Attachment 7 - Public CommentFrom: Lee Quintana <leeandpaul@earthlink.net>
Date: December 10, 2017 at 9:29:48 PM PST
To: Joel Paulson <ipaulson@,losgatosca.gov>, Laurel Prevetti <LPrevetti@,losgatosca.gov>
Cc: Rennie Rob <rrennie@losgatosca.gov>, Marico Sayoc <msavocalosgatosca.gov>,
Leonardis Steve <sleonardis@losgatosca.gov>, Spector Barbara <bspector@,losgatosca.gov>,
Marcia Jensen <mjensen(a,losgatosca.gov>
Subject: Priority Setting Town Council Special Meeting December 12, 2017
From: Lee Quintana
Re: Priority Setting Special Council Meeting
Date: December 12, 2017
Mayor Rennie and Members of the Council,
I will be out of town and not be able to attend this meeting, however I would like to submit the
following for Council's consideration:
Zoning Code:
This is my annual request for As I have for a comprehensive review and update of the Town's
Zoning Code.
Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines:
Review and update of the Hillside Development Standards and Guidelines, including but not
limited to:
1. Review and revise FAR and maximum allowed square footage.
2. Consider establishing setbacks from the LRDA to define the building envelope in the
hillsides.
3. Establish standards for maximum grading quantities in cubic yards for cut and fill (in
addition to standards for maximum cut and hill depth)
4. Revise exceptions to maximum floor area and exceptions to HDS&G standards and
guidelines as a whole
5. Re-enforce/clarify/establish standards to maintaining the rural, natural open character of
the hillsides (also Fence Amendments below)
6. Establish standards to define the area in which non -animal friendly fences are allowed.
(also see Fence Amendments below
Fence Ordinance Amendments:
1. I participated in the development of the original draft submitted to staff by David
Weissman and support the Draft Fence Ordinance as proposed by staff.
2. However, I do not support the subsequent amended draft submitted by David Weissman
for the December 5, 2017 Town Council hearing. In particular I oppose the use of the
parcel setback line rather than a line 30 feet back from the residence.
Please consider returning the proposed Fence Ordinance to the Policy Committee, the Planning
Commission or the Town Council, as appropriate, with additional direction to:
1. To ensure that the work of staff and the participation of the public is not wasted, while at
the same time acknowledging that this might be revised again during a more
comprehensive review of the HDS&G
ATTACHMENT 7
2. To amend the fence ordinance to allow fences in the non -hillside areas up to be up to
seven feet (7') hight provided the last foot is open lattice.
3. To amend the purpose and intent to support the division of the ordinance into two parts.
(i.e. the regulation of fences in the hillsides has two functions, to provide protection for
wildlife and humans, and to provide regulations regarding placement of fences to
maintain the rural open character of the hillsides.
4. To receive clarification from the Town Attorney with respect to the loss of property
rights.
5. To define the line which will be used to divide wildfire friendly form non -wildlife
friendly fences.
The information and knowledge provided by a wildlife corridor or movement study could be
useful, but is not necessary to approve amendments to the Fence Ordinance if both wildlife
movements and the maintenance of the open rural feel are considered. The study would not be
necessary unless the setbacks from the parcel boundary is used as established as the line between
wildlife friendly and non -wildlife friendly fences, which might have an adverse affect on
wildlife.
Currently the stumbling blocks to amending the Fence Ordinance are the issues of property rights
and where to draw the line between animal friendly and non -animal friendly fences.
1. Pproperty rights issue: See #4 above.
2. The line between wildlife friendly and non wildlife friendly fences.. To be able to
approve the ordinance a definitive line that is easy to implement needs to be
specified; one that will not require additional studies or environmental review.
As I stated during the public hearing at the Planning Commission, 30 feet from the residence
may not make sense. However, the alternative of using the parcel setbacks make even less sense,
as, in my opinion, it would not be inconsistent with maintaining the rural open character of the
hillsides. Consider 40 feet from the residence, which would be 10 more than 30 feet from the
residence, which is used in the HDSG to define the limit for ornamental landscaping.
