To: HONORABLE MAYOR AND From: Del D. Borgsdorf
CITY COUNCIL
Subject: GETTING FAMILIES BACK Date: December 9, 2003
TO
WORK—FOLLOW-UP
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the following recommendations for items discussed in
Sections B and C and in the Additional Directives to the City Manager section:
(a) Direct
the City Attorney to draft an Ordinance amending Section 4.46.050 of Chapter
4.46 of Title 4 of the San Jose Municipal Code to:
(1) Clarify the procedures to collect taxes for building permits
that are issued separately for building shell and the first tenant
improvements;
(2) Clarify the industrial use designation for buildings or
structures subject to collection of Building and Structure Construction Taxes;
(3) Add certain Driving Industry uses to the expanded list
eligible for the suspension on collecting Building and Structure Construction
Taxes.
(b)
Direct the City Attorney to draft amendments to the Zoning
Code to clarify and further develop a concurrent Planned Development Zoning and
Planned Development Permits;
(c)
Present in Spring 2004 recommendations related to increased
higher-density residential development in the Downtown and proceed with the
Request for Proposals schedule, as outlined in the report;
(d) Implement tax relief City-wide by suspending for 18 months the
Construction Excise Tax by 50% for new companies of 3,000 sq. ft. or less or
existing small businesses expanding to no more than 3,000 sq. ft.
(e)
Accept the proposed reporting schedules on the Getting
Families Back to Work effort and on the “One Voice” effort with direction to
bring forward a request to schedule a Study Session in April 2004; and,
(f)
Accept staff’s status reports on:
(1) Improving convenience and accessibility of doing business in
San Jose;
(2) Strengthening City’s ability to keep and grow sports teams and
events;
(3) Amateur Sports Complex Partnership opportunities;
(4)
Creating a One Start Center;
(5)
Countywide Conceptual Agreement/Collaborative Strategy;
(6)
Citywide effort to achieve 100% high-speed and wireless access
service coverage in the City of San Jose; and,
(7)
Streamlining Special Events process.
BACKGROUND
On September 30, 2003, the City Council approved various
recommendations in a memo authored by the Mayor and Councilmembers Cortese,
Chavez, Gregory and Yeager. In that
memo, Council provided direction under three sections: (a) items approved on September 16, 2003,
(b) items referred to the City Manager for additional analysis and/or
modifications, and (c) items not approved with direction for alternative action. Staff was directed to return on December 16,
2003 with comment on the following items listed below. In addition, staff has included a separate
section in this report of directives made as part of the motion on November 4,
2003 and additional outstanding directives.
Section B
(Items referred to the City Manager for additional analysis and/or
modifications.)
1. Implement tax relief to encourage investment in San Jose—City
Manager to provide fiscal impact analysis on reducing Construction Excise Tax
by 50% to driving industries.
2. Improve the convenience and accessibility of doing business in San Jose—City
Manager directed to provide outcome of discussions with bargaining units along
with a thorough fiscal impact analysis as a Council action and prior condition
to implementation. Staff is also directed
to survey customers in order to gauge their interest in the above proposal.
3. Strengthen our ability to keep and grow sports teams and events in San
Jose—The City Manager is directed to bring back progress reports to
Council on a quarterly basis beginning in December of 2003. Reports should include: amount of significant public/private
investment actually gained by the City on an annual basis, and the amount of
new revenue attracted to the City over and above the baseline year of 2003.
Section C (Items not approved with
direction for alternative action.)
1. Simplify approval of any permits or zoning applications
that conform to the City’s General Plan—The City Manager was directed
to implement the approval and appeal of Single Family House Permits and the
cancellation of Williamson Act Contracts as actions that could be delegated to
the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement and to report on the
process for those approvals and appeals with the assistance of the City
Attorney and to return to Council for final review and approval.
