The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet CITY OF CUPERTINO AGENDA lop C U P E RTI N O PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION This will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location. Thursday, May 14, 2020 7:00 PM Televised Special Meeting TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION TO HELP STOP THE SPREAD OF COVID-19 In accordance with Governor Newsom's Executive Order No-29-20, this will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location to help stop the spread of COVID-19. Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways: 1) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV. 2) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at www.Cupertino.org/youtube and www.Cupertino.org/webcast Members of the public wishing comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the following ways: 1) E-mail comments by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 14 to the Commission at parkscommission@cupertino.org. These e-mail comments will be received by the commission members before the meeting and posted to the City's website after the meeting. 2) E-mail comments during the times for public comment during the meeting to the Commission at parkscommission(Pcupertino.org. The staff liaison will read the emails into the record, and display any attachments on the screen, for up to 3 minutes (subject to the Chair's discretion to shorten time for public comments). Members of the public that wish to share a document must email parkscommission@cupertino.org prior to speaking. 3) Teleconferencing Instructions Members of the public may observe the teleconference meeting or provide oral public comments as follows: Oral public comments will be accepted during the teleconference meeting. Comments may Page 1 Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda May 14,2020 be made during "oral communications" for matters not on the agenda, and during the public comment period for each agenda item. To address the Commission, click on the link below to register in advance and access the meeting: Online Please click the link below to join the webinar: https:Hcityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_vYWY_woHTD-G4kZvFBJJaA Phone Dial 888 788 0099 and enter Webinar ID: 933 4165 1349 (Type *9 to raise hand to speak) Unregistered participants will be called on by the last four digits of their phone number. Or an H.323/SIP room system: H.323: 162.255.37.11 (US West) 162.255.36.11 (US East) Meeting ID: 933 4165 1349 SIP: 93341651349@z o o mcrc.com After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Please read the following instructions carefully: 1. You can directly download the teleconference software or connect to the meeting in your internet browser. If you are using your browser, make sure you are using a current and up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer. 2. You will be asked to enter an email address and a name, followed by an email with instructions on how to connect to the meeting. Your email address will not be disclosed to the public. If you wish to make an oral public comment but do not wish to provide your name,you may enter "Cupertino Resident" or similar designation. 3. When the Chair calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on "raise hand." Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. 4. When called,please limit your remarks to the time allotted and the specific agenda topic. Page 2 Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda May 14,2020 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 6 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CUPERTINO PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission is hereby called for Thursday, May 14, 2020, commencing at 7:00 p.m. In accordance with Governor Newsom's Executive Order No-29-20, this will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location. Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of conducting business on the subject matters listed below under the heading, "Special Meeting." SPECIAL MEETING CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Subject: Special Meeting of February 6, 2020. Draft Minutes 2. Subject: Regular Meeting of March 5, 2020. Draft Minutes POSTPONEMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission and not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to a matter not on the agenda. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Page 3 Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda May 14,2020 3. Subject: Written Communications to be Received at the May 14, 2020 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. Written Communications OLD BUSINESS 4. Subject: Update on Rancho Rinconada Recreation & Park District. Staff Report A-Public Review Draft Report,Special Study Governance Options,Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District, lanuary 29,2020 5. Subject: Satellite Community Garden Project. Staff Report 6. Subject: Update on the Development of the Specific Plan. Staff Report 7. Subject: Discuss the Process and Timeline for Reviewing Community Funding Grant Program Applications. Staff Report A- Community Funding Policy B-Community Funding Grant Application C-FY19/20 Evaluation Criteria Rating Sheet NEW BUSINESS 8. Subject: Update on the Coronavirus' Impacts to Cupertino Parks and Recreation Programs. Staff Report 9. Subject: Outreach to the Public and Mechanisms for the Public to Contact Staff. Staff Report 10. Subject: Examination of Year-Round Special Events Offered by the City. Staff Report Attachment A-Chart of Events Offered and Locations Attachment B-Map of Cupertino With Facility Locations STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 11. Subject: Receive Monthly Update Reports from: -Director - Commissioners Page 4 Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda May 14,2020 FUTURE AGENDA SETTING ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 6 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Page 5 CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File#: 20-7449, Version: 1 Subject: Special Meeting of February 6, 2020. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF CITY OF CUPERTINO is PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION City Hall EOC CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA Thursday, February 6, 2020 7:00 PM SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Tambe called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m. in the City Hall EOC, at 10300 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Neesha Tambe, Gopal Kumarappan, Carol Stanek, Sashikala Begur Commissioners absent: Xiangchen Xu Staff present: Randy Schwartz, Christine Hanel, Whitney Zeller, Jenny Koverman, Mellownie Salvador Guest speakers: None CEREMONIAL MATTERS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Introduction of New Commissioner. Chair Tambe introduced new Commissioner, Sashi Begur. Commissioner Begur shared a brief overview of her background. 2. Chair/Vice Chair Selection. Chair Tambe tabled the item to the March 5th meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3. Special Meeting of,January 9, 2020 Commissioner Stanek motioned to approve, Vice Chair Kumarappan seconded. Motion passed with three votes yes, one abstention from Commissioner Begur and Commissioner Xu absent. POSTPONEMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS New Business item 7 was discussed at this portion of the meeting. 7. Blackberry Farm Entrance Road Improvements—Feasibility Public Meeting. Public Works Project Manager, Mellownie Salvador presented on the upcoming public meeting that will be held on Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at the EEC to discuss the Blackberry Farm Entrance Feasibility Study. A formal presentation including the feedback from the meeting will be made at the March 5t''Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. The feasibility study and report will be presented to council in April. The Commissioners requested to see the proposals in advance and that it be made available to the public if possible. Chair Tambe suggested posting a version of the flyer on the gate at the scenic circle entrance to BBF. Commissioner Stanek suggested sharing the information with Monta Vista High School and Kennedy Middle School. OLD BUSINESS 4. Satellite Community Garden - Update Recreation Supervisor Jenny Koverman presented an update on potential satellite community gardens. Council had directed staff to use 300k of the community garden funding to create satellite community gardens in Cupertino. The Commissioners were asked to propose at least 2 satellite garden locations and send them to staff by February 241h. Commissioners will later use the evaluation form to rate and evaluate each proposed garden location. At a future meeting the top locations will be identified for master gardeners to review. Vice Chair Kumarappan suggested adding a minimum of 25 plots to be accommodated for each satellite garden site. Vice Chair Kumarappan also requested data on how many people are on the waitlist for the Community Garden. Chair Tambe requested a list of where the current and waitlisted residents are located to be able to target areas for potential satellite gardens. Chair Tambe also suggested the list be expanded to include parklet opportunities as well. Commissioner Stanek requested a list of City owned undeveloped and underutilized properties. 5. Review and Finalize Commission Proposals for the 2020/2021 City Work Program. Interim Director Randy Schwartz reviewed the items on the Commission's Proposals for the 2020/2021 City Work Program, drafted at the January 91n meeting. The Commissioners changed item three from Summer Events to Annual Events and completed a Project Objective for each item. 6. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update Interim Director Randy Schwartz presented an update on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The Master Plan Will be going to Council at the February 18t1'Council meeting. Chair Tambe will attend in support of its adoption. Cindy Mendoza will be making the presentation with the assistance of Gail Seeds. We will be requesting approval of the document from Council. Chair Tambe will select two Commissioners to act as a committee to assist City staff with the strategic plan for the Master Plan. Chair Tambe requested a joint meeting with Council to review the strategic plan when appropriate. NEW BUSINESS 8. Schedule Commissioner's Attendance of Mayor's Monthly Meetings. Commissioners discussed their attendance at the upcoming Mayor's meetings. March 4-Neesha Tambe April 1 -Carol Stanek May 6-Gopal Kumarappan June 3-Sashi Begur Remaining meeting attendance will be scheduled via email. STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 9. Receive Monthly Update Reports from: - Director Interim Director Randy Schwartz provided the Director's Report. - Rancho Rinconada Update, currently scheduled to be on the March Commission meeting agenda. - Cultures of the World Event- February 13 - Winter Ball - February 28 - Big Bunny 5k -April 11 - The City is accepting applications for Summer jobs - February 12t''-BBF Entrance meeting - Director search was conducted in December. Did not choose a candidate from the initial candidate pool, will continue a more concentrated recruitment process starting next week. - Commissioners Chair Tambe - Spoke at the last Council meeting on the Community Funding Policy item which passed. Applications will be reviewed at a future meeting. ADJOURNMENT—Chair Tambe adjourned the meeting at 8:52p.m. to the March 5, 2020 meeting. Respectfully submitted, Whitney Zeller, Administrative Assistant Parks &Recreation Department Minutes approved at the regular meeting CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File#: 20-7450, Version: 1 Subject: Regular Meeting of March 5, 2020. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF CITY OF CUPERTINO is PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Community Hall CUPERTINO 10350 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA Thursday, March 5, 2020 7:00 PM DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Tambe called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m. in the Community Hall, at 10350 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Neesha Tambe, Gopal Kumarappan, Carol Stanek, Xiangchen Xu, Sashikala Begur Commissioners absent: None Staff present: Randy Schwartz, Whitney Zeller, Jason Bisely, Mellownie Salvador, Michael Zimmerman Guest speakers: Greg Marsello (LERN), Richard Berkson (Berkson Associates), Dunia Noel (LAFCO) CEREMONIAL MATTERS AND PRESENTATIONS APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2. Special Meeting of February 6, 2020. Item was postponed to April 2, 2020 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Matley from the Fine Arts Commission shared information on the Art in Unexpected Places program. The deadline to submit proposals for the mural at Blackberry Farm is April 17t'' WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 3. California Association of Parks and Recreation Commissioners and Board Members. Randy Schwartz shared information sent to the Commissioners and encouraged them to contact department staff if they are interested in becoming a member of CAPRCBM. Commissioners noted that the written communication regarding Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District would be included in consideration of Item 7. OLD BUSINESS 4. Receipt of the Marketing Report Prepared by Learning Resources Network L( ERN). Greg Marsello of Learning Resources Network (LERN) provided a presentation on the findings of his evaluation of the City's Parks and Recreation Department marketing strategies. Chair Tambe requested to add the Marketing Plan as an agenda item in a month or two and follow up on how the suggestions are being implemented and what the strategy is for creating a marketing plan in the future. 5. Blackberry Farm Entrance Road Improvement—Feasability Study Alternatives. Michael Zimmerman and Mellownie Salvador presented the feedback received from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission and as well as the public on the 5 road improvement options provided by Underwood and Rosenbloom. The Commissioners were asked to review the options, consider the feedback and select one option for recommendation to Council in April. Community member Dave McLeroy spoke on the item and was in support of making improvements to the road and prioritizing the best engineering over conservation of the existing trees along the entrance. Vice Chair Kumarappan suggested to eliminate any options that are not rated above moderate for safety. Commissioner Stanek motioned to recommend option B to Council. Commissioner Kumarappan seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously with 5 votes yes. Chair Tambe wanted to emphasize how important this area is for traffic and that this is a high priority item for the Commission and the community. Commissioner Stanek reemphasized the importance of making use of the City owend property at the Blackberry Farm entrance, which is now vacant. 6. Receive a Presentation on the Senior Center's Classes and Programs. Jason Bisely shared a presentation on the classes and programs offered at the Senior Center including art, music and exercises classes, monthly events and their monthly newsletter. Community member and volunteer at the Senior Center, Heather Dean, spoke on the item and shared that she's heard comments that Cupertino's Senior Center is the best in the area and people enjoy spending time there. Chair Tambe inquired on the impacts of the Coronavirus to the Senior Center and advised to find more formal ways to include the Senior Center's members in providing feedback for the strategic plan. 7. Rancho Rinconada Recreation &Park District. Richard Berkson and Dunia Noel presented the report prepared by Berkson Associates, commissioned by LAFCO to evaluate options for the operation of the Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District. The report is out for public comment until March 11, 2020. Council reviewed the item at their Februar 161h meeting and recommended the Parks and Recreation Commission review options 1 and 2 and exclude option 3. Community Member Jennifer Griffin spoke on the item and voiced support for option 1 to maintain the status quo. Community Member Sophia Badillo spoke on the item and voiced support for option 2 for the City take over the district. Community Member Tom Flynn seceded his time to Sophia Badillo. Community Member John Blakkan spoke on the item and voiced support for option 2 to have the City take over the district. Community Member and Rancho Rinconada Board Member, Steven Wesolowski, spoke on the item and voiced support for option 1 to maintain the status quo. Ananamous Community Member spoke on the item and voiced support for option 2 to have the City take over the district. Rancho Rinconada Park and Recreation District Manager, Kevin Davis spoke on the item and voiced support for option 1 to maintain the status quo. Chair Tambe suggested adding a question to the survey to see if residents know the district exists and a question on resident use and accessability of the district. Commissioner Stanek suggested adding a question to the survey to determine if the individual's household is located in the district or not, as well as a question on how often the individual has used the district in the past year and what they used it for. Commissioners expressed concern over aquiring unbiased data from the survey and how the survey information will be analized. Chair Tambe suggested that the raw data be analized by City Staff. Commissioner Stanek advised to hold an event for the public at Rancho Rinconada so that residents are informed. Vice Chair Kumarappan expressed concern issuing the survey without being able to verify the data and suggested to add LAFCO as well as City Council to the wording of number 7 on the survey. Randy Schwartz reviewed dates of engagement for this item: March 11t''-LAFCO comment period ends (LAFCO website) March 71h-23rd-Survey will be online (City website) April 2nd-Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting A subcommittee of Vice Chair Gopal and Commissioner Begur was created to work on the item. Item 9 was discussed at this portion of the meeting 9. Dog Off-Leash Area Update. Randy Schwartz provided an update on the DOLA. There have been no incidences to report. Community member Sameer Raheja spoke on the item, shared data on the DOLA and requested that the Commission have a plan for the dog park post- trial. Community member Manjaya Hegde commented on the item and requested a permanent dog park post-trial. Community member Kiran Kavoori spoke on the item and requested a water fountain for the dogs in the park and shared that signs for the park are being misinterpreted thinking they apply to the entire park and not just the DOLA. Community Member Ankita Goyal spoke on the item and shared the benefits of the DOLA trial. Community member Debashis Rad spoke on the item and requested a permanent dog park in the future. Interim Director Randy Schwartz reviewed options for the Commission post trial and acknowledged that the Commission had included in their work program to continue reviewing the DOLA trial and if successful, implement more programs in the community. Commissioner Stanek shared updates on DOLAs in neighboring communities Sunnyvale and Los Altos. The Commissioners recommended talking to Public Works regarding the location of the signage. Chair Tambe recommended that the next Chair add this item to the June agenda and recommended talking with the group who uses the park for Volleyball to ensure that they haven't had any issues with the DOLA as well as others who had expressed concern at the start of the DOLA trial. 8. Satellite Community Garden Project. Randy Schwartz provided an update on the Sattelite Community Garden Project and reviewed the 4 parks that were recommended by the Commissioners. Chair Tambe recommended adding parklets and local businesses with easements to the list of potential areas to review for the satellite gardens. The Commissioners agreed to continue to research for the next month and bring the itme back in April. Staff also agreed to resend information to Commissioners on where the waitlisted residents are located as well as recommendations from the master gardeners and their suggestions on locations. Community member Alden Gu from Boy Scout troup 400 informed the Commission that the Boyscouts would be happy to help when building the community garden. 10. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update and Appointments to Assist With the Development of the Specific Plan. Randy Schwartz provided an update on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Chair Tambe appointed herself and Commissioner Stanek as a subcommittee to assist with the development of the Specific Plan. Ceremonial Matters and Presentations Item 1 was discussed at this portion of the meeting. 1. Chair/Vice Chair Selection. Commissioner Stanek motioned to elect Commissioner Kumarappan as the new Chair. Commissioner Xu seconded. Motion passed unanimously with 5 votes yes. Commissioner Tambe motioned to elect Commissioner Stanek as the new Vice Chair. Commissioner Stanek seconded. Motion passed unanimously with 5 votes yes. NEW BUSINESS STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 11. Receive Monthly Update Reports from: - Director - Interim Director Christine Hanel provided the Director's Report. - Annual events will be included at the next meeting - List of upcoming events - Commissioners - Commissioner Xu requested the opportunity for staff to provide a tour of parks and key facilities. - Commissioner Tambe provided updates from the Mayor's meeting. ADJOURNMENT-Chair Kumarappan adjourned the meeting at 11:41p.m. to the April 2, 2020 meeting at 7 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Whitney Zeller, Administrative Assistant Parks &Recreation Department Minutes approved at the regular meeting CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File#: 20-7458, Version: 1 Subject: Written Communications to be Received at the May 14, 2020 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM PRC 05/14/2020 Item Not on Agenda - Dog off Leash Area Written Communications From: Rai Avasarala To: Neesha Tambe; Gopal Kumarappan;Xiangchen Xu; Helene Davis;Carol Stanek;City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission Cc: Cupertino Recreation and Community Services; Rai Avasarala Subject: Jollyman DOLA: Feedback and Requests Date: Sunday,March 8,2020 5:58:14 PM CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commissioners, First of all,I would like to thank you for the fantastic and ground breaking work you have done,to enable the Cupertino community and their dogs the opportunity to use our local resources equitably,by approving a 10 month trial for the Dogs off-leash Area two hours a day in Jollyman Park.I and my dog(s)are an avid user of this facility and we love it. I have 6 year old lab retriever. She looks forward to meeting her friends every day during this time.During the social interaction between the dogs in the 2 hour off leash time,she releases all her pent-up energy.This keeps her physically and mentally healthy. It would also be great if a dog water fountain could be installed in the off-leash area. Finally,I am sorry I could not attend the March Parks and Recreation meeting where an update on this project was discussed.I would like to request you to please make this trial a permanent feature of the park.In fact,I would highly encourage that this should be expanded to other Cupertino parks,as well.That way the population of 11,600+ dogs in Cupertino will all have"time based"access to our wonderful parks. I plan to attend the June meeting for the final trial readout. Thank you, Raj Avasarala From: Sayun Nishimura To: Neesha Tambe:Goval Kumarappan:Xianachen Xu: Helene Davis:Carol Stanek;City of Cupeitino Parks and Recreation Commission Cc: Cumitino Recreation and Community Services: Kiran Kavoori: Subject: Jollyman DOLA: Feedback and Requeslc Date: Sunday,March 8,2020 5:43:08 PM CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commissioners, I am sorry I could not attend the March Parks and Recreation meeting where an update on this project was discussed. I had an occasional cough which had started several days before. Given the recent coronavinis situation, I decided not to attend. I would like to take this opportunity to express my opinion on the issue. I am one of many happy dog owners that visit Jollyman DOLA regularly. Before becoming an avid user of Jollyman DOLA, I had visited many nearby dog parks or dog-friendly parks including those in neighboring cities like Sunnyvale, and San Jose. Jollyman park is not the nearest park from my home. Maly Avenue Dog Park is closer. Still I go to Jollyman, not Mary Avenue Dog Park. The reason is because my dog is happier at Jollyman. The keyword here is "happy".If my dog is not happy,there is no point for me to go there. Let me address two points that people may have concerns against DOLA with_ 1. Risk of dog being off-leash If people think that off-leash dog means risk,then I think that having a well-marked area/hours would make the risk more manageable. If you ask any dog owner if he/she has ever let the dog play off-leash in places other than the backyard or dog runs, the majority would answer yes. It may imply that dog owners find facilities that would make their dogs happy are not readily available. Given the reality, if we have DOLA,more dog owners may choose to come to DOLA instead of letting their dogs off- leash elsewhere. It might even help reducing dog incidents rather than increasing. 