Thank you for your consideration,
Lee Quintana
From: Jeff Loughridge [mailto:Iokrij@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 10:27 AM
To: Council; Town Manager
Cc: Rob Rennie; Steven Leonard's; Marcia Jensen; Marico Sayoc; BSpector
Subject: Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission UPDATE - for Council Addendum
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
Thank you for your support of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission. I was selected
at the December BPAC meeting to provide the Council with an update of the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Advisory Commission's accomplishments during the past year.
Most notably, the Town Council approved the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan in March of
this year. Completion of this plan required numerous BPAC coordinated special meetings,
public meetings, and work with the Master Plan consultant for over a year. Development and
approval of this plan, allows the Council and the community to develop safer paths of travel for
pedestrians and bicyclists throughout the Town, while allowing Los Gatos to apply for various
grants and matching funds.
The BPAC has been making a presence at Town events. At the Spring into Green event, the
BPAC provided a booth with a Town map where residents identified bicycle and pedestrian areas
of concern around the Town.
The BPAC has also been involved with providing several successful bike valet services for Town
events, including the Red, White and Blue Block Party, and the Town Holiday Parade. The
BPAC helped to coordinate a bike valet for the private Eat, Drink Los Gatos event, which was
also very successful.
These efforts help keep the BPAC members informed of community priorities, so that they can
more effectively fulfill their advisory capacity to Council. They also raise awareness among
residents of the ease of riding their bikes to town events vs. fighting traffic and trying to find
parking spaces.
Additionally, the BPAC worked to develop a prioritization list for capital projects from the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master plan for Council approval. This led to the development of a
recommendation for Council to use the Town non-competitive OBAG grant funding to fund the
design of the Measure B identified Highway 9 Bicycle and Pedestrian Connector project.
The BPAC also worked with PPW on incorporating bicycle and pedestrian striping
enhancements in the Town's maintenance projects, allowing a simple and inexpensive way to
increase bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Town roadways. The Council was supportive
of the Commission in each of these endeavors.
The BPAC appreciates the Council's continued support of both the Commission, and bicycle and
pedestrian projects in the Town and is looking forward to another successful year in 2018. We
welcome Council feedback on priorities for 2018.
Respectfully,
Jeff Loughridge
Chair, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission
From: Peter Hertan [mailto:phertan@alum.mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 10:46 AM
To: Clerk; Laurel Prevetti
Subject: Proposal for LG Emergency Preparedness Advisory Commission
I submit the attached memo as an Addendum to tomorrow's TC meeting Packet.
Peter
408-315-0209
Memo to: Town Council and Town Manager
From: Peter L Hertan
Date: December 11, 2017
Subject: PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH AN EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS ADVISORY COMMISSION
In support of the recently recognized importance of Emergency Preparedness within Los Gatos, the
town council should consider creating an Emergency Preparedness Advisory Commission to ensure the
coordination, integration, and non -duplication of effort of the various citizen community volunteer
groups:
Specifically: CERT, ARES-RACES, DART, VIP, POLICE EXPLORERS, and the RED CROSS.
Each of these organizations has well-defined roles for volunteers in support of responses to local
emergencies. The town staff Priority Setting memo specifically describes the need for support of the
CERT volunteer activities, but only generically identifies "other" community volunteer efforts. This
memo is to specifically recognize all the volunteer groups whose activities should be included in the
town's Emergency Operation Plan and to recommend the coordination and integration of those
individual activities. The objective is to ensure synergy, elimination of duplication of effort, and to
provide balanced financial and staff support.