2. Amateur Sports Complex Partnership Opportunities—City Manager directed to provide Council with a report
offering possible partnership opportunities with San Jose State University and
our amateur sports teams.
3. Signage Regulations related to high rises—City
Manager directed to expand that discussion to include the current sign
ordinance and the identification of any additional efficiencies and report to
the Council.
4. One Start Center—City Manager was directed to
provide status report on the pilot program.
5. Countywide Conceptual Agreement/Collaborative Strategy—City
Manager directed to coordinate a collaborative strategy for job retention with
the Santa Clara County Cities Association, the Santa Clara County City
Manager’s Association, and include the Santa Clara County Executive’s
Office. City Manager directed to draft
a policy position that would convey the interests of San Jose in a regional job
retention strategy and/or agreement with a progress report to the Council.
ANALYSIS
This section of the report responds to the above directives,
in the order listed.
Section B
1. Implement tax relief to encourage investment in
San Jose—
Staff is proposing to amend the Municipal Code provisions on
the Building & Structures Construction Tax, as an alternative to the
proposal to cut by 50 % the Construction Excise Tax for driving industries.[1] Changing the Building & Structures
Construction Tax has the advantage of clarifying an outdated ordinance and
provides additional benefit to qualifying companies. The original intent of the Building & Structures Construction
Tax was to provide incentive to manufacturing and research and development
companies choosing to locate in San Jose.
The Ordinance and the City’s Zoning Code have not changed in over 20
years; but, technology, on the other hand, and the companies providing
manufacturing and research and development have changed radically. As a result, there has been difficulty in
implementing the Ordinance.
For that reason, by early next
year, staff would like to present to Council amendments to the Building &
Structures Construction Tax Ordinance consistent with the City Auditor’s issued
report #00-08, An Audit Of The City Of San Jose's Building-Related Fees And
Taxes, in which the Auditor recommended a clarification of the types
of uses that are included within the “industrial” designation.
Specific industry clusters to
be proposed for suspension on the collection of the tax are: Software
development and Internet applications; Bioscience, research, production and
testing; Server farms and co-location facilities (assist in “wiring” the area);
and, Developers of communications, telecommunications, and wireless
products. In addition, clusters of
Computer and Communications Hardware Manufacturing, Semiconductor and
Semiconductor Equipment Manufacturing would be reviewed to ensure that
businesses that the City would like to spur are not being excluded inadvertently. It is important to note, that during the
review and amendment process, no land uses may be eliminated from the current
list of eligible businesses as exclusion would, in effect, raise issues
regarding Proposition 218.
Benefit Calculation and Cost--The
costs associated with amending the Building & Structures Construction Tax
Ordinance are estimated to be $310,000 annually. The relatively low number is due to the fact that portions of
software, biomedical and telecommunications equipment industries were already
incorporated within the eligible uses of the Building & Structures
Construction Tax Ordinance. Staff
estimates that roughly 235,000 sq. ft. of space will be assisted through this
measure and that space will accommodate approximately 750 employees. Adding jobs will also increase other City
taxes and revenues such as property tax utility taxes and ultimately sales tax.
Companies that qualify as eligible uses in the Building
& Structures Construction Tax Ordinance do not pay the Commercial-Residential-Mobile
Home Park Building Tax (CRMP) at a rate of 3% of one hundred percent of the
valuation. Qualifying companies pay the
Industrial Rate of the Building and Structure Construction Tax, which is 1% of
one hundred percent of the valuation and not the commercial rate of 1.5 % of
one hundred percent of the valuation.
Thus, companies save 3.5% of one hundred percent of valuation.
Office
of Economic Development anticipates marketing the amendment to the Building
& Structures Construction Tax Ordinance in conjunction with the extension
of the Special Tenant Improvement Program for the purposes of business
attraction and retention. Staff
believes that the extension of the Special Tenant Improvement Program and
amendment of the Building & Structures Construction Tax Ordinance provide
sufficient incentive to retain and attract businesses to San Jose. The amendment provisions will have an
18-month sunset, which can be renewed.
