Lisa McLain League News, Observer Reports, Rental Housing Committee

News from the Mountain View Rental Housing Committee August 2017 July – September 2017

News from the Mountain View Rental Housing Committee

Background:

On November 8, 2016, the residents of the City of Mountain View voted to adopt Measure V, also known as the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (CSFRA), to stabilize rents and to provide just cause eviction protections for certain rental units in Mountain View.

Effective April 5, 2017, rent levels and rent increases for covered rental units, built before February 1, 1995 must comply with the CSFRA. Single family homes, condominiums, and duplexes are not covered by the CSFRA.

For more background go to the Mountain View website:

http://www.mountainview.gov/council/rental_housing_committee/default.asp

Rental Housing Committee Meeting 07/10/2017

The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm, roll call taken, minutes approved from the previous meeting, and then for the next hour oral communication from the public was heard by the committee which included any subject that was not on the agenda.  These subject matters were broad in nature however many pertained very closely to the issues of rent stabilization and the community.  This part of the meeting and its’ hour long time span is mentioned in this report only to emphasis the importance of this subject to the people.

The first item on the agenda of unfinished business from the June 19th meeting began when further modifications were made to the Petition and Hearing Processes which will now be formally changed by the Staff so that by the next meeting these procedures can be either be adopted or once again revised.

The next item on the agenda was to determine a ‘Fair Rate of Return’ standard for the landlords.  This is very important in that it could allow the landlords to raise rents higher then what is allowed under the CSFRA by petitioning the city with a list of rising expenses that resulted in declining revenues in the past years.  ‘Expenses’ is the key word and defining this word was tonight’s issue.  Per the CSFRA, expenses can include property tax, ongoing maintenance costs and certain improvements to the property, and further, this law has given discretionary powers to the RH Committee for determining additional expenses that could also be included.  This evening the RH Committee staff presented an expanded list of numerous expenses that they felt should be considered as part of the landlord’s petition package which then brought many people in attendance of this evening’s meeting, wanting to voice their opinion.  This generated hours of discussions from both renters and landlords articulating their views very passionately, very intensely and sometimes very volitively.

No decision was made this night and at about 12:00am the Rental Housing Committee was adjourned to reconvene again on July 24, 2017

Rental Housing Committee Meeting 07/24/2017

This meeting was called to order at 7:00pm with a packed room of both renters and landlords.

Unfinished Business –

6.1

Because little was accomplished at the previous meeting of 7/10 the discussion went immediately to the ‘Unfinished Business’ of the evening’s agenda which continued the discussion of regulations for the Petition and Hearing Process and defining a Fair Rate of Return Standard for the landlords. 

With the guidance and approval of the legal team, the staff presented their recommendations for the above to the committee, however one of the members wished to propose a different approach in defining the Fair Rate of Return Standard.  Rather than using the suggested CPI ‘All’ index which follows costs that he felt did not accurately reflect housing profits, he proposed using the index specific to the rental housing market which would/could overestimate the numbers. 

This generated lengthy discussions and other proposals from each of the RHC members.  The legal team listened and cautioned of potential litigation as the suggestions drifted away from the original recommendations that had been challenged and tested in other courts.

Further discussions and other alternatives were offered however when the vote was taken this new proposal of using the rental housing market index was approved by a decision of 3-2.

Upon hearing this outcome the public in the courtroom made it clear they were unhappy with this decision and were quite vocal.

6.2

RHC acknowledged that they have received the report from the Mountain View City Council for reimbursement of advanced funding.  The RHC was designed to run independently of the City and will pay for its’ own costs by annual fees from the rent-controlled apartments.

New Business –

7.1

The effective date of Measure V is in question:

After Measure V passed in the November election, December 23, 2016 was the effective date for the measure to be enacted.  That date is now in question because of a lawsuit that was filed 2 days before the law was to take effect. 

The lawsuit brought a temporary restraining order which blocked the measure for about 4 months.  Finally on April 5th a court lifted this suspension and since that date the City of Mountain View has informally accepted April 5th as the implementation date for Measure V. 

Renters and landlords now see different dates for Measure V’s effective date and attorneys for both are requesting clarity from the RHC committee and all are heading to court.

Rental Housing Committee Meeting 08/24/2017

This meeting was called to order at 7:00pm, roll call was taken and minutes were approved.

Oral Communication from the Public was presented passionately by both renters and landlords and among numerous subjects included some of the following concerns: one renter has filed a lawsuit against his landlord for overpayment, mobile homes should be covered under Measure V, landlords have no incentives to upgrade or improve their properties with the CSFRA in place.

