updating housing plans to identify sites for more than 2.5 million additional housing units.

AB 309 would disregard this state-mandated planning process and specifically empower DGS to make land use and zoning decisions on state excess property. If DGS can approve housing, why should cities go through the multiyear planning process to identify sites suitable for new housing units if the state can ignore those plans and build housing on sites never considered for new housing?

While AB 309 currently limits DGS authority to three housing projects on declared excess state property suitable for housing, the measure broadly establishes the Social Housing Program within DGS and could be easily expanded to include all stateowned lands.

Bypassing California’s longstanding housing planning laws and local rules is not a way out of the housing crisis. That’s why Cal Cities continues to call on the Governor and lawmakers to annually invest $3 billion to help cities prevent and reduce homelessness and spur affordable housing development. Targeted, ongoing funding is the only way cities can find community-based solutions that produce housing at all income levels.

For these reasons, the City of Scotts Valley respectfully opposes AB 309 unless it is amended to address our concerns.

Sincerely,
Jack Dilles
Mayor
City of Scotts Valley
Cc: Deanna Sessums [email protected]
League of California Cities [email protected]

AGENDA ITEM 2.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Invitation to join the Santa Cruz County Subcommittee on Banning Plastic Filtered Tobacco Products

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
In July, Mayor Dilles received an invitation from Santa Cruz Supervisor Justin Cummings to participate in a countywide subcommittee regarding banning plastic filtered tobacco products. The subcommittee's goal is to draft an ordinance that would be presented to the County Board of Supervisors and participating Cities' City Councils by the end of 2024. The subcommittee would:
• Compile and review information and research related to plastic tobacco litter pollution.
• Review policies from other jurisdictions that have implemented bans or regulations on plastic filtered tobacco products.
• Create public outreach materials about plastic filtered tobacco products and their harmful effects on the environment.
• Evaluate the feasibility and potential challenges associated with implementing a ban on plastic filtered tobacco products.
• Formulate an action plan that outlines the necessary steps, timeline and allocation of resources required to achieve this goal.
• Work with retailers to identify alternative products and establish a timeline for when policies would take effect.

Mayor Dilles shared this invitation with Councilmember Timms as the current representative for Scotts Valley on the Countywide Solid Waste Taskforce and Councilmember Timms expressed interest in serving on this related subcommittee.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with participating on the countywide Subcommittee on Banning Plastic Filtered Tobacco Products

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

AGENDA ITEM 2.

DATE: 8/16/2023
It is recommended that the City Council consider the invitation to participate in the Subcommittee on Banning Plastic Filtered Tobacco Products and, if the Council chooses to participate, consider appointing Councilmember Timms as the representative for Scotts Valley.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Scotts Valley Tobacco Subcommittee Invitation

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Steve Jesberg, Interim Public Works Director
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of a budget appropriation and award of contract to Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. for City of Scotts Valley Shaftless Screw Conveyor, WWTP Project No.

P23-008

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The intention of the City of Scotts Valley Shaftless Screw Conveyor is to replace the original belt press in the wastewater dewatering process. The belt press is essential in reducing the fluid volume of residual waste, improving efficiency of subsequent treatment process and reducing cost of disposal.

In March 2023, the City of Scotts Valley entered into a contract with JMS Inc. for the design of a Shaftless Screw Conveyor to replace the existing Belt Press. The contract included JMS to perform a site visit and design the Shaftless Screw Conveyor to fit the specific dimensions of the City of Scotts Valley Wastewater Treatment Plant. Bids for the Shaftless Screw Conveyor project were to order, deliver, and install the product as outlined by JMS (or approved equal) to replace the existing Belt Press.

The Call for bids for the Shaftless Screw Conveyor project was advertised on July 14th, 2023 as a formal bid. Public works received one bid on Friday, August 4th 2023. The low bid in the amount of $281,000 from Anderson Pacific Engineering, was found to be both responsive and responsible.

Public Works received the following bids:

Anderson Pacific Engineering $281,000.00
Based on the bids received, staff recommends that the City enter into a contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering, the lowest responsive bidder, to perform the work.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is currently $300,000 in the proposed fiscal year of 2023-2024 budget for the Belt Press Conveyor Replacement Project of which $50,000 has been used for design.

AGENDA ITEM 3.

DATE: 8/16/2023
The Project funding source is from the Wastewater Capital Reserve Fund.

There is no impact on the general fund.