The purpose of placing a sunset provision in the Ordinance is to preserve
the ability of future City Council to revive the tax at a future date without
concern of a Proposition 218 challenge.
2. Improve the convenience and accessibility of
doing business in San Jose—
The Building Division commenced a
survey at the beginning of October to determine if alternate service hours
would address convenience and accessibility for customers. Results indicate that approximately 40% of
customers would benefit from some extended hours of service; however, specific
days of the week for extended hours were not identified. As a result, the Building Division formed a
committee made up of employees and management to explore available options.
The Committee had their first meeting on November 6 and, since that
date, has developed an alternative to increase the hours of service
Monday through Wednesday mornings and provide after-hours service Tuesday
nights. The Committee feels this
proposal will meet customer demand.
This proposal requires no new resources and relies upon reallocating staff
from Friday, a day that typically experiences lower customer activity than
other days. In developing staffing
schedules, staff will ensure that adequate coverage is provided on Friday. The initial pilot will limit the extended
service hours to specific commercial and residential customers. A public outreach effort will begin within
the next 30 days with a target date of February 2, 2004 for implementing this
program.
3. Strengthen our ability to keep and grow
sports teams and events in San Jose—
In
November 2003, the City Manager and Director of the Office of Economic
Development had an initial meeting with the Chairman of the Sports Authority
Board, its Executive Director and Don Kassing of San Jose State University. The purpose of this meeting was to get an
orientation to the work of the Authority's Task Force on the growth and
retention of sports teams and events and its expanded role into investigating
the creation, construction, expansion and rehabilitation of sporting facilities
and venues. The meeting also included a
discussion of the opportunities to pursue major league franchises. As additional information is available,
staff will include it in subsequent reports.
Section C
1. Simplify
approval of any permits or zoning applications that conform to the City’s
General Plan—
The Department of
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement and City Attorney's Office have
developed an amendment to the Zoning Code to implement the delegation of
approvals of all Single Family House Permits to the Director of Planning,
Building and Code Enforcement with appeals of those decisions to the Planning
Commission. This Code amendment will be
coming forward to the City Council by December 16, 2003. The City Attorney's Office is in the process
of reviewing relevant State legal requirements and drafting the required
revisions to the Williamson Act Contract cancellation process to implement
delegation of the process to the Planning Director, which will also be
presented to Council in January 2004.
2. Amateur
Sports Complex Partnership Opportunities—
The Director of the Office of
Economic Development has had preliminary meetings with representatives of the
San Jose State University about partnership opportunities. These meetings have focused on the possible
expansion of the Logitech Ice Center and the University's needs for expanded
parking in the South Campus area to serve the Main Campus. Additional meetings are being scheduled
between the Office of Economic Development and the San Jose State University to
begin to implement the strategic initiatives and tactics contained in the
Economic Development Strategy to "Develop Strategic Partnerships with San
Jose State and Other Universities to Drive Innovation and Economic Impact"
and to "Encourage Sporting Teams, Events and Facilities, Professional as
well as amateur. Staff will continue to
provide status reports.
3. Signage
Regulations related to high rises—
On November 18,
2003, the City Council approved
changes to the Sign Ordinance that extends "high rise" signs to the
Edenvale Industrial Redevelopment Area.
On November 24, the DSE Committee considered and recommended
further Sign Code changes to streamline
signage regulations in the commercial and industrial zoning districts. This proposal is scheduled for final
action by the City Council on December 16, 2003.
4. One
Start Center—
The One Start Center
will be located in City Hall in Room 106.
General Services Department began construction on November 12, 2003 and
estimated completion prior to the holiday closure. A floor plan accommodates space for all of the development review
partners--Public Works, Planning, Building, Fire, Office of Economic
Development, and Redevelopment Agency.
The Center should be fully operational by the beginning of the year.