2. Conflict to other activities I did not see many other activities in the fields near DOLA at DOLA hours. We could add the wording on the DOLA signs and say that anybody who want to have an activity near DOLA at DOLA hours, you could contact the following number to discuss and resolve any issue or conflict. I intend to attend the June meeting where the final trial readout will be. I would like to request that you could arrange the order of the agenda so that issues that would likely take longer be discussed after the issues that would take less. Thank you and with kind regards, Sayuri Nishimura From: Uparkar Bhushan To: Neesha Tambe; Gopal Kumarappan;Xiangchen Xu; Helene Davis;Carol Stanek;City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission Cc: Cupertino Recreation and Community Services; ; Prerana Uparkar Subject: Subject:]ollyman DOLA: Feedback and Requests Date: Friday,March 6,2020 8:31:42 PM CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commissioners First of all, I would like to thank you for the fantastic and ground breaking work you have done, to enable the Cupertino community and their dogs the opportunity to use our local resources equitably, by approving a 10 month trial for the Dogs off-leash Area two hours a day in Jollyman Park. I and my dog(s) are an avid user of this facility and we absolutely love it. I like this place as its close from my house and surrounded by lush green grass. I use the park almost 6 days a week and my dog, Roman has lot of friends in this park. It would be great. if we could get water fountain near DOLA. Finally, I am sorry I could not attend the March Parks and Recreation meeting where an update on this project was discussed(or I attended but did not stay as it was very late). I would like to request you to please make this trial a permanent feature of the park. In fact, I would highly encourage that this should be expanded to other Cupertino parks, as well. That way the population of 11,600+ dogs in Cupertino will all have "time based" access to our wonderful parks. I intend to attend the June meeting where the final trial readout will be, but I request that you discuss our agenda first, so we can speak earlier and not have to stay till midnight. Thank you and with kind regards, Bhushan Uparkar Prerana Uparkar Faith is the bird that sings when the dawn is still dark. From: Deepa Mahendraker To: Neesha Tambe; Gopal Kumarappan;Xiangchen Xu; Helene Davis;Carol Stanek;City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission Cc: Cupertino Recreation and Community Services; Subject: Jollyman DOLA: Feedback and Requests Date: Friday,March 6,2020 11:04:19 AM CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commissioners First of all, I would like to thank you for the fantastic and ground breaking work you have done, to enable the Cupertino community and their dogs the opportunity to use our local resources equitably, by approving a 10 month trial for the Dogs off-leash Area two hours a day in Jollyman Park. I and my dog(s) are an avid user of this facility and we love it. Myself, my husband and my 7 year old Golden Baby (named ACE), love to go there DAILY. *EVERY* *SINGLE* *DAY*, rain or shine. We carry a communal water bowl and a big bottle of water for all our thirsty four legged friends, and settle down for 45 minutes to an hour of unparalleled fun. We catch up with our neighbors, complain about bosses, talk about family lives, exchange notes on the politics and COVIDI9. A thriving, growing family of dog lovers community making instant bonds and connections! Needless to say, it is the highlight of our day and our dogs' day. Finally, I am sorry I could not attend the March Parks and Recreation meeting where an update on this project was discussed. I would like to request you to please make this trial a permanent feature of the park. In fact, I would highly encourage that this should be expanded to other Cupertino parks, as well.That way the population of 11,600+ dogs in Cupertino will all have "time based" access to our wonderful parks. I DO NOT WANT DOLA TO STOP AFTER JULY 31. Please find an interim solution, while you work towards a permanent plan so there is no break in our routine. It is hard to tell a Dog why we can't go to the park any more (or worse:to go and be out of compliance with the park rules). I intend to attend the June meeting where the final trial readout will be, but I request that you discuss our agenda first, so we can speak earlier and not have to stay till midnight. Thank you and with kind regards Deepa Mahendraker (I VOTED!) BCC: Jollyman-dog-group alias as FYI. PRC 05/14/2020 Item #4 Rancho Rinconada Recreation & Park District Written Communications From:Jon Robert Willey<JWilley@cupertino.org> Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2020 1:46 PM To: Sophia Badillo Rancho Pool Board Reform ; sandra yeaton ; Randy Schwartz <RandyS@cupertino.org>; Deborah L. Feng <DebF@cupertino.org> Subject: Re: Rancho rinconada Balance sheet off by 2 million dollars but still passed by current board members Hello Sophia and Sandra, Thank you for the e-mail and information and I am forwarding this to the Parks and Rec director, Randy Schwartz, who would be the right person to review it and to decide if actions are needed, which could include bringing it to the City Council. Stay safe and follow the shelter guidance, Jon Jon Robert Willey Council Member City Council JWilley- Cupertino.org ELI] 08-77 T-3193 CUPERTINO 04DO0000 From: Sophia Badillo Rancho Pool Board Reform > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 12:18 PM To: sandra yeaton > Cc:Jon Robert Willey<JWilley(@cupertino.org>; Xiangchen Xu <Xxu(aDcupertino.org>; Gopal Kumarappan <gkumaraapan(@cupertino.org> Subject: Re: Rancho rinconada Balance sheet off by 2 million dollars but still passed by current board members CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Interesting points Sandy. A forensic audit needs to be done. Financial Audits were full of inconsistencies and still passed. The fact that Jordan had bank access for over 4 years but board member Pat Bustamante did not during her tenure needs further investigation. I understand him having access when being a current board member. However he should not have had his name on the bank accounts especially when he was not an active board member but making a bid to work for the district. Technically,Jordan was the sole bidder for changing board policy at a Jan 2019 meeting, had his 201< proposal on the agenda and still had his name on some Rancho bank accounts during this time. This seems like a major conflict and security issue. https://drive.google.com/file/d/lMJ5nBLtZWZXVYncSOISp6SVYXplWmMaM/view Go to page 44 A forensic audit could delve into what current systems and processes the Rancho district is using, how effectively and securely they are working and what could be better. The city of Cupertino, the parks and recs department, and the Rancho residents can have more information to make the right decision about the district's future and make sure the Rancho District's assets, including finances, are properly maintained and secure. Sophia On Mon, Mar 16, 2020, 11:14 AM sandra yeaton wrote: I would also like to add that on their latest meeting agenda the auditor who did the audit for 2019 was supposed to be at the february or march meeting. The March meeting was canceled. I thought that was interesting. They are operating so under the radar that it is almost impossible to know what is going on there anymore. I do walk by there on my daily walk and there is no one there much of the time. Apparently they are writing policy according to the meeting agendas and minutes. lipstick and bandaids. Also, the person who wanted 20,000. for writing policy as a political consultant was appointed to the board in August as a temporary board member. I guess he's writing policy for gratis now. He shouldn't be getting paid beyond 100. stipend for meetings as a government official. Who knows how that works?The meetings are no longer recorded, and if you read the minutes to these meetings it's not clear what goes on. It's business as usual with no accountability or oversight. sandra From: Sophia Badillo Rancho Pool Board Reform Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:51 AM To:Jon Robert Willey<JWilleyPcupertino.org>; xxu(@cupertino.org<xxu(@cupertino.org>; gkumarappan(@cupertino.org<gkumarappan(@cupertino.org> Subject: Rancho rinconada Balance sheet off by 2 million dollars but still passed by current board members Dear Jon, Minna and Gopal, There's a balance sheet from last year that has a 2 million dollar discrepancy and Jordan and Miriam and Steve still all passed it last August. I https://drive.googIe.com/file/d/1 Oat ofrLoLWvh_acNXiHORDOu6MYDPTFe/view Page 22 - 23 December 2018 November 2018 Total Assets 3,235,418 3,106,910 total Liabilities and Equity 2,118,327 2,057,618 Balance Sheet Discrepancies 11,117,091 11,049,292 Balance sheet not balanced by over 2 million dollars: 2,166,383 = 1,117,091 + 1,049,292 A balance sheet should balance and this one clearly does not and should not have been passed by the board. For it to be a "balance sheet," the assets = liabilities + equity. This balance sheet off by more than a million dollars for each month of Dec 2018 and Nov 2018. This is more than a rounding error. A forensic audit strongly needs to be ordered by Cupertino. Companies will do forensic audits before mergers and acquisitions as part of due diligence. Rancho residents also deserve a forensic audit since a former Rancho board member was on the bank accounts for over 4 years after resigning. This is a serious security breach. Once again, a forensic audit needs to be done as part of due diligence so that the city of Cupertino and the Rancho residents can make a proper assessment of how the Rancho rinconada district can properly and effectively allocate its resources and serve the community. I've done hundreds of hours of research when I was a board member and as a concerned citizen and discovered these inconsistencies. The next step is to have them professionally investigated. Thanks Jon and Minna and Gopal for serving the community. Best regards. Fellow Rancho resident, Sophia Badillo From: Sophia Badillo Rancho Pool Board Reform Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 10:51 AM