The CERT, ARES-RACES, and DART volunteers are well-known for their contributions to local emergency
preparedness. The Police VIP program also provides for their volunteers to specialize in Emergency
Management Preparedness (http://www.losgatosca.gov/154/Volunteers-in-Policing-VIP) although there
are not currently such activities. In the past, VIPs participated in the monthly testing of the EOC
equipment and activation of the EOC for drills and emergencies.
A seven member Commission, meeting bimonthly, drawn from volunteers active in CERT, ARES-RACES,
DART, VIP, RED CROSS, and POLICE EXPLORER (provides for a youth member) would permit
communications and integration of efforts by each of these groups, as well as advocacy for specific,
coordinated roles in an emergency.
The ideal town staff interfaces would be the assistant town manager and the town's police captain
because of their central roles in planning and executing the town's emergency management.
From: Jeff Loughridge [mailto:lokrij@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 10:48 AM
To: Council; Town Manager
Cc: Rob Rennie; Steven Leonardis; Marcia Jensen; Marico Sayoc; BSpector
Subject: Council Addendum - Bike Valet Service Suggestion
Dear Mayor and Council members,
Los Gatos needs more parking for existing businesses to comply with their CUPs. Time is wasted for
residents and visitors trying to find a parking space and so many are discouraged from even coming
downtown, they may be redirecting their retail purchases to other cities, where parking is not such a big
problem.
To reduce traffic, reduce the need for additional car parking and possibly increase the likelihood of people
visiting downtown Los Gatos businesses, 1 would recommend that the Town of Los Gatos require a
Bike Valet service for all outdoor events requiring a permit.
This service would allow residents and visitors to bicycle to Los Gatos, park their bike in a secure/staffed
place and be able to enjoy all the amenities Los Gatos offers. This is something that in order to reduce
traffic and make the most of the limited parking, could be a permanent fixture even on the weekends in
town. So far, a bike valet has been available for three events in town (The Red, White and Blue Festival,
Eat/Drink Los Gatos event, and the Christmas Parade).
The advantages of having this as a regular service would be that people would come to rely on the
parking and many more would take advantage of this service. The equipment necessary for this is fairly
inexpensive and can be bought and owned by the town and lent out to event organizers.
believe the benefits of offering a regular bike valet services at events would be a very positive step in
helping to resolve some of our local residents' and businesses' frustration around summer weekend
traffic. It offers a simple, easy and low-cost way to decrease traffic and parking stress, while increasing
the ability of local residents/visitors to attend fun events and patronize local businesses.
Respectfully,
Jeff Loughridge
109 Paseo Laura
Los Gatos, CA 95032
12-11-17
Jak VanNada
Los Gatos Community Alliance
It wasn't long ago that I spoke about the unfunded debt being over $70 M. As time moves on and we
get more of the information from the latest CAFR, I would like to prove that the REAL DEBT is closer to
$90 M ! Yet it doesn't show up on our CAFR as obviously as I would like it to if I were a Councilperson.
I'm the type that needs the 2x4 upside the head to make a point stick. What bothers me is that the
CAFR and Budget would indicate that we get awards and run a conservative government, when in fact,
to really run the town, we need the FULL, TRANSPARENT, EASY TO READ story. As it is written, I believe
the hard facts MAY be there, hidden throughout the report, but as Council people, you need to dig too
much for the full story.
And yet, our CAFR shows that we have a positive $6.7M for the council to presumably spend in the next
fiscal year. If you, the Council, looked deeper and asked the right questions of staff, you would realize
that by following the rules to the T, but not highlighting the full story, you're really $5.4 million in the
hole on the Net Position of Government Activities for 2017-18.. How many of you are thinking
you have money to spend? How many of you read in the budget that we have flat revenues
and flat expenses, and that we're dipping into reserves to keep paying for services?
The town states that it runs things very conservatively; yet I am perplexed that we know the following
and yet it seems to go unaddressed and unnoticed. We're told that we have 30 years to fix this
problem, yet in the past 14 years, our unfunded liability has gone from 0 to $88,000,000 (see below)
when you add the OPEB and use the more realistic 6.5% discount rate. We're told that we're better off
than most of the other passengers on the Titanic. That does not give me comfort, nor should you feel
good about our financial position.