New Business-

7.1 Introduction of Budget Process – Ms. Kong, Mountain View’s Finance and Administrative Services Director presented a report reconfirming that any upfront costs that the RHC was currently generating and that the City was covering, would be fully reimbursed through this committee’s proceedings.  Early in October City Staff will present an RHC proposed budget to this committee for approval by October23rd.   

Unfinished Business-

6.1 Adopt Regulations for a Vega Adjustment Standard to be incorporated into the Fair Return Standard

This standard was to help landlords who had kept their rents at or below market rates and   now because of Measure V the rent roll back is hurting these landlords the most and causing ‘disproportionately low rents’.

Defining ‘disproportionately low rents’ is part of the Vega Standard so the City Staff looked to other rent control cities for their approach to this definition and found some of the cities have used data from HUD, the Department of Housing and Urban Development.  Their data is used to help in the definition and as a baseline calculate Section-8 housing vouchers.

Some members of the RHC stated using HUD data for this application is not acceptable and pointed out that these numbers seemed unrealistically low and although in some parts of Santa Clara County they may be accurate, they are not accurate in Mountain View. 

A few other approaches were suggested, some extremely overly complicated which produced further discussions.  All members of the RHC voiced their concerns pertaining to this complex issue but as the evening wore on a vote was taken and approved using HUD data for individual unit adjustment.

Rental Housing Committee Meeting 09/11/2017

This meeting was called to order at 7:40pm, roll call was taken and minutes from July24, and August 28th were approved.

Oral Communication from the Public – the subject discussed tonight was that some of the landlords are now passing thorough the utilities to the renters as part of their rent.

Unfinished Business –

9.1 Consideration of Establishing the Effective Date of the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act – The RHC deliberated and announced they had decided the effective date of this act is December 23, 2016

New Business-

10.1 Proposed Information Technology System including Database/Registry – Due to the scope and breadth of the CSFRA, implementation could require a reliable well-functioning IT system and currently all cities in California with Rent Stabilization programs use one. 

An IT system will require up front capital and ongoing operating costs.  To the extent that a system is not implemented or is not sufficiently robust, it is likely that greater staffing resources will be needed to handle the various tasks of the CSFRA.

Because of the potential expense, could there be other departments that could also benefit from this program?

The staff will bring to the next meeting additional information for the RHC’s consideration

10.2 Proposed Staffing Plan – After the report was given and discussion was concluded the following proposed staffing plan was approved:

  • 1 Program Manager
  • 2 Administrative Analyst I/II
  • 1 Office Assistant II

10.3 CSFRA Fee Methodology and Program – After the report was given and discussion was concluded the RHC approved:

Setting the same fee for both full and partially covered units.  This methodology would treat Fully and Partially Covered Units the same and establish the same fee for both types of covered units under the CSFRA that would recover the cost of the program. To ensure full funding of CSFRA program the Rental Housing Fees for a total of 16,788 Covered multi-family rental units would amount to the FY 2017-18 Budget divided by the total amount of units. This calculation is simple and easy to implement.

— Tamara Lewis, Observer

Lisa McLain League News, Mountain View Los Altos High School District, Observer Reports

Mountain View – Los Altos High School District (MVLA) August & September 2017

August 21 and September 5, 2017

Summer School Principal Bill Pierce gave the board a report on summer school.  Classes were offered for credit recovery and makeup for failed courses to improve UC A-G eligibility, plus some acceleration courses and a few transition-to-high-school classes for incoming 9th graders, including “Bridge to High School” for students who did not graduate from their middle schools.  The numbers of students attending and classes offered were roughly the same as last year.  Added new this year, Algebra 2 Boot Camp was for students who needed a little help getting ready to take Algebra 2 in the fall.  Last year’s Catalyst class was divided into Catalyst Algebra and Catalyst Geometry this year, to prepare incoming 9th graders for algebra and geometry.  There were many more girls in the Catalyst classes this year compared to last year.

New Associate Superintendent of Educational Services Margarita Navarro presented a review of the implementation of the homework policy that was begun in 2016-17.  Both MVHS and LAHS conducted surveys of students to determine their reactions to the new policy.  A majority of students reported a reduction in stress due to homework-free weekends.  There were mixed results on the question of whether homework was useful to learning or busywork.  A small percentage of students reported that some teachers were not following the policy and those reports were investigated.