To:Jon Robert Willey<JWilley(@cupertino.org>; Xiangchen Xu <XxuCCDcupertino.org>; Gopal Kumarappan <gkumarappan(@cupertino.org> Subject: Rancho rinconada Balance sheet off by 2 million dollars but still passed by current board members CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Jon, Minna and Gopal, There's a balance sheet from last year that has a 2 million dollar discrepancy and Jordan and Miriam and Steve still all passed it last August. https://drive.googIe.com/file/d/1 Oat ofrLoLWvh_acNXiHORDOu6MYDPTFe/view Page 22 - 23 December 2018 November 2018 Total Assets 3,235,418 3,106,910 total Liabilities and Equity 2,118,327 2,057,618 Balance Sheet Discrepancies 117,091 1,049,292 Balance sheet not balanced by over 2 million dollars: 2,166,383 = 1,117,091 + 1,049,292 A balance sheet should balance and this one clearly does not and should not have been passed by the board. For it to be a "balance sheet," the assets = liabilities + equity. This balance sheet off by more than a million dollars for each month of Dec 2018 and Nov 2018. This is more than a rounding error. A forensic audit strongly needs to be ordered by Cupertino. Companies will do forensic audits before mergers and acquisitions as part of due diligence. Rancho residents also deserve a forensic audit since a former Rancho board member was on the bank accounts for over 4 years after resigning. This is a serious security breach. Once again, a forensic audit needs to be done as part of due diligence so that the city of Cupertino and the Rancho residents can make a proper assessment of how the Rancho rinconada district can properly and effectively allocate its resources and serve the community. I've done hundreds of hours of research when I was a board member and as a concerned citizen and discovered these inconsistencies. The next step is to have them professionally investigated. Thanks Jon and Minna and Gopal for serving the community. Best regards. Fellow Rancho resident, Sophia Badillo CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File M 20-7451, Version: 1 Subject: Update on Rancho Rinconada Recreation & Park District. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG STAFF REPORT For the Parks &Recreation Commission Meeting on May 14, 2020 Subject Update on Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District. Recommended Actions Receive an update from staff regarding Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District (RRRPD) and the process going forward for review of the report, opportunities for public comments,and formation of a recommendation to the City Council regarding the report's options. Discussion In February,the City Council directed the Commission to review the report,receive public comment and recommend one of two options listed in the report: • Option 1:Maintain RRRPD's Current Governance(Status Quo)—RRRPD remains intact as an independent recreation and park district,and continues to operate and improve its programs,facilities and planning. • Option 2:Merger of RRRPD with the City of Cupertino—RRRPD would be dissolved and its functions, services, assets, and liabilities transferred to the City of Cupertino. The City would integrate RRRPD programs and facilities into current City operations and recreation planning. This option assumes that RRRPD's current property tax allocation would be entirely transferred to the City, and that all RRRPD services would be maintained at current levels (or better). At the March 7,2020 meeting, the Commission did the following: • Received a copy of the report, • Received some public comments, • Finalized a survey for the residents of the Rancho Rinconada District, and • Formed a committee to help staff pull together data and information for further consideration by the Commission. Subsequent to the March meeting and before the committee had an opportunity to meet, City facilities were closed and the County of Santa Clara issued a shelter-in-place order due to the coronavirus pandemic. Staff is recommending tabling this item until the shelter-in-place order is lifted in order to allow all members of the public to be present for,and participate in,the discussion on this topic. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact is associated with the receipt of this report, although there may be impacts depending upon which Option is ultimately approved. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this report, although there may be fiscal impacts to the City depending upon which Option is ultimately approved. Prepared and Approved by: Randy Schwartz, Interim Parks&Recreation Director Attachments: A—Public Review Draft Report, Special Study: Governance Options, Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District,January 28, 2020 r - - Berkson Associates Urban Economics Policy Forensics & Forecasting Planning & Policy Analysis PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT SPECIAL STUDY: GOVERNANCE OPTIONS RANCHO RINCONAb RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT I Prepared for LAFCO of Santa Clara County Berkson Associates In association with Policy Consulting Associates, LLC January 29, 2020 richard@berksonassociates.com 1 510.612.6906 www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. OVERVIEW................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2. RANCHO RINCONADA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT(RRRPD).............................3 District Boundaries and Service Area Assessed Value, Population and Voters RRRPD Goals, Policies and Plans RRRPD Programs, Staff and Facilities RRRPD Revenues and Expenditures RRRPD Assets, Liabilities and Financial Net Position CHAPTER 3. GOVERNANCE OPTIONS............................................................................................ 15 Option 1: Advantages and Disadvantages of Status Quo........................................................ 17 Option 2: Advantages and Disadvantages of Merger.............................................................. 17 Option 3: Advantages and Disadvantages of a Subsidiary District.........................................21 CHAPTER 4. LAFCO PROCESS.........................................................................................................23 Findings Required for LAFCO-Initiated Reorganization richard@berksonassociates.com 1 510.612.6906 1 www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 FIGURES AND TABLES Figure1 RRRPD Boundaries............................................................................................................4 Figure 2 Aerial View of RRRPD Facilities..........................................................................................8 Figure 3 County Assessor Parcel Map—RRRPD Property...............................................................9 Table 1 Summary of Assessed Value, Population &Voters............................................................5 Table 2 RRRPD Revenues and Expenditures................................................................................. 12 Table 3 Comparison of Governance Options ............................................................................... 16 Table 4 RRRPD Budget vs. City Options 2 and 3...........................................................................20 Table 5 Summary of LAFCO Proceedings for Reorganization Process..........................................26 APPENDICES Appendix A—Detailed Budget Estimates Appendix B—RRRPD Programs and Pricing Appendix C—RRRPD Staff Information richard@berksonassociates.com 1 510.612.6906 1 www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 1. OVERVIEW The Local Agency Formation Commission of Santa Clara County (LAFCO) prepared a Service Review of the Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District (RRRPD) in 2013 which recommended further analysis of governance changes for the District.' RRRPD has had a zero sphere of influence since 1982 indicating that the RRRPD should eventually not exist as an independent special district. LAFCO reaffirmed the District's zero sphere of influence in its 2013 Service Review for the District.2 The 2013 RRRPD Service Review found that a significant service overlap contributes to "the duplication in services delivered within the boundaries of Cupertino [which] creates inherent inefficiencies and fragmented service delivery and impedes long-term planning for the delivery of recreation services to the residents of Cupertino.113 In recent years there have been disputes and allegations of mismanagement among the Board leading to the resignation of two board members and a lack of a quorum to conduct RRRPD business. As noted in LAFCO's Request for Proposals (RFP)for this special study, LAFCO has received complex questions and complaints from residents concerning the RRRPD. At the February and April 2019 LAFCO meetings, community members informed LAFCO of their concerns about RRRPD's inefficient pool operation, lack of public outreach and public awareness of the District, and requested that LAFCO address these concerns, resulting in the current special study. Comments regarding allegations of mismanagement, and responses by the District to the complaints,were submitted at LAFCO's meeting in June, 2019.4 In 2019,following board member resignations, RRRPD was left with two filled seats;the County Board of Supervisors appointed a temporary third RRRPD board member for the purpose of adopting the FY20 budget. Currently the District has three filled seats sufficient to function with a quorum, and the two remaining vacant seats could be filled at the 2020 general election. 1 Special Districts Service Review: Phase 1, Prepared for LAFCO of Santa Clara County by PCA, LLC, Adopted June 5,2013. 2 LAFCO Staff Report,April 3,2019, Item 7. 3 ibid,2013 RRRPD MSR, pg.27. 4 See correspondence received by LAFCO at its 6/5/19 meeting from Sophia Badillo and from Sandra Yeaton,and letter from Kevin Davis, RRRPD General Manager to LAFCO,June 14, 2019. www.berksonassociates.com Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 The 2013 RRRPD MSR considered several governance options which are addressed in more detail in this special study: • Option 1: Maintain RRRPD's Current Governance(Status Quo)— RRRPD remains intact as an independent recreation and park district, and continues to operate and improve its programs, facilities and planning. • Option 2: Merger of RRRPD with the City of Cupertino—RRRPD would be dissolved and its functions, services, assets, and liabilities transferred to the City of Cupertino. The City would integrate RRRPD programs and facilities into current City operations and recreation planning.This option assumes that RRRPD's current property tax allocation would be entirely transferred to the City, and that all RRRPD services would be maintained at current levels (or better). • Option 3: Reorganize RRRPD as a Subsidiary District to the City of Cupertino—RRRPD would remain a special district, but the Cupertino City Council would function as its board. As required by law, "...The district shall continue in existence with all of the powers, rights, duties, obligations, and functions provided for by the principal act, except for any provisions relating to the selection or removal of the members of the board of directors of the district."5 All subsidiary district accounts would be held and reported separately from City funds. Legal and financial responsibility would be limited to the subsidiary district.The subsidiary district would continue to receive its current share of property tax to be used for district purposes. This Special Study further investigates the financial feasibility and the process required to implement the governance options described above. 5 Gov.Code Sec. 57534. www.berksonassoci ate s.