The project is included within the adopted Fiscal Year 2023-24 Capital Improvement Program, CIP-52, and is funded with $300,000 of which $50,000 has been allocated for design. Based on the bid received, the costs will exceed the budgeted amount by $58,000. Below is the breakdown of cost:

Design $ 50,000
Construction $280,000
10% contingency $ 28,000
Proposed total project budget $358,000
Staff is recommending that the project budget within the Wastewater Capital Reserves be amended to allocate an additional $58,000 from reserves to the project.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council consider and take the following actions:

1. Award an agreement to Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. as the lowest responsive bidder and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

2. Approve the allocation of $58,000 from reserves in the Wastewater Capital Reserves to this project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Shaftless Screw Conveyor_Bid Attachment

AGENDA ITEM 4.

DATE: 8/16/2023
City of Scotts Valley

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: 8/16/2023
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Scott Garner, Police Captain
APPROVED: Mali LaGoe, City Manager
SUBJECT: Police Body & Fleet Camera Lease

SUMMARY OF ISSUE
The Scotts Valley Police Department is currently utilizing Motorola Solutions (Watchguard) Body Worn and Fleet camera devices. These devices were purchased in 2019 by the department. The average lifespan of a body worn camera (BWC) is three years. Our current cameras are four years old and now out of Motorola warranty terms.

Motorola has informed our department that they will no longer be providing replacements or repair services for the camera system we currently possess. Motorola has upgraded their camera system which requires a new five-year contract and all new equipment.

Based on the above situation, we decided to research additional options. During that search, two vendors, Axon and LensLock, were identified as potential optional solutions. Staff reached out to all three vendors for information and estimates. It was discovered all three vendors have switched to a five-year lease program versus the traditional agency purchase program. During the research with the three vendors (Motorola Solutions, Axon, and LensLock), we discovered all three vendors provided similar services such as:
- Body Worn Cameras
- Fleet Cameras
- New equipment at 2.5 years and 5 years
- Five-year warranty
All three vendors also provided similar costs ranging from $325,000 to $361,000 over a five-year period. Two of the vendors, Motorola Services and Axon, also provided built in Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) as part of their fleet cameras.

ALPR technology operates on a proactive, investigative, and deterrence principle. It surpasses an officer's ability to scan license plates swiftly, providing safer and more efficient information retrieval as the operator no longer needs to manually input data into a mobile computer while driving. Additionally, it effectively reduces radio traffic time by allowing officers and dispatch to swiftly obtain information without the need to run queries over the air.

AGENDA ITEM 4.

DATE: 8/16/2023
During discussions with Axon, it was brought to the staff's attention that a bundling discount is available for agencies that simultaneously update their TASER equipment with their body cameras. Staff was preparing to begin the process of updating our current Taser devices as they are also beyond service life and no longer covered by warranty. This presented a favorable occasion to upgrade both our body cameras and TASER equipment with cutting-edge options. This move will not only eliminate the need for frequent purchases but also ensure stability throughout the five-year lease period.

Axon has partnered with Sourcewell, a public cooperative purchasing organization that provides competitively solicited contracts to government agencies, educational institutions, and nonprofits. This partnership means staff can skip the traditional Request for Proposal (RFP) process, which can be time-consuming and resource intensive. With Sourcewell, staff can access pre-negotiated contracts for their products and services, reducing the need for a lengthy bidding process. This can result in significant cost savings, while still ensuring high-quality products and services are delivered. The Sourcewell contract information for the City of Scotts Valley and Axon are listed on the quote and as follows:

Sourcewell ID #101395
Contract #010720-AXN

FISCAL IMPACT
The AXON package will incur a total cost of $360,666.60 to the City over the next five years and these expenses will be covered by utilizing the COPS grant funding.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a purchase agreement for the Axon Tasers and body/fleet cameras systems in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Scotts Valley PD - Axon Core+ Quote v.2

2. Scotts Valley PD - Axon Fleet 3 Quote v.2

Q-411843-45142.685TR
Issued: 08/04/2023
Quote Expiration: 08/31/2023
Estimated Contract Start Date: 11/01/2023
Account Number: 109899
Payment Terms: N30
Delivery Method:

SHIP TO BILL TO SALES REPRESENTATIVE PRIMARY CONTACT
Business;Delivery;Invoice-1 Civic Center Dr
1 Civic Center Dr
Scotts Valley,
CA
95066-4197
USA
Scotts Valley Police Dept. - CA
1 Civic Center Dr
Scotts Valley
CA
95066-4197
USA
Email:

Thom Ruseva-Mahan
Phone: +1 4804148450
Email: [email protected]
Fax: +1 4809993359
Scott Garner
Phone: 831-440-5654
Email: [email protected]
Fax:

Quote Summary Discount Summary
Program Length 60 Months Average Savings Per Year $7,228.25 TOTAL COST $237,872.70
ESTIMATED TOTAL W/ TAX $249,040.84 TOTAL SAVINGS $36,141.25 Payment Summary
Date Subtotal Tax Total
Oct 2023 $66,629.36 $4,276.32 $70,905.68
Oct 2024 $40,326.10 $1,622.89 $41,948.99
Oct 2025 $41,939.15 $1,687.90 $43,627.05
Oct 2026 $43,616.71 $1,755.36 $45,372.07
Oct 2027 $45,361.38 $1,825.67 $47,187.05
Total $237,872.70 $11,168.14 $249,040.84
Axon Enterprise, Inc.
17800 N 85th St.

Scottsdale, Arizona 85255
United States
VAT: 86-0741227
Domestic: (800) 978-2737
International: +1.800.978.2737

Quote Unbundled Price: $274,013.95
Quote List Price: $238,142.95
Quote Subtotal: $237,872.70
Pricing
All deliverables are detailed in Delivery Schedules section lower in proposal Item Description Qty Term Unbundled List Price Net Price Subtotal Tax Total Program
OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 60 $211.45 $183.07 $183.07 $164,763.00 $8,120.80 $172,883.80 BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 60 $149.43 $115.00 $115.00 $34,500.00 $1,034.41 $35,534.41 A la Carte Hardware
20050 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRAINING (HALT) SUIT 1 $855.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 73202 AXON BODY 3 - NA10 - US - BLK - RAPIDLOCK 1 $749.00 $749.00 $749.00 $73.01 $822.01 AB3MBD AB3 Multi Bay Dock Bundle 3 $1,638.90 $1,638.90 $4,916.70 $479.37 $5,396.07 AB3C AB3 Camera Bundle 20 $749.00 $749.00 $14,980.00 $1,460.55 $16,440.55 A la Carte Software
73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 60 $9.76 $9.76 $8,784.00 $0.00 $8,784.00 ProLicense Pro License Bundle 3 60 $39.00 $42.25 $7,605.00 $0.00 $7,605.00 A la Carte Services
80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1 $1,575.00 $1,575.00 $1,575.00 $0.00 $1,575.00 Total $237,872.70 $11,168.14 $249,040.84

Delivery Schedule
Hardware
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Delivery Date
AB3 Camera Bundle 11534 USB-C to USB-A CABLE FOR AB3 OR FLEX 2 22 10/01/2023 AB3 Camera Bundle 73202 AXON BODY 3 - NA10 - US - BLK - RAPIDLOCK 20 10/01/2023 AB3 Camera Bundle 74028 WING CLIP MOUNT, AXON RAPIDLOCK 22 10/01/2023 AB3 Multi Bay Dock Bundle 70033 WALL MOUNT BRACKET, ASSY, EVIDENCE.COM DOCK 3 10/01/2023 AB3 Multi Bay Dock Bundle 71019 NORTH AMER POWER CORD FOR AB3 8-BAY, AB2 1-BAY / 6-BAY DOCK 3 10/01/2023 AB3 Multi Bay Dock Bundle 74210 AXON BODY 3 - 8 BAY DOCK 3 10/01/2023 Core BWC Bundle 71044 BATTERY, SIGNAL SIDEARM, CR2430 SINGLE PACK 10 10/01/2023 Core BWC Bundle 75015 SIGNAL SIDEARM KIT 5 10/01/2023
OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 20008 TASER 7 HANDLE, YLW, HIGH VISIBILITY (GREEN LASER), CLASS 3R 15 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 20018 TASER BATTERY PACK, TACTICAL 18 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 20160 TASER 7 HOLSTER - SAFARILAND, RH+CART CARRIER 15 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22175 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 45 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22175 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22176 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 45 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22176 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22177 TASER 7 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRN (HALT) CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF NS 30 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22178 TASER 7 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRN (HALT) CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUART NS 30 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22179 TASER 7 INERT CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 15 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22181 TASER 7 INERT CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 15 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 70033 WALL MOUNT BRACKET, ASSY, EVIDENCE.COM DOCK 1 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 71019 NORTH AMER POWER CORD FOR AB3 8-BAY, AB2 1-BAY / 6-BAY DOCK 1 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 71044 BATTERY, SIGNAL SIDEARM, CR2430 SINGLE PACK 30 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 74200 TASER 6-BAY DOCK AND CORE 1 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 75015 SIGNAL SIDEARM KIT 15 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80087 TASER TARGET, CONDUCTIVE, PROFESSIONAL (RUGGEDIZED) 1 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80090 TARGET FRAME, PROFESSIONAL, 27.5 IN. X 75 IN., TASER 7 1 10/01/2023 A la Carte 20050 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRAINING (HALT) SUIT 1 10/01/2023 A la Carte 73202 AXON BODY 3 - NA10 - US - BLK - RAPIDLOCK 1 10/01/2023 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22175 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2024 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22176 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2024 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22175 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2025 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22176 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2025 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22177 TASER 7 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRN (HALT) CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF NS 30 10/01/2025 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22178 TASER 7 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRN (HALT) CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUART NS 30 10/01/2025 Core BWC Bundle 73309 AXON CAMERA REFRESH ONE 5 04/01/2026 Core BWC Bundle 73689 MULTI-BAY BWC DOCK 1ST REFRESH 1 04/01/2026 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73309 AXON CAMERA REFRESH ONE 15 04/01/2026 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73689 MULTI-BAY BWC DOCK 1ST REFRESH 2 04/01/2026 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22175 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2026 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22176 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2026