Associate Superintendent Mike Mathiesen gave a Facilities Master Plan progress report.  There will be a complete update at the October 23 board meeting with the architect and campus maps showing where new construction is recommended.  The agreement to lease Mountain View city land near Alta Vista for a new two-story building for Freestyle Academy and office space is in final negotiations.  A bond feasibility survey of voters is being designed and will be presented at the October 9 board meeting.   School site meetings will be held at the end of September and early October to get input from administrators, teachers, students, parents, and neighbors.  An application to the state school building fund is being prepared;  MVLA is eligible for $25 million in funding for new construction and improvements.

The board approved an increase in fees for the rental of MVLA facilities by outside groups, to be phased in over two years, 2017-18 and 2018-19.  Rates have not been increased since 2001.  A survey of nearby school districts (Saratoga, Fremont, and Campbell)  found MVLA’s fees to be substantially lower than average.  Palo Alto was not included in the local school district average fees because their rates are much higher. 

Associate Superintendent Mike Mathiesen presented the 2016-17 unaudited actual financial results, which showed revenues of $82.3 million and expenses of $78.6 million.   The final balance in the reserve is $9.5 million, including the state required 3% reserve.  The target reserve amount is $16.2 million (17%); the district is working to achieve that level gradually over multiple years. 

— Sally Ahnger, Observer

Lisa McLain Foothill-De Anza Community College District, League News, Observer Reports

Foothill-De Anza Community College District April-August 2017

August 7:  The Trustees may poll public support for a possible FHDA new general obligation bond.  They did approve Resolution #2017-19 prohibiting funded travel to states that have discriminatory legislation, but allowing the Chancellor to override the ban in specific cases.

July 3:  The annual Board of Trustees self-evaluation raised concerns about community relations and declining enrollment.  All 5 elected trustees anonymously did the self-evaluation.

   The Trustees rejected all bids to restore the soccer field at De Anza College.

   DA Student Trustee Elias Kamal said a discussion of the Muslim Ramadan was attended by 50 staff, students, and family members.  Board President Laura Casas praised trustee Bruce Swenson for 50 years of service to FHDA and 50 years of marriage.

June 12:  Chancellor Judy Minor welcomed FH student trustee Chinwe Idika to the Board and welcomed DA student trustee Elias Kamal to his second term.  President Casa and trustee Landsberger praised the recent town hall meeting at Foothill College with Anna Eshoo.

   Trustee Landsberger said the FHDA Foundation nominated Dudley Anderson as a new director.  Landsberger also said the Foundation heard from the faculty of the Kirsch Center for Environmental Studies on May 24.  Its building is certified Energy and Environmental Platinum.

   Executive Director Puentes summarized the Third Quarter Report.  She noted a 1,170 decline in FTES, reducing revenue by $6 million next year and reducing the stability fund to $25 million.

Puentes described the 2017-18 Tentative Budget which must be in place by July 1.  It includes increases of $4.2 million in base apportionment and $2.2 million in cost of living.  The structural deficit is $12.3 million, the end balance is $38.8 million, the final stability fund is $13.8 million.  She said FHDA has 3 years to restore enrollment before the base is permanently reset.

May 1:  The trustees heard and approved the student budgets for Foothill and De Anza.

   Adam Colling and James Funk of Bloom Energy conversed with the Board at length about using fuel cells to produce electric power from natural gas without burning the gas (technology from NASA’s Mars Rover).  They claimed a 10-15% cost reduction and said their customers included Caltech, San Diego Univ., Apple, Google, AT&T, city of Santa Clara, and Home Depot.

April 3:  Chancellor Judy Minor liked Senator Jerry Hill’s bill SB769, expanding the community college 4-year degree program.  Foothill now offers a 4-year degree in dental hygiene.

— Terry Terman, Observer

Lisa McLain League News, Los Altos City Council, Observer Reports

Los Altos City Council Meetings July & August 2017

July 11, 2017

The City Council approved re-consideration of public Parking Plaza 10 as part of private development at 40 Main Street, provided the design complies with the city’s standards for parking space. It is understood that providing a design does not assure final approval of the private development project.

Note that a similar proposal was denied in 2014, but the advantages of reconfiguration for this project allows for additional parking stalls at no cost to the city and facilitates private development that can contribute to the overall vitality of the community. For example, the landowners’ architect, Bill Maston, suggested that more electric-charging stations and bike racks may be added to the space. Also, if City Council does not allow private developers to propose a re-configuration, any project that doesn’t meet permitted city code could result in the city’s loss of positive development applications.