5. Countywide
Conceptual Agreement/Collaborative Strategy—
At
the November 13, 2003, meeting of the Santa Clara County Cities Association,
(SCCCA), the Board moved to create an Ad-Hoc committee of the SCCCA to begin
dialogue with leadership in the business community. The purpose of the
Committee will be to develop an action plan for the Board to review in January
2004. Representation of the City Manager's Association was also present and
will assist in this endeavor. Discussion
included defining the role of the SCCCA in pursuing a regional strategy for job
retention, creation and attraction to assist in strengthening our local
economy. The action plan will be
shared with Council in a subsequent report.
Additional Directives to City
Manager to Provide Analysis/Information
1. Develop concurrent Planned Development Zoning
and Planned Development Permits—
The Zoning Code currently provides
for the concurrent processing of Planned Development Zoning and Planned
Development Permit applications.
Planning Staff is working with the City Attorney's Office to develop an
amendment to the Zoning Code to further highlight and clarify this
process. Planning staff will provide
outreach on the Division's Planned Development concurrent review process
through its ongoing Developer Roundtable meetings, next scheduled for December
12, 2003.
2. Encourage greater housing density and production
in the Downtown Core, in particular—
The Housing
Department and Redevelopment Agency are working together to analyze a number of
incentives that can be provided to developers to encourage the development of
higher density residential production in the downtown. Using as a model the CIM Project on Block 3, which will be a 12-story mixed-use
retail/residential building, the analysis is looking at reductions in parkland
dedication fees, planning and building fees, and inclusionary zoning
requirements, with the goal of developing the project with the lowest public
subsidies. Other measures, such as
above-ground parking and premium pricing for units in the top floors, may make
development more feasible without any additional public subsidy.
The Redevelopment Agency will issue three Requests for
Proposals for development of various Downtown sites in the next three months:
(1) the Brandenberg Site in December 2003, with responses due back in January
2004, (2) the Dimensions Site in January 2004, with responses due back in
February, and (3) the Block 8 Site in February 2004, with responses due back in
March. The responses to the RFPs will
provide real life examples to determine the need for any of the above-mentioned
incentives. Based on the responses, the
Agency and Housing Department will return to the City Council in the Spring 2004 with
recommendations relating to increased higher-density residential development in
the Downtown.
3. Encourage tax relief for small businesses (less
than 3,000 sq. ft.), with both an emphasis on the downtown and Neighborhood
Business Districts—
Council requested staff to comment on the fiscal impact of
providing tax relief for small businesses, with an emphasis on the downtown and
Neighborhood Business Districts. Based
on staff’s evaluation, and in order to encourage tax relief for small
businesses Citywide (less than 3,000 sq. ft.), staff’s recommendation is to
suspend Citywide for 18 months the Construction Excise Tax by 50%. This reduction would only apply to new
companies of 3,000 sq. ft. or less or existing small businesses expanding to no
more than 3,000 sq. ft. This
recommendation would address concerns discussed during the Getting Families
Back to Work sessions held in August of 2003.
During the sessions, and in the Economic Development Strategy, emphasis
was placed on the importance of start-up businesses in the community. Small businesses also expressed concern that
costs make it difficult for new enterprises to expand.
An additional incentive that surfaced during Council’s
discussions of financial relief to small businesses was a reduction in service
and development fees by 50%. This
benefit would require that the City backfill the lost revenue from other
revenue sources which at this time poses a significant challenge. In addition, these programs are mandated by
the City Council to achieve cost recovery and have established these fees in
compliance with applicable law.
The City Manager was directed to provide preliminary
estimates of the cost of this proposal.
Based on an estimate of 200 qualifying projects, it is estimated that
there would be a loss of over $700,000 in fee revenue over 18 months. Without a subsidy, most probably from the
General Fund, a staffing reduction of 5.00 FTE in the development fee programs
would be required to balance the budget.