Hardware
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Delivery Date
OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22175 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, STANDOFF (3.5-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2027 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 22176 TASER 7 LIVE CARTRIDGE, CLOSE QUARTERS (12-DEGREE) NS 30 10/01/2027 Core BWC Bundle 73310 AXON CAMERA REFRESH TWO 5 10/01/2028 Core BWC Bundle 73688 MULTI-BAY BWC DOCK 2ND REFRESH 1 10/01/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73310 AXON CAMERA REFRESH TWO 15 10/01/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73688 MULTI-BAY BWC DOCK 2ND REFRESH 2 10/01/2028 Software
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Core BWC Bundle 73449 RESPOND DEVICE LICENSE 5 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Core BWC Bundle 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 5 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Core BWC Bundle 73683 10 GB EVIDENCE.COM A-LA-CART STORAGE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Core BWC Bundle 73686 EVIDENCE.COM UNLIMITED AXON DEVICE STORAGE 5 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Core BWC Bundle 73746 PROFESSIONAL EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 5 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 20248 TASER 7 EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 20248 TASER 7 EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 1 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73449 RESPOND DEVICE LICENSE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73638 STANDARDS ACCESS LICENSE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73686 EVIDENCE.COM UNLIMITED AXON DEVICE STORAGE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 73746 PROFESSIONAL EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Pro License Bundle 73683 10 GB EVIDENCE.COM A-LA-CART STORAGE 9 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Pro License Bundle 73746 PROFESSIONAL EVIDENCE.COM LICENSE 3 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 A la Carte 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Services
Bundle Item Description QTY
Core BWC Bundle 79999 AUTO TAGGING / PERFORMANCE IMPLEMENTATION SERVICE 1 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 20246 TASER 7 DUTY CARTRIDGE REPLACEMENT ACCESS PROGRAM 15 A la Carte 80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1
Warranties
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Core BWC Bundle 80464 EXT WARRANTY, CAMERA (TAP) 5 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80464 EXT WARRANTY, CAMERA (TAP) 15 11/01/2023 10/31/2028 Core BWC Bundle 80465 EXT WARRANTY, MULTI-BAY DOCK (TAP) 1 10/01/2024 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80374 EXT WARRANTY, TASER 7 BATTERY PACK 18 10/01/2024 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80395 EXT WARRANTY, TASER 7 HANDLE 15 10/01/2024 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80396 EXT WARRANTY, TASER 7 SIX BAY DOCK 1 10/01/2024 10/31/2028 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 80465 EXT WARRANTY, MULTI-BAY DOCK (TAP) 2 10/01/2024 10/31/2028