The City Council discussed potential fundraising efforts to support the new Hillview Community Center and the Downtown Vision, including a theater for plays, affordable senior housing and other affordable housing on city-owned land. Also, expand parking at Plaza 7 with underground parking. After pro and con discussion from the public, Council members Lynette Lee Eng and Jean Mordo, the lead on putting forth these ideas, were selected to form a subcommittee to recommend fundraising policies. Staff was directed to look into the cost of expanding Parking Plaza 7 with underground parking. The City Council approved that the Downtown Vision project consultants consider placement of a theater and affordable housing on city property downtown.

August 22, 2017

Los Altos City Council, 4 to 1, authorized Chris Jordan, City Manager, to execute a professional services agreement with Noll & Tam Architects and Planners in an amount not to exceed $2, 804, 597 for design services to begin redevelopment of the Hillview Community Center. Janet Tam, the principal architect for the project, expects to confirm the goals of the center, recommend a space design that meets the budget, and present the plan by the end of the year. There is a concern about space for Children’s Corner. Mr. Jordan said the design project includes space allocation for services for young children, but doesn’t specify who and how the services of a particular organization are to be determined. Agreements would be contracted when the project is completed.

Jon Biggs, Community Development Project Director, urged the City Council and community to look at the Downtown Vision project as a tool to assist the community in the design of a renovated downtown. The City Council heard and provided feedback for three future scenarios designed after surveys and twenty-two community and pop-up meetings provided feedback and information for Debbie Rudd, rrmDesign Group, who presented the scenarios. Additional information came from Bill Lee, economic consultant for the project. The three scenarios show, from least to most change, Green Plazas, connection to the Civic Center, entry elements to downtown, parking structures, live theater, movie theater, and evaluation of residential over commercial and office over commercial development. Also, a public citizen presentation focused on parking problems for every vision and offered possible solutions.

— Claire Noonan, Observer

Lisa McLain League News, Observer Reports, Rental Housing Committee

News from the Mountain View Rental Housing Committee June 2017

Background:

On November 8, 2016, the residents of the City of Mountain View voted to adopt Measure V, also known as the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (CSFRA), to stabilize rents and to provide just cause eviction protections for certain rental units in Mountain View.

Effective April 5, 2017, rent levels and rent increases for covered rental units, built before February 1, 1995 must comply with the CSFRA. Single family homes, condominiums, and duplexes are not covered by the CSFRA.

For more background go to the Mountain View website:

http://www.mountainview.gov/council/rental_housing_committee/default.asp

Rental Housing Committee Meeting, 6/8/2017

The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm

The RHC listened to input from tenants and landlords. Key outcomes from the meeting include:

There will be individual stakeholders meeting for the tenants and landlords next week.  The Rental Housing Committee Staff will attend and will summarize these forums at the June 19th RHC meeting.

RHC Staff will continue to work on the Regulations for the Petition Process for Individual Rent Adjustment.

RHC Staff presented beginning criteria for a Hearing Officer and a Mediation Officer.

The person will be an independent contractor

A third party ‘Project Sentinel will be used to facilitate this process.

Cost of position – Further information from staff to be forthcoming

Meeting adjourned around 11:00pm

Stakeholders Meeting ‘Fair Return Standard’

Meeting for Landlords held 6/12/2017

Meeting for Tenants held 6/14/2017

As established in the RHC Meeting of 6/8/2017 a Stakeholders Meeting for both the tenants and the landlords was to take place separately to create a methodology for determining a ‘Fair Return Standard’ that could be used during the landlord’s petition process for modifying rents upward if necessary.  These meetings took place on 6/12/2017 and 6/13/2017.

This methodology for a ‘Fair Return Standard’ should include the following:

Could be objectively applied

Is understood by both parties so that decisions can be based on predictable outcomes

Is consistent with the current CSFRA established guidelines

Three (3) potential ‘Fair Return Standards’ were offered. See staff report online at:

http://mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=22966

    • Maintenance of Net Operating Income – MNOI – CPI Adjustment – Most commonly used standard in California.  Once establishing the NOI, (Property Income minus the operating expenses for the base year of 2015), this number is then increased by an inflationary index which increases with changes in the Consumer Price Index, CPI, or some portion there of between the base year and the petition year.