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 2. RANCHO RINCONADA RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT (RRRPD) RRRPD was formed in 1955 as an independent special district with its own elected board of trustees. A five-member Board of Directors governs the District; members are elected to four- year terms. As described in the 2013 RRRPD Service Review board members as of 2013 all ran unopposed, eliminating election costs, but also indicating a lack of resident involvement.The Service Review stated that the lack of elections and opposing candidates "reflects a lack of candidate and resident interest in the District's activities and governance", however, all seats were filled at that time and in prior years. In 2018 an election occurred with multiple candidates. As noted in the Overview, in recent years there have been disputes and allegations of mismanagement'among the Board leading to the resignation of two board members and a lack of a quorum to conduct RRRPD business. Currently the District has three filled seats and functions with a quorum, and the two vacant seats could be filled at the 2020 general election. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES AND SERVICE AREA As shown in FIGURE 1,the boundaries of the District are entirely within the City of Cupertino with the exception of two parcels owned by the County of Santa Clara;those parcels are to the east along Lawrence Expressway and include portions of the Saratoga Creek Trail and riparian area. The City of Cupertino is negotiating with the County of Santa Clara for the acquisition of the two County-owned parcels within the District but located in the City of San Jose adjacent to the City's boundaries;the parcels could then be detached from the City of San Jose and annexed to the City of Cupertino. If that process is completed,the District will be contained entirely within the City's boundaries.Alternatively,the parcels may be detached from RRRPD so that all RRRPD territory is contained within the City of Cupertino.' District revenue data,which charges higher non-resident rates, indicate that District residents account for about 20 percent, on average, of program participation. Resident participation reaches 50 percent for public swim family passes and 15 percent for private swim lessons. 'See correspondence received by LAFCO at its 6/5/19 meeting from Sophia Badillo and from Sandra Yeaton,and letter from Kevin Davis, RRRPD General Manager to LAFCO,June 14,2019. 'Boundary changes would be processed through LAFCO as part of a potential reorganization of RRRPD. www.berksonassoclates.com EA Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 FIGURE 1 RRRPD BOUNDARIES BENNETTAVE PKWY Santa Clara Q CREEK BLV gPo CIR z o 1 ¢ W ALBANY DR O OQ Cupertino S w U C VISTA CIR Z o 2 O I LA HONDA AVE m y p NORWALK DR L Z O g 3 w ®E WESTDALE DR ®I ®� BARNHA MITTY WAY Tr')� ,R RENDERGASTA �f c=i WWW San � OW O� Q IIIA OVE DR O o GLEAVE W pp'' Jose Q o p y A ° W � e W P J =- FOREST VIEW OR O Z U p O U W U ¢ O WME/GGS LN OPPJ� HANNA FOREST GLEN DR o J w ® W GLENTREE DR O D CyERR I'W �IDD OOD OR rc NEWSOMAVE 2 O QQ O� g KIMBER 2 O LV ST U ¢ CASTLEWOOD DR K U ZQ CASTANO D,q � J WILLIAMS RD AMAPOLA OR 3P Q� o U W O R TO'�pK/NS J °� Oe m AVE BLANCO DR yEp W S SEC OR Rancho Rinconada Rancho Rinconada 00 00 LAFCO O Recreation&Park District Recreation and Park District District has a zero Sphere°'/°"uence Loeal Agen[Y Fonnaoon Commission of Santa Clara County District Facility ,uoo � February 2013 18000 Chelmsford Drive,Cupertino www.berksonassociates.com 4 BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 ASSESSED VALUE, POPULATION AND VOTERS TABLE 1 describes key characteristics of the District. Reorganization of RRRPD could alter the manner of voter representation in District affairs which currently is determined by voters within the District.The current number of RRRPD registered voters represents approximately 6.8 percent of the City of Cupertino's 30,630 total registered voters. Depending on the manner of reorganization, and LAFCO terms and conditions,the current allocation of property tax could 1) shift to the City's General Fund; 2) remain allocated to a newly-formed subsidiary district to the City. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF ASSESSED VALUE, POPULATION&VOTERS Item Amount Land Area(1) 0.4 sq.miles Residential Parcels(2) 1,266 Population(3) 3,983 Registered RRRPD Voters(4) 2,086 Total City Voters 30,630 RRRPD Voters as%of City 6.8% Assessed Value(5) $1,200,662,755 Tax Increment Factors FY19-20(6) Rancho Rinconada RPD 4.61% City of Cupertino 6.17% (1)Special Districts Service Review:Phase 1,Prepared for LAFCO of Santa Clara County by PCA,Adopted June 5,2013. (2)Residential parcels based on review of assessor parcel maps.The District is built out according to the 2013 MSR. (3)ibid,2013 MSR. (4)As of 9/13/2019 in the following precincts:3645,3652,3654,3659, per Registrar of Voters. (5)County of Santa Clara Compilation of Tax Rates&Information Fiscal Year 2019-2020. (6)Share of annual change in 1%property tax from RRRPD TRAs, net of Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund(ERAF). TRA 013-266;https://payments.sccgov.org/propertytax/ www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 RRRPD is largely built-out and no significant population increase is likely, other than minor changes due to growth in housing unit occupancy rates and household size.The City of Cupertino's household population is estimated to increase from 64,335 in 2020 to 65,275 in 2030, an average annual compound growth rate 0.3 percent.' RRRPD GOALS, POLICIES AND PLANS The District's Bylaws, last revised in 1992, govern District procedures.The Bylaws state that the purpose of the District is to "...provide a well-rounded, wholesome program of leisure time activities for the people residing within the boundaries of the District and others not residing within the boundaries of the District who desire to participate. This shall be accomplished by the development of supervised programs, construction and maintenance of recreation facilities and park facilities, while cooperating with other agencies in an area which provide like services or can assist in providing said services." RRRPD does not have a strategic plan or a facilities master plan; those documents have been a major District goal which, according to District staff, "has been delayed due to the recent governance issues."' The District produces a budget annually; no long-term budget forecasts are included.The District's financials are audited annually. RRRPD PROGRAMS, STAFF AND FACILITIES RRRPD PROGRAMS Following is a summary of programs provided at the RRRPD facility. Additional detail and pricing can be found in APPENDIX B. • Swim Lessons-the most popular program at RRRPD is private swim instruction. There are roughly 8,450 lessons delivered annually with the majority clustered in the summer months. $Projections 2040,ABAG/MTC,downloaded 1/23/2020 from http://prolections.planbayarea.org/ 9 RRRPD response to 2019-07-25 Data Request. www.be rksonassociates.com Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 • Precompetitive Swim Training—Provides endurance training and teaches advanced racing techniques and terminology. • Youth Swim Team—Hour-long training provided by swim coaches for the Rancho Swim Team that participates in nationally-organized competitions including the Junior Olympics and the Western Championships. • Public Swim—Second to swim lessons in popularity and open to the public. • BBQ Pool Party Rental—Offered hours concurrent with public swim,the privately-gated area provides a canopy, BBQ grill, and picnic tables for parties between 15 and 40 people. • Swim Camp—The swim camp started in 2018 and in its second year operated at full capacity with further expansion planned. • Pool and Hall Rentals—The pool and the hall are available for private events.The hall provides approximately 100 chairs,tables, and a full kitchen. • Other Recreation Partners—RRRPD charges fees to various recreation partners that provide programs available to the public,for example, scuba classes and a separate swim school.The hall is rented for yoga classes, after-school care, cultural gatherings and music events. RRRPD STAFF An employment contract with the General Manager was approved by RRRPD at its board meeting in October 2018 and expires October 11, 2020. This is the District's only employment contract. In addition to the full-time General Manager, RRRPD employs a full-time Accounting and Records Manager and a full-time Program Manager.These positions' benefits include a "defined contribution" retirement plan;10 therefore there are no unfunded pension liabilities. RRRPD hires part-time staff, including "graduates" of its swim programs; in 2018 there were 14,759 part-time hours worked. Additional detail about part-time staff positions and other personnel-related costs can be found in APPENDIX C. "Internal Revenue Code Sec.457. www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 RRRPD FACILITIES The District owns the building and property located at 18000 Chelmsford Drive shown in FIGURE 2.The property (assessor parcel number 375-22-104) is near the corner of Bollinger and Lawrence Expressway in Cupertino as shown in FIGURE 3. RRRPD also identified a nearby walkway which they believe is RRRPD property, and which is highlighted on the parcel map and recently has been blocked by private fencing. However,the walkway is designated as a public right-of-way and currently believed to be owned by the City of Cupertino.11 Facilities include a 25-yard pool, playground, barbecue area, and indoor hall.The barbecue and hall are available for rent for special events. FIGURE 2 AERIAL VIEW OF RRRPD FACILITIES G% :, ,• lk r �} 1 t r (�° o • conadar • o 1 T ! e, � r �� •° air. ii Correspondence from C.Mosley,City of Cupertino, 1/22/2020 per communication with Santa Clara County Assessor's Office staff. www.berksonassociates.com EA Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 FIGURE 3 COUNTY ASSESSOR PARCEL MAP—RRRPD PROPERTY rn 9 2 9 f c � n r t.. 9 �n6 J< � n m oaNG%�a 55 BARR/NGTON BRAW LNrn v\� N ci em \� f N 100 Id y 0 FP o TI \Q �40 NEWSOM qm_ �� vt\�F�, o .4 Os 700' p0 100 O � 2 I C� 'R 'A \; = 6 5e 80 BOOK PAGE 1'.b.60 BOLLINGER —�— ROAD www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 Facility Improvements Required The District has identified a number of improvements required by its facilities:12 • Re-painting of the pool fence and interior of the shower room is needed in the near- term.The total cost is expected to not exceed $10,000. • The degrading pool deck requires re-surfacing; prior estimates ranged from $30,000 to $50,000 depending on materials. • A new pump and heater will be required within the next five years at a combined cost of approximately$15,000. • The bathrooms are roughly 30 years old and need an overhaul in the next five years; no cost estimates are currently available. • In addition, major upgrades are needed for ADA requirements,family/gender-neutral bathrooms, and user flow improvements; no cost estimates are currently available. The District anticipates that detailed cost estimates would be prepared, along with a phasing and funding plan, as part of a more detailed Master Plan (and/or Strategic Plan). RRRPD designates reserves for capital improvements, and current unrestricted net position of more than $1 million appears sufficient to fund currently identified improvements. It is unknown, lacking a plan by the District at this point whether the $1 million will be sufficient and fully available for capital replacement over the long-term;the District sets aside funds annually toward fully funding replacement of all facilities over their lifespan -- its reserve goal is$1.4 million.l3 The City of Cupertino recently inspected the facilities and identified related and additional improvements. A rough estimate of these improvements totaled $350,000:14 • Exterior ADA Upgrades (parking spaces and ramp landings) ($100,000) • Locker Room Upgrades including ADA Compliance ($175,000) • Kitchenette Upgrades-desired ($40,000) • Life Safety and Security Systems Compliance ($35,000) 12 RRRPD response to 2019-07-25 Data Request. 