Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.01 Draft CC 02-10-2011 DUSD, 02-26-2011 Mini o-~ `l DRAFT ~~ ~"~~r,~ MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL ~~~ 1 O F T H E C I T Y O F D U B L I N/ D U B L I N ~- ~-~ 8~ UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ~~~~~ ~`ILIFOR~~ SPECIAL MEETING - FEBRUARY 10, 2011 A special meeting of the Dublin City Council/Dublin Unified School District was held on Thursday, February 10, 2011, in the Dublin Library Community Room. The meeting was called to order at 6:02 PM, by Mayor Sbranti. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CALL TO ORDER PRESENT: Councilmembers Biddle, Hildenbrand, Swalwell and Mayor Sbranti Boardmembers Cunningham, Tomlinson, Haubert, Kenney, Miller ABSENT: Vice Mayor Hart PUBLIC COMMENT 6:07:09 PM ~ Introductions were made and public comment was offered, with none received. FACILITATED DISCUSSION BY DEREK OKUBO, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE 6~07~26 PM Mr. Okubo led a discussion on community image building and the formation of partnerships between cities and school districts. He also provided historical information on the National Civic League and how they assist cities across the nation to thrive in serving their communities. Mr. Okubo also provided historical background of the All America City Award. Mr. Okubo commended the City and the School District for their coordination of efforts for a possible partnership to work through current economical challenges. A review of the historical perspective of the City was provided and the following comments were noted: rapid change since Dublin was incorporated in 1982; a blue collar community; known for the many fast food establishments; no government unit representation for schools; a small town feel; one stoplight for many years; a strong sense of community; viewed as Pleasanton's shadow; a gem undiscovered; sense of pride; safe; the proud underdog; an affordable DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/ 1 DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES VOLUME 30 ~~~oe~ SPECIAL MEETING n; , t~~ FEBRUARY 10, 2011 '`~~~ ~ 'rGI R DRAFT 20-~ c ~ community; a strong sense of heritage; a high level of community involvement; and is not an employment city. . The discussion continued regarding how the City was perceived as a community today, with the following comments noted: upwardly mobile; a progressive community, on the cutting edge, more legitimate through business corporate center, growing economically, desirable location, school district progression, incredible public facilities such as parks, library, senior center, new academic facilities funded by community supported measures, well managed, responsible fiscal stewardship, pro-business, a welcoming community and adaptive and responsive to the community through City Parks and Community Services, striving for excellence, high level of parent involvement and a highly diverse community, and still a safe community. A discussion of the City's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) occurred. Strengths included: great City Staff, access to public safety resources from trusted agencies, great geographical location, access to transportation, solid infrastructure, high parent involvement, great quality of life, good economic base, consistently dedicated leadership in both School District and City Council, strong faith-based as well as community and service organizations. Ms. Catherine Lew of the Lew Edwards Group stated that their community polling indicated that constituents were overwhelmingly safisfied with City services and trusted the City's fiscal responsibility. She also indicated that the findings reflected that: 86% of residents rated the quality of life in Dublin as excellent or good; 79% of residents rated City services as excellent or good; less than 50% of residents felt there were any real concerns with traffic, schools or public safety. City Manager Pattillo stated one of the strengths of the community was consistency in leadership of both the City Council and School Board, who have tackled tough issues over the years and have made tough decisions for the betterment of the entire community. Weaknesses or areas of improvement were noted: high commercial vacancies; no designated traditional downtown area; Camp Parks division of west and east; vulnerability of facilities maintenance at risk dependent on economy; and community misconception of areas of responsibility between School District and City. Opportunities noted were: educating the public on areas of responsibility of the School District and City responsibility to the community; how to prepare for build-out; how to prepare for student population growth and fluctuations; finding a.way to use School facilities for the community's use; as well as volunteer opportunities befinreen both organizations. Threats discussion was led by Ms. Lew who elaborated on current threats of the State Budget's impact on cities and school districts in the entire state. Ms. Lew indicated that,based on polling results in the community, the residents' finro biggest concerns were the State Budget deficit and the impact of the State Budget on local services. Other threats noted: the State had really taken the predictability out of the budget process which causes challenges in the City's long- DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL/ 2 DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES VOLUME 30 G~~oe~ue~~ SPECIAL MEETING u, FEBRUARY 10, 20'I'I 1~\~~~1% ~'1L/FOR~~` DRAFT 3~~~. term planning; charter school was a threat to the School District in terms of reduction to current funding; and