Issues

Confirmation of the operating expenses for base and petition years

Landlords may have incomplete records of operating expenses

Operating Expenses do not always vary with inflation indexes.  Example –  a one-time expenditure of a new roof can impact the determination for a rent increase

    • Maintenance of Net Operating Income – MNOI – Ratio Adjustment – Allows for rent increases in proportion to increases in qualified operating expenses. The Base year factor however is different in that it can be any year including the 12 months prior to the petition year.
    • Fixed Return on Investment – This is a variation on the fair return standard that was developed to regulate utilities and later adopted by some mobile home parks. A ‘deliberative body’ identifies a Minimum standard rate of return for the landlord’s investment of between 4-12%.  The chosen number is then multiplied by the value of the property resulting in the Minimum NOI. To determine whether the landlord is receiving a fair return, the Property Expenses are subtracted from the Property Income resulting in Net Operating Income excluding debt service.  If the Minimum Annual NOI is lower than the Net Operating Income the landlord would be entitled to increase the rents.

Issues

Different rates of return lead to disparities in the rents that can be charged

Determining valuation of property could be ‘fair market value’ which would require an appraisal, which would increase administrative cost and subject rent increases to market swings.

Landlords – preferred ‘Fixed Return on Investment’, must have universal definitions, use standard formulas to determine Operating Expenses, provide a list of items with their lifespans

Tenants – preferred ‘MNOI – CPI Adjustment, what process will be used to evaluate property…should it be a standard formula, if a rent increase is required for a one-time expense example new roof once it is paid for should the rent return to its’ previous value?

The Rental Housing Committee staff will summarize these meetings for discussion at the Monday June 19th RHC meeting.

Rental Housing Committee Meeting, 6/19/2017

The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm

The Rental Housing Committee Staff presented a summary of the two separate Stakeholder Meetings, one for the Tenants and one for the Landlords that were held last week.  These meetings were to determine one standard out of a potential of 3 options, to be agreed upon for a ‘Fair Rate of Return’ for the Landlords in accordance with Measure V.  The Tenants chose ‘MNOI – CPI Adjustment’ and the Landlords chose ‘Fixed Return on Investment with modifications.

After reviewing the summary of the meetings the RHC Staff recommended the MNOI – CPI Adjustment standard as it is widely used in nearly all the California rent controlled cities and when a petition is presented, offers the simplest calculations for the hearing officers and the RHC.

The landlords disagreed and felt very strongly about their position and their chosen option in that the MNOI-CPI only allows for a minimal (this year 3.4%) yearly percentage rent increase.  With the roll back of rents to 2015 levels, increasing operating costs, extra repairs or maintenance issues some of the landlords will no longer be turning a profit and then a Fair Rate of Return is no longer applicable.

Most of the RHC members could not all agree after listening to the very passionate discussions on both sides however one member encouraged the committee to adopt the option that the staff had recommended so that this process could continue to move along without further delays.  There is no perfect option but he argued that this is a good choice and changes can and probably will be made as the procedure unfolds.

The vote was taken and by 3-2 the MNOI – CPI Adjustment option was chosen as a standard for the ‘Fair Rate of Return’.  The RHC Staff will draft a full policy of this standard and bring it bring it back to the committee to the next meeting early in July.

For more detailed information on Fair Return Standard from the public:

http://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=23110

Meeting adjourned around 11:30pm

—Tamara Lewis, Observer

Lisa McLain League News, Mountain View City Council, Observer Reports

Mountain View City Council Meeting June 2017

The Council met for the final time before the summer recess on June 27th and will resume meeting in September. Here are some of the final actions the Council took in June:

Adoption of Fiscal Year 2017-18 Budget and Capital Improvement Projects

After several months of discussion, the Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2017-18 Budget on June 20th. The $304,715,136 budget includes a $127,092,614 General Operating Fund, which funds the core city services (Police & Fire, Parks & Recreation, Library, Planning, Public Works, and Administration). Significant discretionary expenditures include payments for city employee pensions and other post-employment benefits (to reduce unfunded liabilities), additional positions across all departments (particularly Planning and Public Works to address the development boom), and 100% renewable energy purchased from the new Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority to power municipal operations.

Additionally, $34,380,690 has been appropriated for Capital Projects. These include the Shoreline Blvd Interim Bus Lane (a reversible bus lane running through the median to improve traffic flow to North Bayshore), improvements for the Center for Performing Arts and Library, and the Rengstorff Park Aquatics Center Replacement.

North Bayshore Precise Plan Land Use and Transportation Discussion

In a lengthy and contentious study session on June 27th, the Council provided input on the North Bayshore Precise Plan for what was intended to be the last time before adoption of the finalized plan in Fall 2017. However, because the Mayor was traveling and unable to participate in the meeting, a divided Council deadlocked 3-3 on a key policy question: how should the new housing be phased in?