13 Reserve policy adopted Dec.,2016; present reserve goal of$1.4 million per correspondence with RRRPD,2019-08-14 14 City of Cupertino response to 2019-09-06 Data Request. www.be rksonassociates.com Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 More detailed cost estimates and timing of improvements would be prepared as part of a Plan for Services if the City seeks to take over RRRPD programs and facilities. It is expected that the District will face these City-identified improvements as well as those that the District has identified; the lists of improvements prepared by the City and RRRPD are overlapping and address similar needs and concerns. Facility improvements may be needed to accommodate increased community use of the facilities (nature and extent of increased use and corresponding improvements are to be determined by the City in the case of Option 2 and Option 3).This issue would also apply to any expansion of current RRRPD activities. RRRPD REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES As shown in TABLE 2, RRRPD's FY20 budget (as adjusted for purposes of this report) projects an ending annual net balance of about$51,000 including depreciation. Eliminating special election costs originally included in the budget produces this annual surplus. Excluding depreciation, a non-cash accounting expense,the net annual balance is$124,000.This balance would add to reserves for contingencies, planning and capital improvements. www.berksonassociates.com 11 BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 TABLE 2 RRRPD REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES STATUS QUO Item RRRPD REVENUES Program Revenues(1) $438,500 Property Tax(2) 530,000 Total Revenues $968,500 EXPENDITURES Administration and Office Expenses(3) $77,957 Facilities(4) Building/Yard,Pool,Utilities 113,000 Facility Depreciation(5) 73,000 Subtotal, Facilities 186,000 Program Expenses(exc.staff)(6) 26,200 Personnel(7) 626,982 Total Expenditures $917,139 ANNUAL SURPLUS OR(SHORTFALL) $51,361 Surplus or(shortfall)excluding depreciation $124,361 (1) Includes aquatics,rentals,and activities(snack bar,swim camp). (2) Property tax is the District's share of the basic 1%. (3) RRRPD"Administration"includes Board&office expenses,insurance and professional services. Status Quo adds$20,000 for general election costs instead of RRRPD budget for special election. RRRPD legal costs reduced vs. FY20 to represent a more typical year. (4) Facilities include building&yard,pool,and utilities. (5) Depreciation is a non-cash accounting expense. (6) Program expenses include advertising,program supplies,&snack bar. (7) Personnel costs include payroll,taxes&benefits,and related expenses. 1129120 REVENUES Service charges paid by program participants funded approximately 50 percent of FY20 total expenditures. Property tax funds most of the remaining expenditures, supplemented by interest earnings and miscellaneous revenues. www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 Within the RRRPD area, RRRPD receives 4.61 percent of the increase in Prop. 13 property taxes, which are one percent of assessed value; the City receives 6.17 percent. City allocations outside of RRRPD vary due to differences among taxing entities throughout the City, but typically the City's share is about 6.5 percent and other taxing entities' rates are slightly higher than within RRRPD. Currently RRRPD charges a non-resident fee for program participants from outside the District, residents account for about 50 percent (or less) of program participation, and average about 20 percent overall. Rates are further detailed in APPENDIX B and on the RRRPD website. EXPENDITURES TABLE 2 summarizes District expenditures which are further detailed in APPENDIX A. Revenues exceed expenditures, producing a surplus. Depreciation is a non-cash accounting expense often not shown in a budget. Excluding depreciation from the budget shows a larger cash surplus. However,this increased surplus should be set-aside for capital replacement to effectively offset the effects of depreciating assets.The District's FY20 budget has been adjusted slightly to reflect a typical year,for example, special election costs of$150,000 were replaced by general election costs of$20,000. RRRPD ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND FINANCIAL NET POSITION RRRPD's financial condition indicates reserves exceeding 100 percent of annual expenditures.A typical minimum standard for operating reserves is about 15-20 percent of expenditures; the balance provides reserves that can fund capital improvements. ASSETS Capital assets include land, building and improvements,the pool, furniture and equipment.The historical acquisition value totals$1.8 million, and its current depreciated value is approximately $1 million after deducting accumulated depreciation." 11 ibid, RRRPD Financial Statements FY18, Note D—Capital Assets. www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 LIABILITIES The District has no long-term debt (due beyond one year) or other long-term financial obligations. Current liabilities, due within one year, totaled $190,000 at the end of FY18.16 Approximately 75 percent of the current liabilities represent deferred revenue (generally swim lessons/camp reserved in one fiscal year but delivered in the next).These relatively high current liabilities result from a fiscal year cut-off midway into the District's peak season. FINANCIAL NET POSITION RRRPD's Net Position is a key indicator of fiscal health.The District's FY18 financial statements show a net position of$2.0 million including the net value of capital assets; approximately $1 million of the net position is unrestricted and comprised of cash and current investments.17 The$1 million unrestricted net position totaling more than 100 percent of annual operating expenditures, provides for operating and capital reserves.The amount exceeds currently identified capital improvement needs although it has not been entirely designated for that purpose.The unrestricted net position is less than the District's capital reserve goals of$1.4 million needed to provide for long-term repair and replacement of all capital assets based on estimated life span.18 A financial statement is typically prepared for RRRPD in the December following the end of the reported fiscal year. As shown in TABLE 2 above,the District projects a surplus in FY19-20, after eliminating special elections costs from the budget, and unrestricted net position of cash and investments should increase to about$1.3 million. 16 ibid, RRRPD Financial Statements FY18,Statement of Net Position, pg. 9. 17 RRRPD Financial Statements and Independent Auditor's Report for the Year Ended June 30,2018, Statement of Net Position, pg.9, Fechter&Company CPAs, Dec. 15,2018. 18 District Reserve Allocation. www.berksonassociates.com Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 3. GOVERNANCE OPTIONS This report evaluates governance options for RRRPD. Each option presents a different set of legal and policy choices with implications for finances, management,governance and services. TABLE 3 summarizes and compares key features of governance options: • Option 1: Maintain RRRPD's Current Governance(Status Quo)—RRRPD remains intact as an independent recreation and park district, and continues to operate and improve its programs,facilities and planning. • Option 2: Merger of RRRPD with the City of Cupertino —RRRPD would be dissolved and its functions, services, assets, and liabilities transferred to the City of Cupertino. The City would integrate RRRPD programs and facility into current City operations and recreation planning.This option assumes that RRRPD's current property tax allocation would be entirely transferred to the City, and that all RRRPD services would be maintained by the City at current levels (or better).To meet the requirement for a merger all RRRPD territory19 must be contained within the City of Cupertino.The two RRRPD parcels outside the City would need to be detached from RRRPD. Alternatively, the two parcels would need to be detached from San Jose and annexed to the City of Cupertino. Option 3: Reorganize RRRPD as a Subsidiary District to the City of Cupertino —RRRPD would remain a special district, but the Cupertino City Council would function as its board. All subsidiary district accounts would be held and reported separately from City funds. Legal and financial responsibility would be limited to the subsidiary district. The subsidiary district would continue to receive its current share of property tax and the tax would be restricted to subsidiary district purposes. To meet the requirement20 for reorganizing as a subsidiary district, at least 70%of the RRRPD territory must be located within the City of Cupertino or 70%of the RRRPD registered voters must be within the City of Cupertino. The LAFCO processes for Options 2 and 3 could be initiated by voter petition, RRRPD (or City) resolution, or by LAFCO.The process is described in CHAPTER 4 and summarized on TABLE S. 19 Gov.Code Sec. 57104 20 Gov.Code Sec. 57105 vvww.berksonassoci ate s.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 TABLE 3 COMPARISON OF GOVERNANCE OPTIONS OptionGovernance OPTION OPTION .• RRRPD Merger with RRRPD becomes a Subsidiary Governance Status Quo i.., CityofCupertino District to Cupertino Reorganization No reorganization. RRRPD is dissolved and merged RRRPD is reorganized as a with the City of Cupertino,which subsidiary district of Cupertino. assumes responsibility for RRRPD property tax is allocated functions,services,assets, to the subsidiary district.All liabilities.RRRPD property tax is assets&liabilities remain with included in City General Fund. subsidiary district,accounted separately from City. Governance& No change.RRRPD remains an Cupertino City Council Cupertino City Council serves as Representation independent district governed by responsible for facilities& board of subsidiary district&is a 5-member elected/appointed programs of former RRRPD,in responsible for facilities and Board of Directors comprised of addition to all other City programs.The Council is elected District residents. recreation services.The Council by all City voters. is elected by all City voters. Management& No change to management of City staff manage and operate Same as Option 2. Operation programs and facilities by former RRRPD programs& RRRPD staff. facilities at similar(or improved) levels. Recreation No changes currently planned to No changes currently planned to No changes currently planned to Programs,Facilities ;programs. programs. programs. and Plans District management plans to Facility and programs integrated Planning changes same as prepare a Strategic/Master Plan into City operations,budget, Option 2. to guide facilities upgrades. Recreation Master Plan,&CIP. Costs and Revenues District's typical budget shows a City-run programs project a Likelyto be similar to Option 2. surplus of$124,000/yr(before $131,000/yr surplus from higher Subsidiary district accounting, depreciation&election costs). participation offset by staff reporting,etc.may add minimal Fund balances total$1 mill. costs.Fund balances of admin.costs.Fund balance $1 mill.transfer from RRRPD. remains w/subsidiary dirt. Rates and Charges No changes currently planned to No changes currently planned to Rates and charges same as rate schedules. rate schedules;uniform rate for Option 1 unless otherwise all City residents. changed. Capital Costs District policy budgets Preliminary City budget for Capital costs same as Option 2. depreciation($73,000/yr)and Rancho Rinconada includes builds capital reserves for capital depreciation.City has identified repair,replacement&upgrades. capital requirements and Capital priorities,costs&timing expects to budget annually not determined,pending Plan. towards capital needs. January29,2020 www.berksonassociates.com 16 Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 OPTION 1: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF STATUS QUO Option 1 maintains RRRPD's current governance (Status Quo). RRRPD remains an independent recreation and park district with an elected/appointed Board of Directors, and continues to operate its programs and facility. Advantages • Property