Payment Details
Oct 2023
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Upfront Hardware 20050 HOOK-AND-LOOP TRAINING (HALT) SUIT 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Upfront Hardware 73202 AXON BODY 3 - NA10 - US - BLK - RAPIDLOCK 1 $749.00 $73.01 $822.01 Upfront Hardware AB3C AB3 Camera Bundle 20 $14,980.00 $1,460.55 $16,440.55 Upfront Hardware AB3MBD AB3 Multi Bay Dock Bundle 3 $4,916.70 $479.37 $5,396.07 Upfront Hardware BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 $965.90 $94.19 $1,060.09 Upfront Hardware OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 $6,242.66 $608.67 $6,851.33 Year 1 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 $1,621.76 $0.00 $1,621.76 Year 1 80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1 $290.79 $0.00 $290.79 Year 1 BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 $6,191.31 $173.60 $6,364.91 Year 1 OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 $29,267.15 $1,386.93 $30,654.08 Year 1 ProLicense Pro License Bundle 3 $1,404.09 $0.00 $1,404.09 Total $66,629.36 $4,276.32 $70,905.68
Oct 2024
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 2 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 $1,686.64 $0.00 $1,686.64 Year 2 80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1 $302.42 $0.00 $302.42 Year 2 BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 $6,438.95 $180.53 $6,619.48 Year 2 OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 $30,437.84 $1,442.36 $31,880.20 Year 2 ProLicense Pro License Bundle 3 $1,460.25 $0.00 $1,460.25 Total $40,326.10 $1,622.89 $41,948.99
Oct 2025
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 3 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 $1,754.10 $0.00 $1,754.10 Year 3 80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1 $314.52 $0.00 $314.52 Year 3 BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 $6,696.51 $187.76 $6,884.27 Year 3 OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 $31,655.36 $1,500.14 $33,155.50 Year 3 ProLicense Pro License Bundle 3 $1,518.66 $0.00 $1,518.66 Total $41,939.15 $1,687.90 $43,627.05
Oct 2026
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 4 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 $1,824.26 $0.00 $1,824.26 Year 4 80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1 $327.10 $0.00 $327.10 Year 4 BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 $6,964.37 $195.26 $7,159.63 Year 4 OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 $32,921.57 $1,560.10 $34,481.67 Year 4 ProLicense Pro License Bundle 3 $1,579.41 $0.00 $1,579.41 Total $43,616.71 $1,755.36 $45,372.07

Oct 2027
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 5 73682 AUTO TAGGING LICENSE 15 $1,897.24 $0.00 $1,897.24 Year 5 80146 VIRTUAL BODYCAM STARTER 1 $340.18 $0.00 $340.18 Year 5 BWCCore Core BWC Bundle 5 $7,242.97 $203.07 $7,446.04 Year 5 OSP7 OFFICER SAFETY PLAN 7 15 $34,238.40 $1,622.60 $35,861.00 Year 5 ProLicense Pro License Bundle 3 $1,642.59 $0.00 $1,642.59 Total $45,361.38 $1,825.67 $47,187.05

Tax is estimated based on rates applicable at date of quote and subject to change at time of invoicing. If a tax exemption certificate should be applied, please submit prior to invoicing.

Contract Sourcewell Contract #010720-AXN is incorporated by reference into the terms and conditions of this Agreement. In the event of conflict the terms of Axon's Master Services and Purchasing Agreement shall govern.

Standard Terms and Conditions
Axon Enterprise Inc. Sales Terms and Conditions
Axon Master Services and Purchasing Agreement:

This Quote is limited to and conditional upon your acceptance of the provisions set forth herein and Axon’s Master Services and Purchasing Agreement (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), as well as the attached Statement of Work (SOW) for Axon Fleet and/or Axon Interview Room purchase, if applicable. In the event you and Axon have entered into a prior agreement to govern all future purchases, that agreement shall govern to the extent it includes the products and services being purchased and does not conflict with the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix as described below.

ACEIP:

The Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix, which includes the sharing of de-identified segments of Agency Content with Axon to develop new products and improve your product experience (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), is incorporated herein by reference. By signing below, you agree to the terms of the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program.

Acceptance of Terms:

Any purchase order issued in response to this Quote is subject solely to the above referenced terms and conditions. By signing below, you represent that you are lawfully able to enter into contracts. If you are signing on behalf of an entity (including but not limited to the company, municipality, or government agency for whom you work), you represent to Axon that you have legal authority to bind that entity. If you do not have this authority, please do not sign this Quote.