All Councilmembers supported allowing a maximum of 9,850 new units, and all supported a policy to monitor the new development and evaluate traffic and other impacts. The Council disagreed on the staff proposal to implement a “Phase I residential growth policy” that would allow 1500-3000 units before Council review and approval of the next phase. The three members who did not support the staff proposal instead advocated for using the existing trip cap report (which imposes a strict cap on all car trips into North Bayshore and allows the Council to regularly monitor trips) and a “Master Planning” process as a way to monitor progress and potential impacts. A “Master Plan” would require the developer to show how their project would “meet the Precise Plan’s vision and intent, complete neighborhood strategy, affordable housing goals, and other standards and guidelines, including any necessary area transportation infrastructure improvements.”

Because no proposal earned the support of a majority, staff will seek Council direction on this question again at a future study session.

Preservation of 938 and 954 Villa Street Historic Buildings

On June 13th, the Council provided early feedback on a proposal to remove two historic buildings in the downtown area and replace them with a new office building and restaurant. 938 Villa Street (the “Weilheimer House,” currently occupied by Chez TJ) and 954 Villa Street (Tied House) are historic resources because they meet at least one of four criteria:

• If it was associated with a person or organization important to the history of the City.

• If it was the site of a significant event in the City’s history.

• If it embodies distinctive architectural characteristics significant to the City’s history.

• Has yielded or may yield information important to the City’s history or prehistory.

938 Villa Street was built around 1894 and first occupied by prominent Mountain View resident Julius Weilheimer, who served on the City Board of Trustees. Not long afterwards, it was the home of Arthur Free, who served as City Attorney and later was elected to Congress (1921 to 1933). 954 Villa Street was built in 1931 and employs notable building design and architecture.

The Council generally preferred to preserve the Weilheimer House at its current location, but a majority was open to exploring the feasibility of relocating the building to allow the new development to proceed. Because the building at 954 Villa Street is much more challenging to relocate, several Councilmembers expressed interest in potentially incorporating its architectural features into the new office building instead.

Council directed staff to explore options for preserving or relocating the structures and to return to the Council in another study session. The office developer, The Minkoff Group, indicated that, even if the historic buildings were relocated, the current restaurants would not be preserved, as both restaurant owners intend to be partners in the new restaurant (which would occupy the ground floor in the new office building).

—Lucas Ramirez & Julie Lovins, Observers

Lisa McLain League News, Los Altos City Council, Observer Reports

Los Altos City Council Meetings June 2017

June 13, 2017

The city council voted to appropriate $96,619 from the Capital Improvement Program to award Wattis Construction the total $234,216 to complete the University Avenue Crosswalk Improvement Project.

The city council adopted the resolution to support the Association of the Los Altos History Museum’s application for a $95,000 grant to the Santa Clara County Historical Heritage Grant (SCCHHG). If the grant is received by 2018, the restoration of the 100-year-old water tower tank house at the History Museum will begin in summer 2018. The tank house had been moved to the museum from the Spagnoli property and Pilgrim Haven construction site in 1993. In 2015 leaks in the water tower roof prodded the Association to apply for a grant, at the time $35,000. The History Museum also raised donations of $10,000. When costs for restoration were found to be $105,000, the original grant was withdrawn and the new grant was drawn up. From rules by the SCCHHG, support from the “property owner”, in this case Los Altos City, must be assured.

June 27, 2017

Following discussion at the May 9, 2017 council meeting about “accessory dwellings” or “granny units” to address the issue of affordable housing, Jon Biggs, Community Development Director, led further discussion in a study session with city council members at this meeting about “accessory structure” standards. The objective was to decide whether current standards are adequate to turn existing structures into dwelling units. Adjustments to standards may be needed to minimize potential impact on adjoining properties.

Currently, accessory structures over 6 feet high must be 2.5 feet from the nearest property line and no more than 800 square feet. Accessory structures may be up to 12 feet high, but actual plans for construction of these structures is not clear. Revisions in 2008 defined a rear setback for different structure heights from 2.5 to 7.5 feet.

To make the standards clearer, the staff recommends clearance to be 5 feet to the main building structure and 5 feet from the property line. The city council may recommend other amendments to the standards so as not to impact neighbors. For instance, standards might be made for height, building size, and placement of windows and door openings. Also, noise, privacy, and aesthetics were discussed and they might be considered as part of the standards. Direction was given to staff to draft new standards especially for setbacks.