taxes collected within the District continue to be spent for recreation services and facilities of the District. • RRRPD continues to be governed by board of locally-elected and/or appointed District residents. Disadvantages • The District could potentially revert to contentious and inefficient board practices. • Potential future, ongoing election costs, and/or difficulty filling board vacancies. • Property tax revenues levied within the District continue to be allocated to two recreation service providers within City boundaries (RRRPD and the City) and perpetuates the duplication and inefficiencies of aquatic recreation services and related administration within the Rancho Rinconada area of the City of Cupertino. This option requires no further action by LAFCO,the City or RRRPD. OPTION 2: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MERGER OF RRRPD WITH THE CITY OF CUPERTINO Option 2 involves the dissolution of RRRPD and merger with the City of Cupertino. RRRPD would be dissolved and its functions, services, assets, liabilities and property tax transferred to the City of Cupertino.This option assumes that RRRPD's current property tax allocation would be entirely transferred to the City, and that all RRRPD services would be maintained at current levels (or better) by the City.The City would integrate RRRPD programs and facilities into current City operations and recreation planning. The City does not anticipate significant www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 transition costs;21 hiring of current RRRPD staff, which has not yet been decided by the City, could assist with a smooth transition. Cupertino's FY19 General Fund budget allocates about$8.6 million to Park and Recreation, or about 11 percent of the total General Fund budget;this is about$136 per City resident, and funds a broad range of parks and recreation programs. By comparison, RRRPD provides aquatic programs and facility and the total budget for its aquatics program and facility is approximately $243 per RRRPD resident; as part of the City,the RRRPD budget would add about$15 per City resident, an increase of about eleven percent per City resident for parks and recreation. The City of Cupertino's aquatics program currently operates at Black Berry Farm but is restricted to operating 100 days each year. Use of the RRRPD would allow for year-round programming. The swim lesson programs at RRRPD are very similar to the current City programs, although RRRPD focuses more on individual rather than group lessons.The City charges fees similar to RRRPD.zz Capital improvements to the facilities will be required for all options, utilizing current RRRPD reserves and future additional reserves. It is unknown whether and to what extent the City would contribute additional City funds. Programming, staff needs, capital planning, and other issues influencing City operations of RRRPD programs and facilities would be delineated as part of a Plan for Services that would be required by LAFCO as part of a City application for RRRPD merger. Advantages • Eliminates the duplication of aquatic recreation services and administration by two separate agencies within the Rancho Rinconada area of the City boundaries.This would dissolve one layer of government and reduce public confusion about governance responsibility for aquatic recreation services. • No board member election costs (other than current and ongoing City council election costs) or potential difficulty filling board positions. 21 City of Cupertino response to 2019-09-06 Data Request. 22 City of Cupertino response to 2019-09-06 Data Request. www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 • Reduces the possibility of the current District reverting to contentious and inefficient board practices. • Programs and facilities of the former RRRPD would be publicized and available to all residents citywide at the same cost. • The higher rates currently paid by non-residents of RRRPD would be revised and replaced by a uniform rate structure for all City residents (higher non-City resident rates may still apply). • One entity,the City,would be responsible for planning,financing, and providing park and recreation services within the City of Cupertino. • The City could expand its current seasonal swim program to a year-round program. • Long-term planning for programs and facilities, including the former RRRPD facility, would be coordinated and integrated into current ongoing Citywide budget, CIP and recreation master planning. • The management of recreation service delivery to the residents of the District would benefit from the more extensive management and supervisory structure of the City's Council, Parks and Recreation Department and other City departments (e.g.,finance, public works). Disadvantages • Governance by the City Council would reduce representation of RRRPD voters regarding current RRRPD recreation affairs proportionate to all current City governance,facilities and services provided to RRRPD residents. • Property tax revenue the City receives as a result of the dissolution and merger with the City would go into the City's general fund and could possibly divert current funding from programs and facilities of the former RRRPD. • City operation currently is estimated to result in positive surpluses similar to a typical RRRPD budget, as shown in TABLE 4.The difference is not deemed to be significant in the context of the budget forecasts and future policy and operational decisions that will be made by the City and RRRPD. This option could be initiated by petition, resolution by an affected agency, or resolution by LAFCO.The process is further described in CHAPTER 4 and summarized on TABLE S. www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 TABLE 4 RRRPD BUDGET VS.CITY OPTIONS 2 AND 3 STATUS • • OPTIONS RRRPDItem city REVENUES Program Revenues(1) $438,500 $460,400 Property Tax(2) 530,000 530,000 Total Revenues $968,500 $990,400 EXPENDITURES Administration and Office Expenses(3) $77,957 $31,957 Facilities(4) Building/Yard,Pool,Utilities 113,000 99,000 Facility Depreciation(5) 73,000 73,000 Subtotal, Facilities 186,000 172,000 Program Expenses(exc.staff)(6) 26,200 26,200 Personnel(7) 626,982 702,657 Total Expenditures $917,139 $932,814 ANNUALSURPLUS OR(SHORTFALL) $51,361 $57,586 Surplus or(shortfall)excluding depreciation $124,361 $130,586 (1)Includes aquatics,rentals,and activities(snack bar,swim camp). City estimates a 5%potential program revenue increase due to increased publicity Citywide. (2)Property tax is the District's share of the basic 1%. Options 2 and 3 assume the same amount is transferred to City(or subsidiary dist.) (3)RRRPD"Administration"includes Board&office expenses,insurance and professional services. Status Quo adds$20,000 for general election costs instead of RRRPD budget for special election. RRRPD legal costs reduced vs. FY20 to represent a more typical year. City admin. costs exclude board expense,and accounting/legal(handled by existing City staff). (4)Facilities include building&yard,pool,and utilities. RRRPD"Outside Services"assumed handled by additional City cost equal to 50%of RRRPD cost. (5) Depreciation is a non-cash accounting expense. (6) Program expenses include advertising,program supplies,&snack bar. (7) Personnel costs include payroll,taxes&benefits,and related expenses. 1129120 www.berksonassociates.com Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 OPTION 3: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF A SUBSIDIARY DISTRICT Option 3 would reorganize RRRPD as a subsidiary district to the City of Cupertino. RRRPD would become a City-dependent subsidiary district, and the City Council would serve as its board. As required by law, "...The district shall continue in existence with all of the powers, rights, duties, obligations, and functions provided for by the principal act, except for any provisions relating to the selection or removal of the members of the board of directors of the district."23 All subsidiary district accounts would be held and reported separately from City funds. Legal and financial responsibility would be limited to the subsidiary district.The subsidiary district would continue to receive its current share of property tax to be used for district purposes. Programming, staff needs, capital planning, and other issues influencing City operations of RRRPD programs and facilities would be delineated as part of a Plan for Services that would be required by LAFCO as part of a City application for reorganization of RRRPD as a subsidiary district to the City. Advantages • RRRPD's current property tax revenue would continue to be allocated to the subsidiary district for programs and facilities of the former RRRPD, unlike the potential for a reduction or City re-allocation that could occur with Option 2.The City could contribute additional funding if desired. • Eliminates the duplication of aquatic recreation services and administration by two separate agencies within the Rancho Rinconada area of the City boundaries.This would eliminate one elected board and reduce public confusion about governance responsibility for aquatic recreation services. • No board member election costs (other than current and ongoing City council election costs) or potential difficulty filling board positions. • Reduces the possibility of the current District reverting to contentious and inefficient board practices. • Programs and facilities of the former RRRPD would be publicized and available to all residents citywide; it is assumed that the current RRRPD rate structure would continue z3 Gov. Code Sec. 57534. www.berksonassoci ate s.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 to apply higher rates for non-RRRPD residents, however,the schedule could be changed by the subsidiary district. • One entity, the City,would be responsible for planning for,financing, and providing park and recreation services within the City of Cupertino. • The City could expand its current seasonal swim program to a year-round program. • Long-term planning for programs and facilities, including the former RRRPD facility, would be coordinated and integrated into current ongoing Citywide budget, CIP and recreation master planning. • The management of recreation service delivery to the residents of the District would benefit from the more extensive management and supervisory structure of the City's Council, Parks and Recreation Department and other City departments (e.g.,finance, public works). Disadvantages • Restricting RRRPD's property tax revenue to the subsidiary district could reduce the City's flexibility in managing and funding its programs for all City residents. • Governance by the City Council would reduce representation of RRRPD voters regarding current RRRPD recreation affairs proportionate to all current City governance,facilities and services provided to RRRPD residents. • City operation currently is estimated to result in positive surpluses similar to a typical RRRPD budget, as shown in TABLE 4.The difference is not deemed to be significant in the context of the budget forecasts and future policy and operational decisions that will be made by the City and RRRPD. This option could be initiated by petition, resolution by an affected agency, or resolution by LAFCO. The process is further described in CHAPTER 4 and summarized on TABLE S. www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 4. LAFCO PROCESS Option 1,the Status Quo, requires no further action by LAFCO,the City or RRRPD. The LAFCO processes for Options 2 and 3 are similar and could be initiated by voter petition, RRRPD (or City) resolution, or by LAFCO.TABLE 5 summarizes the process for the two reorganization options. In the event of a City resolution, LAFCO will require preparation of a Plan for Services that will describe in detail the City's proposed plans, programs, capital improvements, staffing, costs and revenues for management of RRRPD programs and facilities. FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR LAFCO-INITIATED REORGANIZATION Following are determinations required if LAFCO is to initiate a reorganization.14 (1) Public service costs of the proposal are likely to be less than or substantially similar to the costs of alternative means of providing the service. The surplus estimated for Option 2 and Option 3 is substantially similar to the Status Quo surplus, and the difference is less than one percent of total revenues.The minimal difference is not significant due to policy and program differences and future uncertainty in the context of budget forecasts.Therefore LAFCO could meet this determination in order to initiate a reorganization. (2)The proposal promotes public access and accountability for community services needs and financial resources. RRRPD holds regular, noticed meetings and periodic open houses and provides a website with comprehensive information about the District, its financial documents, and other public information; however, RRRPD has faced criticism for a lack of public outreach and public awareness of the District, board dysfunction, and lack of a quorum during a portion of 2019. Currently the District has adequate liquidity and fund balances; however, as noted above,the District lacks a facilities master plan/strategic plan to guide future capital improvements. 