\s1\ \d1\
Signature Date Signed
8/4/2023

Q-412143-45142.686TR
Issued: 08/04/2023
Quote Expiration: 08/31/2023
Estimated Contract Start Date: 03/01/2024
Account Number: 109899
Payment Terms: N30
Delivery Method:

SHIP TO BILL TO SALES REPRESENTATIVE PRIMARY CONTACT
Business;Delivery;Invoice-1 Civic Center Dr
1 Civic Center Dr
Scotts Valley,
CA
95066-4197
USA
Scotts Valley Police Dept. - CA
1 Civic Center Dr
Scotts Valley
CA
95066-4197
USA
Email:

Thom Ruseva-Mahan
Phone: +1 4804148450
Email: [email protected]
Fax: +1 4809993359
Scott Garner
Phone: 831-440-5654
Email: [email protected]
Fax:

Quote Summary Discount Summary
Program Length 60 Months Average Savings Per Year $3,582.60 TOTAL COST $106,919.40
ESTIMATED TOTAL W/ TAX $111,625.76 TOTAL SAVINGS $17,913.00 Payment Summary
Date Subtotal Tax Total
Feb 2024 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2025 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2026 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2027 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2028 $21,383.88 $941.28 $22,325.16
Total $106,919.40 $4,706.36 $111,625.76
Axon Enterprise, Inc.
17800 N 85th St.

Scottsdale, Arizona 85255
United States
VAT: 86-0741227
Domestic: (800) 978-2737
International: +1.800.978.2737

Quote Unbundled Price: $124,832.40
Quote List Price: $106,919.40
Quote Subtotal: $106,919.40
Pricing
All deliverables are detailed in Delivery Schedules section lower in proposal Item Description Qty Term Unbundled List Price Net Price Subtotal Tax Total Program
Fleet3A Fleet 3 Advanced 7 60 $297.22 $254.57 $254.57 $106,919.40 $4,706.36 $111,625.76 Total $106,919.40 $4,706.36 $111,625.76

Delivery Schedule
Hardware
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Delivery Date
Fleet 3 Advanced 11634 CRADLEPOINT IBR900-1200M-B-NPS+5YR NETCLOUD 7 02/01/2024 Fleet 3 Advanced 70112 AXON SIGNAL UNIT 7 02/01/2024
Fleet 3 Advanced 71200 FLEET ANT, AIRGAIN, 5-IN-1, 2LTE, 2WIFI, 1GNSS, BL 7 02/01/2024 Fleet 3 Advanced 72034 FLEET SIM INSERTION, VZW 7 02/01/2024 Fleet 3 Advanced 72036 FLEET 3 STANDARD 2 CAMERA KIT 7 02/01/2024 Fleet 3 Advanced 72040 FLEET REFRESH, 2 CAMERA KIT 7 02/01/2029 Software
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Fleet 3 Advanced 80400 FLEET, VEHICLE LICENSE 7 03/01/2024 02/28/2029 Fleet 3 Advanced 80401 FLEET 3, ALPR LICENSE, 1 CAMERA 7 03/01/2024 02/28/2029 Fleet 3 Advanced 80402 RESPOND DEVICE LICENSE - FLEET 3 7 03/01/2024 02/28/2029 Fleet 3 Advanced 80410 FLEET, UNLIMITED STORAGE, 1 CAMERA 14 03/01/2024 02/28/2029 Services
Bundle Item Description QTY
Fleet 3 Advanced 73391 FLEET 3 DEPLOYMENT (PER VEHICLE) 7 Warranties
Bundle Item Description QTY Estimated Start Date Estimated End Date Fleet 3 Advanced 80379 EXT WARRANTY, AXON SIGNAL UNIT 7 03/01/2024 02/28/2029 Fleet 3 Advanced 80495 EXT WARRANTY, FLEET 3, 2 CAMERA KIT 7 03/01/2025 02/28/2029

Payment Details
Feb 2024
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 1 Fleet3A Fleet 3 Advanced 7 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15 Total $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2025
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 2 Fleet3A Fleet 3 Advanced 7 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15 Total $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2026
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 3 Fleet3A Fleet 3 Advanced 7 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15 Total $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2027
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 4 Fleet3A Fleet 3 Advanced 7 $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15 Total $21,383.88 $941.27 $22,325.15
Feb 2028
Invoice Plan Item Description Qty Subtotal Tax Total
Year 5 Fleet3A Fleet 3 Advanced 7 $21,383.88 $941.28 $22,325.16 Total $21,383.88 $941.28 $22,325.16

Tax is estimated based on rates applicable at date of quote and subject to change at time of invoicing. If a tax exemption certificate should be applied, please submit prior to invoicing.

Contract Sourcewell Contract #010720-AXN is incorporated by reference into the terms and conditions of this Agreement. In the event of conflict the terms of Axon's Master Services and Purchasing Agreement shall govern.

Standard Terms and Conditions
Axon Enterprise Inc. Sales Terms and Conditions
Axon Master Services and Purchasing Agreement:

This Quote is limited to and conditional upon your acceptance of the provisions set forth herein and Axon’s Master Services and Purchasing Agreement (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), as well as the attached Statement of Work (SOW) for Axon Fleet and/or Axon Interview Room purchase, if applicable. In the event you and Axon have entered into a prior agreement to govern all future purchases, that agreement shall govern to the extent it includes the products and services being purchased and does not conflict with the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix as described below.

