Long night. We start the evening with another closed session regarding the California Voting Rights Act. This is followed by a study session where the Council and the various board and commission chairs and vice chairs meet to discuss ways to improve commission meetings.
The general session starts with a presentation of the 2018 Municipal Information Systems of California awards. We then get an update on how Caltrain Electrification is going.
The consent calendar is pretty huge. We have a routine update of the city’s Conflict of Interest code, a purchase order for 53 public safety mobile data terminals, a purchase order for library materials, a contract for a third party service to handle worker’s comp claims, a purchase order for four new fire apparatuses, a purchase order for an IT management solution, the quarterly investment report, a NOVA Workforce Board appointment, and a legal services amendment related to the CVRA efforts.
Finally, staff is recommending that the City increase its contribution for the all-inclusive park by $160,000 to close the funding gap.
Item 2 has the city considering a development agreement and agreeing to $12.5 million in affordable housing funds to pay for 90-unit housing development on the city-owned property at Charles, Mathilda, and Iowa. The city would lease the property to the project operator, and the project would consist of 90 housing units (89 affordable housing units and one unit for the property manager).
Item 3 is a request for indefinite continuance of a request to study rezoning property at 1050 West Remington from Public Facility to Medium Density Residential. The applicant is requesting more time to work with staff on the application.
Item 4 is a request to start a General Plan Amendment study to rezone the office part at California and Mathilda, to permit greater office density and to allow housing units. The applicant proposes building housing along the western side of the property, building denser offices on the rest of the property, and relocating the Libby Water Tower elsewhere on site as part of the redevelopment. Interestingly, staff is recommending that Council does not initiate the study, primarily due to staff work load and competing priorities.
And finally, item 5 has us possibly appointing a candidate to the Personnel Board.