misinformation from a variety of social media sources. Mr. ~kubo 1ed the discussion on what image the City Council and the School Board envisioned for the future. The following comments were noted: maintain the image of the place to live, work & play; leader in sustainability; a fully integrated community; a desirable location to live; thriving community in schools, tax base, public facilities; and continue to add new facilities. Mr. Okubo continued with discussion on the definition of the City/District partnership with the following noted: mutually beneficial vision; understanding the capabilities and needs of both the City and District; action plans with accountability and uplifting of each other; understand that the State does have mandates which have a direct impact on the City; as well as maintaining a safe community which public safety is well over 50% of the City budget. Mayor Sbranti highlighted the City's Mission, "The City of Dublin promotes and supports a high quality of life which ensures a safe and secure environment that fosters new opportunities", and reviewed the City Strategies: 1) Pursue economic development initiatives that attract new businesses while strengthening existing businesses; 2) Continue to strengthen the identity and aesthetic appeal of the downtown; 3) Create a community that supports environmental sustainability and provides an open space nefinrork that ensures environmental protection and provides public access where appropriate; 4) Develop dynamic and unique community recreational and cultural opportunities in the region; and 5) Develop a Citywide communication program that provides connectivity with our residents and businesses across several media outlets. Board President Cunningham highlighted the District's Vision, "All Dublin Students Will Become Lifelong Learners". He further stated that all their Strategic Initiatives were based on their Mission Statement, "Our mission is to ensure that every student becomes a lifelong learner by providing a rigorous and relevant education that prepares them for college or service to our country and for success in the global economy." Mr. Cunningham also reviewed the District's Strategic Initiatives: 1) Maximize Student Success; 2) Safe and Healthy Learning Environment; 3) Human Resources Support; 4) Financial and Facilities Support; 5) Technology - Educational Support; and 6) Communication - Mission and Initiatives Support. Ms. Lew led the discussion on the potential of a future financial partnership involving a joint revenue measure and shared recent successful examples of city and school districts which had worked together on identifying their short term and long term revenue needs. She cited, as an example, the City of Santa Monica and the Santa Monica Unified School District, who proposed a simple majority requirement on sales tax, no sunset, and had a companion measure where proceeds were split 50/50 befinreen the City and School District. She cautioned that, in reality, only 11 % of the school parcel taxes passed Statewide in the November 2010 General Election. Ms. Lew shared another example: the Emery Unified School District and the City of Emeryville successfully obtained 55% requirement bond covering construction of joint city-school facilities. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIU 3 DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES VOLUME 30 ~~OFDpB~ SPECIAL MEETING n;/~ ~ ~ FEBRUARY 10, 2011 '``V~~1~ ~'~G/FOR~S DRAFT ~o~"~ ~ In both cases, Ms. Lew stated that this type of joint venture required several joint City Council and School Board meetings to accomplish. Ms. Lew stated that, in any case, there would be a lead agency dependent upon what was the desired outcome. In the City of Dublin, the measure could not be listed as a simple majority level unless it was held at the next regularly scheduled City General Election in November 2012, which would, in her judgement, be a good year to do so. Details regarding sunset clauses and additional operating revenues for the School not limited to facilities would need to be discussed. School Boardmember Haubert and City Manager Pattillo then briefly discussed the type of proposed tax (Utility User Tax) and the community education that would need to be presented to residents and the business community, if it was the direction of the City Council and the School Board. Ms. Lew stated that currently there were more than 150 cities with a utility user tax, and there were a number of ways to be community responsive in a proposal.. Common exemptions included seniors, the disabled, and low income , citizens. There was also a way to create consensus with business stakeholders and the business community. Superintendent Hanke stated that, in order for schools to continue to thrive, they would need two funding sources. One source would be needed to cover programs and one source to cover facilities. The current parcel tax generates $1.2 million, and was in its second year of a five year sunset. When the School District polled the community, the response was a relatively small percentage of support for additional funding and had decided to reconsider at the appropriate time which might be 2012 to pursue an additional measure which was imperative if schools were to continue to move forward as they had been. City Manager Pattillo stated that, in past years, the City's property tax revenue fully funded salaries for all public safety services which made up over 50% of the City's budgef. This was no longer the case. She also stated that, while both the City and Schools were doing better than most, it was only with careful foresight and planning that this would continue to occur. Ms. Lew stated that, if there was interest in a 2012 tax measure, then a new community survey should occur. She also cautioned that, if the City was the lead agency in this proposal, there was only an opportunity to act on this every other year. {f the direction was to move forward in a dual agency partnership, quality discussions and planning needed to begin. Mayor Sbranti commented that if polling were to occur, it might be best to do if a June election occurred. If the Governor's measures impacted schools, the polling data might be significantly different than if it were to occur any time prior to June. Ms. Lew stated that the timeline necessary to move forward with this measure would typically be one year. The Mayor's suggestion would place the process within that timeline. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIU 4 . DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES VOLUME 30 G~~.~OFDpB~ SPECIAL MEETING n, ~ ~~~ FEBRUARY 1.0, 2011 '``~~~~~ ~dLI R~~ DRAFT ~o~~~ Mayor Sbranti summarized the needs identified which were the School District's operating needs currently funded by a parcel tax, facilities maintenance needs which was partially funded by the current school bond and the City's structural gap and capital improvement project gap. Mr. Okubo thanked Ms. Lew for her input and asked the City Council and School Board for final thoughts on the ideal partnership and how they would move forward. The following was noted: the City and District work together on an enhanced version of land use planning discussions; detailed list of priorities into specific items that would be targeted, such as a narrative would be developed, gaps and needs identified, and tell the story of why and what, hold a discussion on how to make City & School facilities more visible to the community. For example, a shared aquatic center and computer labs, hold discussion on how and when sharing of facilities can occur, enhancing non-monetary and non-capital collaboration, enhance language in strategic initiatives in ways that supported the partnership, make a decision to preserve 2012 as an option; if so, would need structured disciplined timeiine for the agencies' deployment. City Manager Pattillo summarized the following timeline: City Manager Pattillo, Superintendent. Hanke and Ms. Lew to coordinate a strategy, then meet with the City/School Liaison committee in April 2011 with findings, followed by a meeting with the City Council and School Board in July or August. City Manager Pattillo also cautioned everyone that this meeting tonight might cause speculation and spread inaccurate information as to the intention of the overall meeting, and stated the importance for all to come to an understanding that the City Council and School Board were in the explorative stages of this process and each respective body would determine if this partnership was to move forward. 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council/Dublin Unified School District, the meeting was adjourned at 8:23 PM in memory of Staff Sgt. Sean Diamond and our fallen troops. Minutes prepared by Dora Ramirez, Deputy Gity Clerk. Mayor ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk DUBLIN CITY COUNCIU DUBLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES VOLUME 30 `,~o~'bue~, SPECIAL MEETING, n; ~ FEBRUARY 10, 2011 '~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ 5 ~~~i~ DRAFT ~.~. ~F DU~~~ MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL ~,`` OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN -- ~~/$/~ ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 26, 2011 ,C;~~'~ ~ _i~ An adjourned regular meeting of the Dublin City Council, Heritage & Cultural Arts Commission, Parks & Community Services Commission, and Planning Commission was held on Saturday, February 26, 2011, in the Dublin Library Community Room. The meeting was called to order at 9:03:17 AM, by Mayor Sbranti. ~- - - ,-'... _ __ -- - - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Biddle, Hildenbrand, Swalwell, and Mayor Sbranti Planning Commissioners, Brown, Bhuthimethee, Schaub, and Wehrenberg Heritage & Cultural Arts Commissioners Minniear, Carr, Tutino, King, Sr., Halket, and Hernandez Parks & Community Services Commissioners Boboc, Elias, Mack, and Totaro ABSENT: Vm. Hart, Commissioners Jones, Reinemann, Vonheeder-Leopold, O'Keefe 1. PUBLIC COMMENT 9:07:39 AM None. 2. JOINT WORKSHOP 9:07:48 AM Mayor Sbranti welcomed those in attendance and asked for self-introductions of the Commissions and Staff. He stated that this meeting format had changed from previous years and turned the meeting over to Strategic Planning Consultant Sherry Lund. Strategic Planning Consultant Sherry Lund presented the Staff Report and advised that the City Council, Heritage & Cultural Arts Commission, Parks & Community Services Commission, and Planning Commission would participate in a joint workshop to discuss DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1 VOLUME 30 ,~oeoo~ ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING n;~ ~ ;~ FEBRUARY 26, 2011 '~~~~~~~ Gc~FOR~s ~~ ~ ~ ~. DRAFT proposed changes to the Strategic Plan, changes to the Strategic Plan process, and the Roles and Scope of the City Council, Staff and the three Commissions. Ms. Lund reviewed the City's Mission, Vision and Values and Strategic drivers and major sustaining goals and objectives. City Manager Pattillo reviewed the goals and objectives and the historical perspective of the mission, vision and values and the strategic plan process and the changes currently in place. She stated that, with diminishing resources, it was critical to move forward cautiously while supporting