ACEIP:

The Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program Appendix, which includes the sharing of de-identified segments of Agency Content with Axon to develop new products and improve your product experience (posted at www.axon.com/legal/sales-terms-and-conditions), is incorporated herein by reference. By signing below, you agree to the terms of the Axon Customer Experience Improvement Program.

Acceptance of Terms:

Any purchase order issued in response to this Quote is subject solely to the above referenced terms and conditions. By signing below, you represent that you are lawfully able to enter into contracts. If you are signing on behalf of an entity (including but not limited to the company, municipality, or government agency for whom you work), you represent to Axon that you have legal authority to bind that entity. If you do not have this authority, please do not sign this Quote.

\s1\ \d1\
Signature Date Signed
8/4/2023

1 FLEET STATEMENT OF WORK BETWEEN AXON ENTERPRISE AND AGENCY Introduction
This Statement of Work (“SOW”) has been made and entered into by and between Axon Enterprise, Inc. (“AXON”), and Scotts Valley Police Dept. - CA the (“AGENCY”) for the purchase of the Axon Fleet in-car video solution (“FLEET”) and its supporting information, services and training. (AXON Technical Project Manager/The AXON installer)
Purpose and Intent
AGENCY states, and AXON understands and agrees, that Agency’s purpose and intent for entering into this SOW is for the AGENCY to obtain from AXON deliverables, which used solely in conjunction with AGENCY’s existing systems and equipment, which AGENCY specifically agrees to purchase or provide pursuant to the terms of this SOW.

This SOW contains the entire agreement between the parties. There are no promises, agreements, conditions, inducements, warranties or understandings, written or oral, expressed or implied, between the parties, other than as set forth or referenced in the SOW.

Acceptance
Upon completion of the services outlined in this SOW, AGENCY will be provided a professional services acceptance form (“Acceptance Form”). AGENCY will sign the Acceptance Form acknowledging that services have been completed in substantial conformance with this SOW and the Agreement. If AGENCY reasonably believes AXON did not complete the professional services in conformance with this SOW, AGENCY must notify AXON in writing of the specific reasons within seven (7) calendar days from delivery of the Acceptance Form. AXON will remedy the issues to conform with this SOW and re-present the Acceptance Form for signature. If AXON does not receive the signed Acceptance Form or written notification of the reasons for rejection within 7 calendar days of the delivery of the Acceptance Form, AGENCY will be deemed to have accepted the services in accordance to this SOW.

Force Majeure

2 Neither party hereto shall be liable for delays or failure to perform with respect to this SOW due to causes beyond the party’s reasonable control and not avoidable by diligence.

Schedule Change
Each party shall notify the other as soon as possible regarding any changes to agreed upon dates and times of Axon Fleet in-car Solution installation to be performed pursuant of this Statement of Work.

Axon Fleet Deliverables
Typically, within (30) days of receiving this fully executed SOW, an AXON Technical Project Manager will deliver to AGENCY’s primary point of contact via electronic media, controlled documentation, guides, instructions and videos followed by available dates for the initial project review and customer readiness validation. Unless otherwise agreed upon by AXON, AGENCY may print and reproduce said documents for use by its employees only.

Security Clearance and Access
Upon AGENCY’s request, AXON will provide the AGENCY a list of AXON employees, agents, installers or representatives which require access to the AGENCY’s facilities in order to perform Work pursuant of this Statement of Work. AXON will ensure that each employee, agent or representative has been informed or and consented to a criminal background investigation by AGENCY for the purposes of being allowed access to AGENCY‘s facilities. AGENCY is responsible for providing AXON with all required instructions and documentation accompanying the security background check’s requirements.

Training
AXON will provide training applicable to Axon Evidence, Cradlepoint NetCloud Manager and Axon Fleet application in a train-the-trainer style method unless otherwise agreed upon between the AGENCY and AXON.

Local Computer

3 AGNECY is responsible for providing a mobile data computer (MDC) with the same software, hardware, and configuration that AGENCY personnel will use with the AXON system being installed. AGENCY is responsible for making certain that any and all security settings (port openings, firewall settings, antivirus software, virtual private network, routing, etc.) are made prior to the installation, configuration and testing of the aforementioned deliverables.