Given the recent conversations with the development industry, it is
possible that delays in the development review and inspection process could
ultimately cost businesses more than the savings from a service fee
reduction. If a reduction in
development fees were to apply only to small businesses, businesses not
eligible for the reduced fees could challenge the fees on the basis that they
would be overpaying their share of the cost of the City’s development review
program. At this time, staff does not
recommend a reduction in fees for reasons outlined above.
Benefit Calculation and Cost—Through the above
alternative proposal, monetary relief to small businesses that wish to expand
could be obtained through reductions to construction taxes without identifying
backfill funds or impacting service levels in the development process. On the same estimated 200 projects, a
suspension of 50% of construction taxes would result in a $456,000 loss of
revenue primarily used for traffic related improvements.
Council asked for staff to comment on the fiscal impact of
providing tax relief for small businesses in the downtown and Neighborhood
Business Districts. The above Benefit
Calculation and Cost information reflects data Citywide. Staff’s estimate is that the fiscal impact
for downtown and Neighborhood Business Districts would be 50-60% of the
Citywide figures. Exact numbers are not
available because the San Jose Permits On-line System does not provide
information based on area.
4. Report
on citywide effort to achieve 100% high-speed and/or wireless access service
coverage—
Staff from the Department of Public
Works, City Manager’s Office, Office of Economic Development, Information
Technology Department, and Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department
have contacted and met with numerous wired and wireless high-speed Internet
service providers to solicit input and information on coverage area, types of
Internet service available and future plans.
Companies that staff contacted are SBC, Comcast, AT&T Wireless,
Verizon Wireless, and Sprint. The
purpose of this effort was to gather information on Broadband and Internet
services in San José, identify areas that are not covered, identify current
plans to facilitate total City coverage and to accelerate development of the
infrastructure in San José, and work collaboratively with wireless providers to
identify sites for their equipment on city property or facilities. Following is an update on wired and wireless
high-speed Internet service in San Jose.
Wired--Comcast and SBC provide
dial-up (phone) and cable Internet and Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) connection
services in San Jose. Comcast is
converting its cable network to a fiber-optic/coaxial cable system capable of
delivering video, telephone, and cable Internet. This conversion is a multi-phased project, and the phases are
described below:
|
Phase |
Completion
Date |
Geographic
Area |
|
1 |
Currently Available |
Northeast and south-central regions
of the City and represents approximately one-third of the households in San
José |
|
2 |
April 2004 |
Evergreen/Silver Creek areas and
Foxworthy Extension node area that reaches into Blossom Valley and Almaden
Valley |
|
3 |
December 2004 (Construction begins April 2004) |
Completion of the rest of the City
and presence in some parts of the Downtown Core Area, providing Cable service
(video only). Currently, the main
line is located along Market Street, West San Fernando Street, San Carlos
Street, Fourth Street, and Woz Way, providing cable television services to
businesses such as the Tech Museum, Fairmont Hotel and DeAnza Hotel. |
Comcast’s current plan is to upgrade
its aging video cable network system within residential areas only. Comcast’s current network system does not
include services to the majority of business parks and industrial areas,
including some parts of the Downtown Core Area. However, Comcast has indicated that services are available with a
cost to extend lines upon special request by business customers. Comcast has major trunk lines that are
easily accessible to business parks and industrial areas, e.g. North and Central
San José - Santa Clara Street, Fourth Market Street, Fourth Street, Brokaw
Road, First Street, and River Oaks Blvd.
According to Comcast staff, Comcast chooses not to focus on Business
Parks, Industrial and Downtown Core Areas for economic reasons.
SBC is the current
owner of the telephone system in San José and provides two types of Internet
access through dial-up and DSL connections.
Through dial-up connections, Internet access is available to businesses
and residents anywhere in San José. DSL
technology simultaneously transmits data and voice over the same line so one
can talk on the phone while connected to the Internet. According to SBC, DSL service is available
to ninety percent of the City.