Our statement of position for the Unfunded Liabilities and the OPEB are based on FAKE DISCOUNT
NUMBERS of 7.65%, or 7.5% or even 7.25%, when in fact, even CalPERS and their consultant, Wilshire
Consulting, state that the realistic discount rate for the next 10 years is 6% to 6.21%. (see attached).
We're much worse -off than what our CAFR or the Budget show and I suggest that the Council presses
the staff for more transparent numbers and explanations so that you can have more realistic discussions
about our debt.
Put it in a graph so that you can see what's going on at a glance. Reading a CAFR or a budget is a huge
yawn when pictures can tell you more about where we really are. Set up key indicators of important
numbers that affect us most, and that gives you something to question without having to dig through
the CAFR or the budget.
CalPERS is lowering the discount rate over 3 years from 7.5% to 7.0%. However, in another DEEP breath,
CaIPERS states that the projected rate of return over the next 10 years will be 6%. (see attached) If
you'll listen (or read) carefully to the rest of this speech, you'll understand the sheer magnitude of
dropping to the more realistic 6.5%, based on the town's CAFR sensitivity analysis found in the 2017
draft !
In this next fiscal year we are supposed to include the OPEB numbers into our financial statements.
That means that we'll see a $7.3 Million positive balance instead of the more conservative -$5.4 million
with few revenue dollars to offset the loss. I just think it's important that you look into the next few
years, rather than look at the past that may have been done by the book, but doesn't give you forward
thinking data. It's like driving your car while keeping your eyes on the rear view mirror.
We projected flat revenues ahead, as well as flat expenses. But what if we added in the missing OPEB;
OR THE MISSING UNFUNDED LIABILITIES THAT SHOW AS $47M on the 2017 CAFR, but in reality, are over
$87,000,000?
If you look at Note 9 in the draft 2017 CAFR (attached), it will show you that IF the discount rate
dropped 1% (to approximately 6.5%), our total Miscellaneous and Safety Plans would have a staggering
$69,419,086 due as opposed to the false -hope number of $47,300,000. If you add the OPEB at 6.5%,
the total Unfunded Liabilities, if on the books conservatively, would be $ 18,463,936 (estimated)
2017 CAFR ^7.5% 6.5% (source 2017 draft CAFR, Page 79)
Miscellaneous plus Safety = $47,272,000 $ 69,419,086
$12,600,000 $ 18,463,936 (THIS IS ESTIMATED)
OPEB
Our Real Liability @ 6.5% Discount Rate $ 87,735,936
$100,000,000
$90,000,000
$80,000,000
$70,000,000
$60,000,000
$50,000,000
$40,000,000
$30,000,000
$20,000,000
$10,000,000
$-
Unfunded Liabilities Plus OPEB
Our liability at 6.5% $87,735,916
Our liability at --7.5%
$62,745,000
$55,992,000 $55,512,000
$49,739,000
$53,111,000
$45,902,000
$59,872 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
1
Ca1PERS board gives green light to cut
assumed rate of return to 7%
BY RANDY DIAMOND •
UPDATED 5:47 PM
DECEMBER 21. 2016
2:12 PM
The full Ca1PERS board approved Wednesday a plan to reduce the
pension fund's rate of return to 7% from the current 7.5% over a
three-year period.
The action follows the recommendation of CaIPERS' finance and
administration committee Tuesday night.
California Gov. Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown Jr., who in the past has
criticized the $303.6 billion California Public Employees'
Retirement System, Sacramento, for having unrealistic investment
return assumptions, issued a statement in support of the action.
"Today's action by the CaIPERS board is more reflective of the
financial returns they can expect in the future," Mr. Brown said.
"This will make for a more sustainable system."