Network
AGENCY is responsible for making certain that any and all network(s) route traffic to appropriate endpoints and AXON is not liable for network breach, data interception, or loss of data due to misconfigured firewall settings or virus infection, except to the extent that such virus or infection is caused, in whole or in part, by defects in the deliverables.

Cradlepoint Router
When applicable, AGENCY must provide AXON Installers with temporary administrative access to Cradlepoint’s NetCloud Manager to the extent necessary to perform Work pursuant of this Statement of Work.

Evidence.com
AGENCY must provide AXON Installers with temporary administrative access to Axon Evidence.com to the extent necessary to perform Work pursuant of this SOW.

Wireless Upload System
If purchased by the AGENCY, on such dates and times mutually agreed upon by the parties, AXON will install and configure into AGENCY’s existing network a wireless network infrastructure as identified in the AGENCY’s binding quote based on conditions of the sale.

VEHICLE INSTALLATION
Preparedness

4 On such dates and times mutually agreed upon by the parties, the AGENCY will deliver all vehicles to an AXON Installer less weapons and items of evidence.

Vehicle(s) will be deemed ‘out of service’ to the extent necessary to perform Work pursuant of this SOW.

Existing Mobile Video Camera System Removal
On such dates and times mutually agreed upon by the parties, the AGENCY will deliver all vehicles to an AXON Installer which will remove from said vehicles all components of the existing mobile video camera system unless otherwise agreed upon by the AGENCY.

Major components will be salvaged by the AXON Installer for auction by the AGENCY. Wires and cables are not considered expendable and will not be salvaged. Salvaged components will be placed in a designated area by the AGENCY within close proximity of the vehicle in an accessible work space.

Prior to removing the existing mobile video camera systems, it is both the responsibility of the AGENCY and the AXON Installer to test the vehicle’s systems’ operation to identify and operate, documenting any existing component or system failures and in detail, identify which components of the existing mobile video camera system will be removed by the AXON Installer.

In-Car Hardware/Software Delivery and Installation
On such dates and times mutually agreed upon by the parties, the AGENCY will deliver all vehicles to an AXON Installer, who will install and configure in each vehicle in accordance with the specifications detailed in the system’s installation manual and its relevant addendum(s). Applicable in-car hardware will be installed and configured as defined and validated by the AGENCY during the pre-deployment discovery process.

If a specified vehicle is unavailable on the date and time agreed upon by the parties, AGENCY will provide a similar vehicle for the installation process. Delays due to a vehicle, or substitute vehicle, not being available at agreed upon dates and times may results in additional fees to the AGENCY. If the AXON Installer determines that a vehicle is not properly prepared for installation (“Not Fleet Ready”), such as a battery not being properly charged or properly up-fit for in-service, field operations, the issue shall be reported immediately to the AGENCY for resolution and a date and time for the future installation shall be agreed upon by the parties.

5 Upon completion of installation and configuration, AXON will systematically test all installed and configured in-car hardware and software to ensure that ALL functions of the hardware and software are fully operational and that any deficiencies are corrected unless otherwise agreed upon by the AGENCY, installation, configuration, test and the correct of any deficiencies will be completed in each vehicle accepted for installation.

Prior to installing the Axon Fleet camera systems, it is both the responsibility of the AGENCY and the AXON Installer to test the vehicle’s existing systems’ operation to identify, document any existing component or vehicle systems’ failures. Prior to any vehicle up-fitting the AXON Installer will introduce the system’s components, basic functions, integrations and systems overview along with reference to AXON approved, AGENCY manuals, guides, portals and videos. It is both the responsibility of the AGENCY and the AXON Installer to agree on placement of each components, the antenna(s), integration recording trigger sources and customer preferred power, ground and ignition sources prior to permanent or temporary installation of an Axon Fleet camera solution in each vehicle type.

Agreed placement will be documented by the AXON Installer.

AXON welcomes up to 5 persons per system operation training session per day, and unless otherwise agreed upon by the AGENCY, the first vehicle will be used for an installation training demonstration. The second vehicle will be used for an assisted installation training demonstration. The installation training session is customary to any AXON Fleet installation service regardless of who performs the continued Axon Fleet system installations.

6 The customary training session does not ‘certify’ a non-AXON Installer, customer-employed Installer or customer 3rd party Installer, since the AXON Fleet products does not offer an Installer certification program. Any work performed by non-AXON Installer, customer-employed Installer or customer 3rd party Installer is not warrantied by AXON, and AXON is not liable for any damage to the vehicle and its existing systems and AXON Fleet hardware.