—Claire Noonan, Observer

Lisa McLain League News, Mountain View Los Altos High School District, Observer Reports

Mountain View – Los Altos High School District (MVLA) July 2017

June 12 and 19, 2017

The board passed a budget for 2017-18 after holding a public hearing on June 12 which garnered no public comments.  The budget assumes a secured property tax growth of 8% and a donation from the MVLA Foundation of $1.7M.  It includes 4 additional full-time teachers to accommodate the expected increased enrollment. This budget also includes the rise in STRS/PERS (the teachers and public employees retirement systems) contribution rates from 14.43/15.8% in  2017-18 to 18.1/20.8% in 2019-20, as the state requires the districts to pay a larger share of the pension costs.  The district budget for Career Technical Education increases as county funding of Regional Occupation Program, ROP, continues to ramp down.  The state continues to supply an Adult Education Block Grant of $1.3M.

Superintendent Jeff Harding and Superintendent Ayinde Rudolph of the Mountain View Whisman School District presented a report on the impact of the Mountain View North Bayshore Precise Plan on the two school districts.  According to demographic analysis, the 10,000 units of housing planned for the North Bayshore will produce 1100 K-12 students.  Adding in all of the housing projects currently in the pipeline, there will be 5800 additional students by 2023-24, needing 235 classrooms, estimated to cost $440 million, not including the cost of land.  The elementary district would need 3 new elementary schools and 1 new middle school, and the high school district would need a new high school.  The superintendents are planning to make this presentation to the Mountain View City Council.

Bill Pierce reviewed the Alta Vista Opportunity Program, a small program for credit-deficient students with behavior problems.  At the end of the 2015-16 school year the district discontinued its partnership with the county Office of Education to operate the program itself.  Last year’s program was run out of the Adult School, but it turned out that it was too far away from the resources needed by the students so the program will be moved near the District office for next year.  The other discovery from last year was that the range of student capabilities and ages was too broad, so next year the program will serve only 9th and 10th graders without severe special education needs.

The board approved the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) report after a public hearing on 6/12/17 which had no public comments.  The LCAP is a tool for local educational agencies to set goals, plan actions, and leverage resources to meet those goals to improve student outcomes. The report is available on the district website.

Lisa McLain League News, Observer Reports, Rental Housing Committee

Mountain View Rental Housing Committee Update June 2017

News from the Mountain View Rental Housing Committee

Background:

On November 8, 2016, the residents of the City of Mountain View voted to adopt Measure V, also known as the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (CSFRA), to stabilize rents and to provide just cause eviction protections for certain rental units in Mountain View.

Effective April 5, 2017, rent levels and rent increases for covered rental units, built before February 1, 1995 must comply with the CSFRA. Single family homes, condominiums, and duplexes are not covered by the CSFRA.

Key Provisions:

1.   Rent Rollback:

a. For tenancies commenced on or before Oct. 19, 2015, the allowable rent 

is the rent in effect on Oct.19, 2015, 

b. For tenancies commenced after Oct. 19, 2015, the allowable rent

is the rent the tenant paid at the start of the tenancy.  

 2.   Allowable General Annual Rent Increases

In September of each year, including 2017, landlords may increase rents in an amount equal to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the prior year (as determined by the Rental Housing Committee). On May 22, 2017 the Rental Housing Committee announced that the annual general adjustment of rent for 2017 is 3.4%. This rent increase for covered units is allowed to take effect starting September 1, 2017. Landlords must provide tenants with at least 30 days’ advance written notice of such rent increase. A rent increase is only allowed if landlords are in compliance with all provisions of the CSFRA.

 3. Initial Rent Levels and Rent Increases for New Tenants

Landlords may set the initial rents for new tenancies if the prior tenant voluntarily vacated the Rental Unit or was evicted for a just cause. After a tenant moves in, rent increases are limited to the annual general adjustment.

4. Eviction protections applicable to Covered and Non-Covered Rental  Units

Just cause is required for evictions from Rental Units with an initial certificate of occupancy prior to April 5, 2017. Just cause reasons include a tenant’s failure to meet the obligations of a rental agreement, non-payment of rent, and demolition of the unit or owner move-in, subject to limitations in the Law. Any notice to terminate a tenancy for just cause must state with specificity the basis of the termination. Certain just cause evictions require tenant relocation assistance and compliance with other provisions.  Please refer to the CSFRA for the full provisions.