major sustaining goals and objectives. City Manager Pattillo reviewed the strategic plan, the budget process and highlighted the changes. Major changes in the process were the implementation of input received and information provided to the City Council and to the public in the form of an Annual Report outlining the City's accomplishments. Mayor Sbranti asked if there were any questions from the Commissions regarding the review of the Strategic Plan. Commissioner Alan Brown asked the City Manager if there was a detailed process in place as to the accountability of objectives by department. City Manager Pattillo explained there was a work plan detailing all of the objectives out of the normal scope of daily operations which had been put into place this year. In addition there were regular status updates to the City Council on all objectives. Commissioner Carr commented that the City Manager's description of process changes was in line with what was done in the private sector. Based on her experience it was a workable process. Ms. Lund commented the components of the Strategic Plan had remained the same. However, it was the sequence that was restructured to make more sense. In the past the entire process started with the Goals and Objectives and the work plan detail. The strategies came afterward which was counterintuitive. With the new process, the City Council and Commissions could implement the Strategies and Vision, allowing for the focus of the City's financial and human resources. Commissioner Totaro asked how Objectives were removed from the Strategic Plan. City Manager Pattillo explained that, once the Objectives for a specific Strategic Goal have been completed, they were removed. However, in order to provide the Commissions the historical data, the completed items remained on the list. Mayor Sbranti added that, as an example, there was a Strategic Goal for Transportation in 2005 which detailed needed infrastructure such as extension of Dublin Boulevard to Fallon DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2 VOLUME 30 G~~~OFDpB~ ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING rn ~ ~~~ FEBRUARY 26, 2011 ~~~~~~~ ~crFOC~~` ~ o~o ~ DRAFT Road, the Rapid Transit Bus route and the West Dublin BART Station. Since all of these had been completed this item would be removed. Commissioner Totaro stated, as an internal document, that seemed appropriate. But as a public document perhaps highlighting the items the City wanted to accomplish might be more effective as opposed to listing all of the items that had been completed. City Manager Pattillo further explained that the City Council reviewed this document on an annual basis and a way to accomplish a presentation to the public would be to create a Annual Report. Commissioner Schaub asked how the Commission could place items on or remove items from the Goals and Objectives listing. City Manager Pattillo clarified the new process would enable the Commissions to initiate the placement or removal of objectives to support the Strategic drivers. Ms. Lund reviewed the roles of the City Council, Staff, Commissions, and Commission Chairs, and reviewed the City organizational chart. City Manager Pattillo discussed the City Council and City Manager form of government, roles, responsibilities, and authority of both. This review of roles was suggested by City Council and, while was not new information, it was a reminder of how alignment of the roles allowed for a focused approach on execution of the City's Mission, Vision and Strategic process. City Manager Pattil{o stated it was the City Council's desire to review the code of conduct, which had already been reviewed by Staff with all of the individual Commissions. Mayor Sbranti elaborated on the importance of the review of the code of conduct, which he stated was a good reminder of the responsibility that accompanied the role of Councilmember or Commissioner, not only when seated at the dais but at all times when out in the public. Mayor Sbranti called for a short recess at 9:58 a.m. RECESS 9:58 AM to 10:07 AM The meeting reconvened with all City Councilmembers and Commissioners present. Ms. Lund reviewed the City's Vision Statement, Mission Statement and Values statements. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 3 VOLUME 30 G~,~qOF~UB~y ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING a, ~ ~~~ FEBRUARY 26, 2011 1~`~~~~~ ~4LIFOR~~ ~ ~~~v DRAFT Mayor Sbranti pointed out that the first City Value, Buildinq Communitv, was to "Promote locations and events that bring people of all ages together" was an example clearly demonstrated with the upcoming Farmer's Market event. Ms. Lund reviewed the Fiscal Year 2011-2012 Preliminary Update of the Ten Year Strategic Plan and reviewed the five Strategies. Mayor Sbranti stated a high priority was set by the City Council regarding Strategy #1, "Pursue economic development initiatives that attract new businesses while strengthening existing business." The City Council felt that both new and existing businesses were equally important. Cm. Swalwell stated his support for the level of priority set by the City Counci{ for new businesses as well as providing support to existing businesses with the various City incentive programs. Commissioner Mack asked for clarification of Strategic Goal #1A, No. 6, "Execute Business Visitation Program". Cm. Biddle explained that he and the Mayor were on the Economic Development Committee which participated in scheduled visits with various local businesses to enhance public relations and receive feedback from businesses to bring back to the City Council. Commissioner Totaro asked for a comparison on how the City