According to SBC staff, in 2001, heavy Federal regulatory burden, in
addition to the sagging economy, forced SBC to cut back on accelerated
development of DSL infrastructure.
Last, there are other providers of DSL services to businesses and
residences, such as Qwest, Sprint, Verizon, MSN, AT&T, Covad, Earthlink,
and Netzero. These providers mainly
lease SBC’s infrastructure to provide DSL connections to Internet
subscribers.
Wireless Internet
Connections-- Six companies (AT&T Wireless, Verizon, Sprint, Nextel,
Cingular, and T-Mobile) currently provide wireless services for a fee,
throughout the City of San José on their existing system via existing cellular
sites. The focus of these companies is on cellular services including Internet
services and text messaging. All of San
José is covered, except for the northern border of San José /Milpitas, fringes
of west and east San José area along the hillsides (Evergreen and
Almaden). Verizon Wireless and AT&T
Wireless have future plans to develop infrastructure so that the entire
community is wireless. Verizon Wireless
alone is investing $255 million nationwide in infrastructure, out of which,
approximately $60 million is targeted for Santa Clara County. Similarly, in 2004 AT&T Wireless will be
starting a “Best in Class” build-out in New York, Washington DC, and California
addressing areas that have weak coverage.
There are some constraints and hindrances that wireless companies need
to overcome in order to add cellular sites to increase capacity, such as
current Federal requirements do not allow cellular antennas to be located
closer than approximately 33 feet from a residential dwelling. On September 16, 2003, the City of San José
revised its Land Use Policy for Wireless Communications Facilities (two-way
wireless communication facilities) to further allow development and encourage
growth of wireless facilities in San José.
Wi-Fi allows the freedom to connect to the Internet at high
speed without wires. Wi-Fi wireless
technology works as a cordless phone does, transmitting a wireless signal from
a base station to a device located within the building. However, Wi-Fi enabled devices are designed
to transmit data across a wireless network at broadband speeds. Smaller wireless companies provide wireless
fidelity (Wi-Fi) service in certain locations of San José, including the Mineta
San José International Airport, Santana Row, major hotels, and national retail
establishments. This service is offered on a fee or free basis. SBC is the first major telecom provider in
San José that has entered into the Wi-Fi market on a fee basis.
5. Provide Fiscal Information on tax relief to
encourage investment in San Jose and include in future reports fiscal analysis
and impacted funds—
This directive was originally made to staff on September 30,
2003 with a deadline of November 4, 2003.
On November 4, 2003, staff was directed to return on December 16, 2003
with information on implementation of tax relief to encourage investment in San
Jose. This information is contained in
sections beginning with “Benefit Calculation and Cost” (see Sections B, #1 and
Additional Directives to the City Manager, #3).
6.
Include the guidelines for how Attachment B, of
November 4, 2003 report, was developed—
Attachment B, of the November 4, 2003 staff
report was a draft list of identified current regulations that may hinder business
development or operations. Planning
staff worked closely with the Chamber’s Development Committee in response to
the Zucker Study and in a broader consideration of regulations that are not
helpful to business concerns. Through the Economic Development Strategy,
developers, businesses and cultural organizations have provided additional
testimony and refinement of the draft list. It is important to note that all
ordinance changes would be subject to community outreach prior to the City
Council's public hearing. Council
directed staff to provide criteria used to develop the draft list. Below is the set of criteria used:
§ Complete
process improvements and Zoning Code changes that promote Smart Growth/Economic
Development/Quality of Life and simplify the development review process (e.g.,
changes to the conventional residential districts, North San Jose Area
Development Policy, etc).
§ Streamline the
permit process to reduce staff processing times, improve customer service, and
reduce customer costs (e.g, retaining wall permits).
§ Streamline the
permit process to reduce staff processing times, particularly for those permits
that are not cost recovery because we do not charge a fee (e.g., tree removal
permits).