City Council appointed the following people to be on the Rental Housing Committee:

Chair Vanessa Honey, Vice-Chair Evan Ortiz

Committee Members: Matthew Grunewald, Tom Means, Emily Ramos, Julian Pardo de Zela (alternate)

Rental Housing Committee Meeting, 5/22/2017

The meeting was called to order at 8:00pm

Oral Communications from the Public began.  Most of the public communication was from landlords. Below are some sample comments.

  • The regulation states that landlords should refund over payments because of roll back since January 2017.  Landlords questioned how that would be monitored.
  • A previous Councilman, who had been against Measure V, commented that it was going
  • to be difficult to manage
  • Landlords who kept rent at below market rates will be hurt the most
  • Rental property expenses (water, sewer, electricity, garbage, and repairs) are going up but rent income will not.
  • Measure V benefits some people that may not need it.

Action taken:

  • Committee adopted an annual general adjustment of rent 3.4% for 2017, however, landlords wanted 6%.
  • Committee adopted ‘Rules of Conduct’ similar to Mountain View City Council’s.

For future meetings:

  • Committee will be discussing ‘What is a fair rate of return for landlords’
  • Committee will be schedule two Stakeholder meetings, one for Tenants, one for Landlords.  They will be posted on the city website and will ask the audience to be ready to answer a list of perhaps 3 prepared questions.

Meeting adjourned 11:15pm

— Tamara Lewis, Observer

Lisa McLain League News, Mountain View City Council, Observer Reports

Mountain View City Council Meeting May 2017

Water Supply Transfer Agreement with the City of East Palo Alto

On May 23rd, 2017, the City Council approved an agreement to permanently transfer a portion of its San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) water supply guarantee to the City of East Palo Alto. The agreement stipulates that, for a one-time payment of $5 million, East Palo Alto will receive 1 million gallons per day (MGD) of Mountain View’s 13.46 MGD supply guarantee from the SFPUC. East Palo Alto’s supply guarantee, in contrast, is only 1.963 MGD, and because current consumption is near that maximum allocation, a moratorium has been established on new development.

Under the supply agreement with the SFPUC, Mountain View must purchase a minimum of 8.93 MGD – even if the City does not use that amount. Because of significant changes in industrial water use and successful conservation efforts, the City has used less water than the minimum purchase requirement in five of the past seven fiscal years (FY), using only marginally more than the minimum in FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14. City staff indicated that “water consumption has not come within 1 MGD of the supply guarantee since the last 1980s,” and was only 6.78 MGD in FY 2015-16. In fact, despite the increase in population and development, water use has declined significantly, and is half of the 13.5 MGD that the City used in FY 1986-87. Assured that the City would not run out of water anytime soon, the Council approved the agreement on a 6-1 vote.

Automated Guideway Transit Study

Also on May 23rd, the Council provided additional direction on the scope of the Automated Guideway Transit (AGT) feasibility study. The intention is explore the possibility of developing a fully automated, driverless, off-street (exclusive right of way) transit system connecting Downtown Mountain View to the North Bayshore area. Four technologies will be studied:

  1. Automated Transit Network – these include Personal Rapid Transit and Group Rapid Transit systems. They provide point-to-point service and can bypass other stations to get to the passengers destination.
  2. Automated People Movers – these include rubber-tired or steel-wheeled systems, monorails, and Meglevs. They allow for the highest speeds, offering scheduled service with small headways (3 to 5 minutes).
  3. Autonomous Transit – driverless vehicles capable of integration with mixed-flow (non-exclusive right of way) traffic.
  4. Aerial Cable (Gondolas, Aerial Trams, Funitels)

In providing input, the Council expressed interest in possibly expanding the system to serve the Shoreline Amphitheatre and the San Antonio and East Whisman areas. Council also sought to minimize negative impacts to neighborhoods. The feasibility study will provide cost estimates and a timeline for implementation.

North Bayshore Affordable Housing Administrative Guidelines

Although the final number of housing units that will be allowed in North Bayshore has not yet been determined, the Council provided input on the robust affordable housing program that city staff is developing for the area. The program provides incentives to developers: in exchange for greater building height and density, developers must provide affordable housing. The Council’s ambitious goal is to have 20% of the new housing be affordable to individuals and families at low and moderate levels of income.

On May 16th, the Council made several technical changes to the guidelines, including establishing the density and height bonuses provided in exchange for housing, setting the individual and family income eligibility for affordable units (based on the “Area Median Income” for the county), and exploring making units affordable in perpetuity (instead of the typical 55-year deed restrictions placed on affordable units currently). The Council also directed staff to investigate preferences for anyone who lives or works in the area.

— Lucas Ramirez, Observer