The reduction in the rate of return is not as big as was discussed
last month. Chief Investment Officer Theodore Eliopoulos said at
Last month's finance and administration committee meeting that
given diminished investment return assumptions over the next
decade. 6% was a more realistic return for the coming 10 years.
Andrew Junkin, president of Wilshire Consulting, which serves as
Ca1PERS' general consultant, said at the November meeting that
Wilshire was predicting an annual return of 6.21% for the next
decade, down from its estimates of 7.1 % a year earlier.
The change comes as representatives of California cities, towns,
school districts and other governmental units that contribute to the
nation's largest defined benefit plan argue that they could not afford
the contributions necessary with a lower return rate.
California state Controller Betty Yee, a member of the finance and
administration committee, said at Tuesday's meeting that she can
predict the headlines Wednesday. "There will be headlines
tomorrow about how we were not aggressive enough," Ms. Yee
said of the 7% rate of return, adding that the reduction will be
noted around the world.
But Ms. Yee said the rate reduction will help stabilize the pension
fund and added that CaIPERS' falling funding ratio is a symbol of
the changing world economy.
Ca1PERS' current funding ratio is 68%. Two years of poor results
— a 0.6% return for the fiscal year ended June 30 and a 2.4%
return in fiscal 2015 — have contributed to a more negative view
of what CalPERS can earn over the next decade.
Mr. Eliopoulos, in explaining how the investment staff came up
with the 7% rate of return, said it was based on a longer -term 30-
year forecast that shows better investment returns, not a 10-year
horizon.
Mr. Junkin said at the November meeting that CaIPERS might not
survive past 10 years if the rate of return was not lowered but never
specified how much the return should be reduced.
Under the three-year reduction, phased in to soften the blow on
employers, the rate of return for the pension fund would be lowered
to 7.375% for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2017; 7.25% for the
following fiscal year; and 7% for the year after that.
Ca1PERS is far from the only public pension plan lowering its
return assumption. Statistics from the National Association of State
Retirement Administrators show that 43 of 137 public plans have
lowered their return assumption since June 30, 2014. But NASRA
statistics show only nine plans out of 127 are below 7% and none
has gone below 6.5%.
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
NOTES TO BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2017
NOTE 9 - EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PLAN, CONTINUED
(c) Changes in the Net Pension Liability, Continued
Miscellaneous Agent Multiple
Employer Plan
NOTE THAT THE $69,419,086 IS ABOUT $22,000,000 HIGHER
WITH JUST THE 1% DROP OF THE DISCOUNT RATE
TO THE 6.5% CALPERS BELIEVES WILL BE THE RETURN
OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS
Safety Cost Sharing Plan Total Plans
1% Decrease
Net Pension Liability $ 39,567,384 $ 29,851,702 69,419,086
Current Discount Rate
Net Pension Liability $ 27,893,890 $ 19,377,843 47,271,733
1% Increase
Net Pension Liability $ 18,225,532 $ 10,779,878 29,005,410
Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position — Detailed information about the pension plan's fiduciary net position is
available in a separately issued CaIPERS financial report.
(d) Pension Expenses and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions
For the year ended June 30, 2017, the Town recognized pension expense of $1,982,015for the Miscellaneous
Agent Multiple Employer Plan and $2,548,057 for the Safety Cost Sharing Plan.
At June 30, 2017, the Town reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related
to pension from the following sources for the Miscellaneous Agent Multiple Employer Plan:
Pension contributions subsequent to
measurement date
Changes in assumptions
Difference between expected and actual experiences
Change in employer's proportion and differences between
the employer's contributions and the employer's
proportionate share of contributions
Net differences between projected and actual
earnings on plan investments
Miscellaneous
Deferred
Outflows of Deferred Inflows
Resources of Resources
$ 2,407,496
3,506,890
72,054
224,893
Totals $ 5,914,386 $ 296,947
79