§ Hold in
abeyance those pending ordinances that would add new permit requirements (e.g.,
beverage service ordinance).
§ Implement new
regulations that further the health and safety of the community.
7.
Streamline Special Events process by: creating a
tiered fee structure for events based on small vs. large and non-profit vs.
for-profit applicants; resolving inconsistencies in City invoices, amongst
departments, and providing timely invoices; improving event evaluations;
improving grant process for the Festival, Parade and Celebration (FPC) Grant
Program; and, developing a strategy for increasing quantity and quality of
events—
A
variety of directives have emerged relating to the City's Special Event
Program. All directives are under
review for purposes of developing recommendations and operational changes. The
principal assignment to be addressed, which will immediately improve the
application process for customers, is implementation of a streamlined
"one-start" event application process. A multi-departmental staff team has made significant progress in
developing a draft application that has been reviewed and revised by affected
City departments. The final draft
application and process will be presented to community stakeholders for their
input, with an implementation target in early 2004.
Council
assigned additional issues for review or implementation on November 4, 2003,
which are: creating a tiered fee
structure for events based on small vs. large and non-profit vs. for-profit
applicants; resolving inconsistencies in City invoices, amongst departments,
and providing timely invoices; improving event evaluations; improving grant
process for the Festival, Parade and Celebration (FPC) Grant Program; and,
developing a strategy for increasing quantity and quality of events. These directives have been incorporated into
the multi-departmental team’s work plan and are under review. It is important to note, though, that a
change in structure, process or policy in one area may have significant effects
on other areas of the special event process.
For that reason, a comprehensive review of the remaining issues will
require additional time to develop meaningful solutions that do not adversely
impact the intended improved processes.
For example, most of the current special event and FPC Grant Program
policies were developed with broad internal and external stakeholder input
through the City's 1993-94 Special Events Task Force. Many of the Task Force members are still active in the field and
their expertise and historical knowledge will be sought, in addition to new
stakeholders. The challenge will be to
reconcile the factors leading to the current process with City’s current
economic and cultural environment.
The following preliminary timeline is in place and will be
refined as the team continues its work.
Special Event
Multi-Departmental Work Schedule
Date
|
Type |
|
February
– March 2004 |
“One-Start” Application
Process--stakeholder involvement in December and January; final draft for
review in February; and implementation in March. |
|
March |
Consistent
City Service Invoicing practices |
|
May-
June |
Report
on Proposed Fee Structure Revisions |
|
September
– November |
Report
on Improvements to the City’s grant process (for implementation into the 2005-2006 grant cycle process) |
|
November |
Report
on outstanding issues, listed above. |
8.
Provide schedule of reports to Council on “One
Voice” and GFB2W effort, and include customer input and community outreach
component in reports back to Council—
In the November 4, 2003 memo, one
status report was scheduled for the Cisco effort in March 2004 and that
additional information would be made available as part of the budget
process. Council directed additional
status reports on both the “One Voice” effort and Getting Families Back to Work
effort. In addition, the City Manager
suggested an additional Study Session on the “One Voice” effort based on
completion of the Cisco effort in March 2004.
Following is a proposed schedule for
the Getting Families Back to Work effort.
Later in this report, a brief status report and proposed report schedule
is provided regarding “One Voice” effort.
The two schedules have been separated for purposes of distinguishing the
two efforts.
Getting Families Back to Work Status Report Schedule
Date
|
Type |
|
December 16, 2003 |
Status Report |
|
February 2004 |
Status Report |
|
June 2004 |
Status Report (as part of budget
process) |
This report constitutes the above
referenced December 16, 2003 status report on the Getting Families Back to Work
effort and the “One Voice” effort. The
February 2004 report is offered in response to the proposed January 15, 2004
Study Session on the City and Redevelopment Agency’s fiscal challenges and
budgets. This report will incorporate
responses to Council’s discussion of December 16, 2003 and January 15,
2004. The June status report would
report on the impact of Council’s strategic input in time for final passage of
the budget in later June.