ranked among the surrounding cities in regards to being a desired business location. Mayor Sbranti emphasized the many incentive programs offered by the City and maintained relationships with the developer and business community to continue to allow the City of Dublin to have a competitive edge over the surrounding cities. City Manager Pattillo stated the feedback from residential and commercial brokers was that Dublin was the City that they want to work with due to the business receptive processes in place that ace being continuously improved. Ms. Lund continued with the review of Strategy #2, "Continue to strengthen the identity and aesthetic appeal of the downtown" and Strategy #3, "Create a community that supports environmental sustainability and provides an open space nefinrork that ensures environmental protection and provides public access where appropriate". Commissioner Wehrenberg commented on Strategic Goal #3D.1, "Partner with schools to do outreach related to waste management with the students and teachers", and #3D. 14, "Conduct a volunteer clean-up day in the fall", and stated she was pleased with the working relationships with the schools. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 4 VOLUME 30 ~~.~oFOOB~ ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING rii y FEBRUARY 26, 2011 1\\\~~~1% ~'IGIFOR~~ ~ ~ ~~: .~ DRAFT Ms. Lund reviewed Strategy #4, "Develop dynamic and unique community recreational and cultural opportunities in the region". Commissioner Minniear commented on the differentiation of art in the parks as opposed to art in streets and how was it integrated with the cultural aspect of Dublin. Mayor Sbranti clarified that the art in the Streetscape Master Plan was approved by the Planning Commission, in order to create uniformity along with uniqueness on Dublin Boulevard, yet there was a desire to differentiate from the art that was in parks, and in the heritage district. Cm. Hildenbrand stated that there was a time when the Dublin Fine Arts organization was the lead organization on the various art projects throughout the City, while the art seen on the corridor was implemented based on grant funds received for affordable housing. She also stated that, when a piece of art is selected, it is specific to the area in which it will be located. Commissioner Boboc asked for an overview of Strategic Goal #4C.1, "Complete U.S. Army Reserve Camp Parks General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments". Mayor Sbranti stated the overall plan, managed by developer Argent Management Co., would be required to do improvements on the base equivalent to the land exchange value for the 180 acre site. Once final negotiations are completed befinreen the U.S. Army and Argent Management, the City would be involved in the planning process of the proposed site. Commissioner Totaro asked why Fallon Sports Park and the completion of the other half of the Dublin Sports Grounds were not listed as specific goals on the Strategic Plan. Cm. Hildenbrand responded that the City was able to construct the first phase of Fallon Sports Park , which had been completed based on construction of residential units in the near future. The future phases will be built by development impact fee revenues from future development . Mayor Sbranti also stated that if development had not occurred then that also meant fees would not be collected to fund subsequent phases which .added to this challenge. However, the importance of additional phases to the Fallon Sports Park remained a high priority and it seemed like a good idea to place this objective back on the Strategic Plan. City Manager Pattillo cautioned that maintenance of effort was the major driving factor of continued phases of Fallon Sports Park. Expenditures were estimated at $450K annually just for phase one. DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5 VOLUME 30 `~qOFppe~ ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING u; ~, ~~ FEBRUARY 26, 2011 '`~~~~~~ ~~~~~ d,~~=~~L DRAFT Ms. Lund continued with review of Strategy #5, "Develop City-wide communication and outreach programs that provide connectivity with our residents and businesses across several media outlets". Commissioner Tutino asked how Strategy #5 could address the divide between the east and west side of the City. ~ Cm. Hildenbrand stated that this was a topic discussed at the recent Joint City Council and Dublin Unified School Board meeting to address the many issues that arose with this concern. Mayor Sbranti stated that Strategic Goal #5A.2, "Develop a Faith and Culture Based Nefinrork that will assist Dublin Police Services in bridging the gaps befinreen the Police and various faiths and cultures", assisted with this specific issue of the east and west division within the City. Ms. Lund concluded the Strategic Plan overview and thanked all of the Commissions for their participation. City Manager Pattillo thanked the City Council for their direction in restructuring the Joint City Council/Commission meeting, and thanked Ms. Lund and Staff for their work in implementation of the new meeting structure. ~ 3. ADJOURNMENT 11:52:00 AM There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:52 a.m. to the Regular City Council meeting of March 1, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. in the Dublin Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California, in memory of Staff Sgt. Sean Diamond and our fallen troops. ~ Minutes prepared by Dora Ramirez, Deputy City Clerk. Mayor ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6 VOLUME 30 ,~OFDp~ ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING i~;~ ~ m FEBRUARY 26, 2011 '~~~~~~ ~`1G/fpR~~