9.
Schedule a Study Session on the Redevelopment
Agency—
The Mayor’s Office submitted a request
for a Study Session to Rules Committee on November 19, 2003. The Rules Committee approved the Mayor’s
request for a January 14th Study Session on the City and
Redevelopment Agency’s fiscal challenges and budgets.
10. Provide update on “One Voice” effort—
The “One Voice” service delivery effort with the support of Cisco
System's Internet Business Solutions Group (IBSG) is underway. Stakeholder interviews with the
four-stakeholder departments/agency and the project steering committee were
completed in early December 2003. The
information gained from the interview process and the completion of an IBSG
proprietary readiness assessment will serve as the foundation for a strategic
planning session with the steering committee members, scheduled on January 6,
2004, with the objective of reaching group consensus on the ‘one-voice’ vision
and strategic objectives.
A capabilities assessment will be completed by mid-February 2004. The assessment is intended to provide an
evaluation of the needed resources in people and technology required to meet
“One Voice” service delivery objectives.
A second facilitated session will be conducted in February 2004 to
develop and approve a portfolio of projects that when combined will constitute
the entire “One Voice” service delivery effort. This facilitated session will validate and approve business cases
that support each project in the portfolio.
The project team will assemble the completed deliverables and prepare a
briefing for the City Council in March 2004.
Report Schedule—Each Getting Families Back to Work
status report will include and update on the “One Voice” effort. In addition, based on Council’s direction,
an April 2004 Study Session is being proposed.
This will provide a forum for Council to discuss the content of the
previous “One Voice” status reports and to provide strategic input prior to
budget deliberations. April 2004 is
suggested because the Cisco work will be completed in March 2004.
11. City Auditor’s Performance Measures and Annual Accounting to
Monitor Success—
The City Auditor was directed to
develop performance measures for every item approved by the Council as a result
of the Getting Families Back to Work effort for purposes of conducting
performance evaluations for the City Manager, Redevelopment Agency Executive
Director, and City Attorney. In
addition, the City Auditor was directed to perform an annual accounting to
monitor and gauge the success of the recommendations and actions taken by the
Mayor, City Council, and the City Manager.
For reasons outlined in the attached City Auditor’s memorandum,
Government Auditing Standards preclude the Auditor from performing the above
directives (Attachment A).
To that end, the City Manager
proposes a slight adjustment to the current Council Appointee Performance
Evaluation format to incorporate the intent of the above directives. Currently, the City Manager’s Performance
Evaluation is divided into three reporting sections: Part 1, Results/ Accomplishments
(40%); Part 2, Council Relations (30%); and, Part 3, Organizational/ Managerial
Effectiveness (30%). The
Results/Accomplishments portion is reported by City Service Area and speaks to
direct service accomplishments in the previous year. City Service Area performance measures, along with a new Getting
Families Back to Work section, could be incorporated into this section of the
report format. Likewise, the
Redevelopment Agency Executive Director and City Attorney could identify an
appropriate place in the existing performance evaluation format to report out
on Getting Families Back to Work performance.
FISCAL IMPACT
When applicable, under each header,
fiscal analysis has been provided. In
addition, fiscal impact issues will be addressed as part of the FY 2004-2005
Proposed Budget. It is understood that
implementation of these recommendations should result in cost savings or be
cost neutral.
PUBLIC
OUTREACH
This report covers multiple issues
and, in some instances, a level of public outreach is already underway and
mentioned in this report. In other
instances, staff is in process of meeting with key stakeholders to solicit
input. The intent of this effort is to
improve services for the Public, and staff is mindful of appropriate public
outreach to achieve responsive service delivery.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s
Office, Redevelopment Agency and City departments.
CEQA
Not a project.
Del D. Borgsdorf
City Manager
Attachment