24 Gov. Code Sec. 56375(a)(2)(C/D)and 56881(b) www.be rksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 Option 2 and Option 3 would increase public access by expanding oversight, management, publicity and program coordination Citywide; plans and programs would be integrated into Citywide planning. A change in oversight from RRRPD to the City council would reduce current RRRPD representation from the point of view of RRRPD residents to the level of all other City services, and would increase representation of all City residents. Currently about 20 percent of RRRPD use is attributable to RRRPD residents, although this overall average varies by program and reaches 50 percent or more for certain programs. A reorganization would reduce the possibility of future RRRPD board conflict similar to what the District experienced in recent years. LAFCO TERMS AND CONDITIONS Any reorganization may be made subject to one or more terms and conditions in LAFCO's resolution of approval.Zs Potential terms may include one or more of the following;the terms are likely to evolve as reorganization proposals are better defined and reviewed by LAFCO. • Property—This study assumes that all property owned by RRRPD would be transferred to the City in the case of an RRRPD dissolution/merger with City, or retained by the subsidiary district in Option 3. Further review is required to clarify rights and obligations of RRRPD with respect to use of private streets fronting the RRRPD facility, and an access easement for a walkway across from the RRRPD facility(access is currently blocked by a property owner). • Funds—Option 2 includes the transfer of all RRRPD liabilities and assets, including fund balances and cash assets to the City following dissolution of RRRPD. The government code indicates that"...So far as may be practicable, as determined by the city council, any of these funds, money, or property shall be used for the benefit of the lands, inhabitants, and taxpayers within the territory of the merged district."26 In the case of Option 3, all assets and liabilities would remain with the subsidiary district, pursuant to State law, which states "...The district shall continue in existence with all of the powers, rights, duties, obligations, and functions provided for by the principal act, 25 Gov.Code Sec. 56886. 26 Gov.Code Sec. 57533. www.berksonassociates.com BAL Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 except for any provisions relating to the selection or removal of the members of the board of directors of the district."27 • Employee benefits and rights—A reorganization proposal will need to recognize and address any RRRPD employee contracts, civil service rights, seniority rights, retirement rights, and other employee benefits and rights;for example, accrued but unpaid vacation and holiday time would need to be paid to terminated employees. Current full- time employees benefit from a defined Sec.457 contribution plan; employees do not belong to a defined benefit retirement system managed by CalPERS (or other entity) and therefore RRRPD has no unfunded pension liabilities. • Effective date—LAFCO will need to specify an "effective date" at which time any and all changes will be effective. • Service continuation—LAFCO may require, in the event of a reorganization,that the City must continue to provide programs and facilities substantially comparable to current RRRPD programs. The City may choose to employ former RRRPD staff,which would also facilitate transition from the District to the City and continue programs without interruption. • RRRPD parcels outside City boundary--Currently two parcels that are within RRRPD are outside the City's boundary; the City is negotiating with the County to purchase the parcels and then could detach from San Jose and annex them to the City, or the parcels must be detached from RRRPD for Option 2 since all merged RRRPD territory must be within City boundaries. Creation of a subsidiary district per Option 3 allows a portion of the subsidiary district to exist outside City boundaries.28 27 Gov.Code Sec. 57534. 28 Gov.Code Sec. 57105. www.be rksonassociates.com EA Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF LAFCO PROCEEDINGS FOR REORGANIZATION PROCESS OptionsGovernance it OPTION RRRPD Merger with OPTION 3 RRRPDCity of Cupertino becomes a Subsidiary District to Cupertino 1.Initiation of Proposal Proposal shall contain a description of changes,proposed terms and conditions,boundaries Same as Option 2. and map of affected territory,and other items(Sec.56700). Petition Signed by 5%of registered voters of RRRPD OR 5%of City voters outside the district(GC Same as Option 2. §56866). Resolution by Affected RRRPD or the City may adopt a resolution to initiate the proposal,and provide notice to Same as Option 2. Agency LAFCO and each interested and subject agency 21 days before adoption.Must contain a Sec.56654 plan for services per§56653. Resolution by LAFCO LAFCO may initiate only if consistent with a LAFCO study/service review/sphere of Same as Option 2. Sec.56375(a)(2)&§56881 influence review and LAFCO finds: 1)Costs are substantially similar or less than alternatives; 2)The change promotes public access and accountability for services and financial resources. 2.Processing of the Upon receipt of application,LAFCO provides mailed notice to each affected agency,and Within 10 days of proposal receipt,LAFCO notifies affected Application(non-LAFCO within 30 days determines if application is complete(Sec.56658). district.Within 35 days of receiving notice district may adopt initiated) and file with LAFCO 1)resolution consenting;OR 2) resolution of intent to file an alternative proposal(Sec. 56861). Property Tax Transfer City Council and BoS adopt resolutions of property tax transfer per Rev.&Tax Code Sec. N/A §99(b). Certificate of Filing A certificate of filing is issued when application is deemed complete,and no sooner than If district files intention to adopt an alternative proposal, Sec.56658 20 days after mailing notice. LAFCO takes no action for 70 days to allow district to submit a complete alternative proposal(Sec.56862). Hearing&Notification LAFCO sets hearing within 90 days after Certificate issued,or application accepted.Notice Same as Option 2.LAFCO analyzes and reports on original Sec.56658 and 56660 and posted at least 21 days prior,and report distributed 5 days prior to hearing. proposal and alternative at the same hearing. 56665 www.berksonassociates.com 26 EA Public Review Draft Report Special Study: RRRPD Governance Options January 29, 2020 TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF LAFCO PROCEEDINGS FOR REORGANIZATION PROCESS(cont'd) GovernanceOptions Item OPTION OPTIONRRRPD Merger with City of Cupertino becomes a Subsidiary District to Cupertino Adoption of Resolution No later than 35 days after hearing,LAFCO adopts resolution to approve/disapprove, No later than 35 days after hearing,LAFCO adopts resolution Sec.56880 et seq. including any terms and conditions(Sec.56886)or alternatives.Note:LAFCO may not order denying both proposals,or approving one(Sec.56863).Note: a merger without City consent(Sec.57107c). LAFCO may not order establishment of subsidiary district without City consent(Sec.57107c). Protest Hearing Within 35 days of resolution,LAFCO sets date and provides notice for protest hearing that Upon request of district,the protest hearing shall be at least Sec.57002 must be held between 21 and 60 days after notice is given. 90 days but no more that 135 days from date notice is given Protest Thresholds LAFCO approves reorganization subject to confirmation of voters in an election(§57107)if Same as Option 2. proposal was initiated by petition or resolution and(1)RRRPD has not objected to proposal by resolution and at least 25%of#of landowners within affected territory who own at least 25%of assessed value of land within the territory OR at least 25%of voters within the affected territory submit written protest or(2)RRRPD has objected to proposal by resolution and at least 25%of#of landowners within any subject agency within the affected territory who own at least 25%of the assessed value of land within the territory OR at least 25%of voters within any subject agency within the affected territory submit written protest. If proposal was initiated by LAFCO,order a merger or establishment of subsidiary district subject to confirmation of voters in an election if written protest is submitted by at least 10%of#of landowners within the affected territory who own 10%assessed value of land within the territory OR at least 10%of the voters within the territory.Otherwise no election is required. Election Prior to conclusion of protest hearing,a petition to request election signed by at least 10% Same as Option 2. of registered voters in RRRPD may be filed with LAFCO(§57108).LAFCO will review for sufficiency and forward to City and City must call,hold and conduct election on question of a merger or establishment of subsidiary district only within RRRPD. Certificate of Completion LAFCO files Certificate of Completion within one year after resolution.of approval(or Same as Option 2. Sec.57001&57200 et seq. within 90 days after election if required as a result of Protest Hearing). Note:this table summarizes key provisions to provide general overview only,the reader should consult codes for specific language and requirements which may not be detailed in this table.Code Sections refer to the Government Code unless otherwise indicated. lanuary29,2020 www.berksonassociates.com 27 APPENDIX A DETAILED BUDGET ESTIMATES www.berksonassociates.com Table A-1 RRRPD Budget vs.City Option-Detail with Comments RRRPD City Options Item Estimated FY19-20 Comments REVENUES Aquatics Public Swim Pool Passes 7,000 Punch Passes 6,000 Day Passes 26,000 Subtotal, Public Swim Revenues 39,000 Swim Lessons 222,000 SwimTeam 71,000 Subtotal,Other Aquatics Revenues 293,000 Subtotal,Aquatics Revenues 332,000 Rentals Pool Rental 27,500 BBQ Rental 3,000 Hall Rental 33,000 Subtotal,Rentals Revenues 63,500 Activities Snack Bar 3,000 Swim Camp 40,000 Subtotal,Activities Revenues 43,000 Subtotal,Operating Revenues 438,500 460,400 City estimates 5%revenue increase from Citywide publicity. Property Taxes Subtotal,Property Taxes 530,000 530,000 TOTAL REVENUES 968,500 990,400 1/29/20 Page A-1 of 5 Table A-1 RRRPD Budget vs.City Option-Detail with Comments RRRPD City Options Item Estimated FY19-20 Comments EXPENDITURES Administration Board Expense Stipends 6,000 Other Board Expenses 1,500 Elections 20,000 0 RRRPD adopted budget included$150,000 but there will be no special election;est'd Subtotal,Board Expense 27,500 0 City option assumes no Board expenses(BA est.) Office Expense Liability Insurance 15,000 15,000 City may be able to obtain lower cost by including in current policies. Directors&Officers Insurance inc.above 0 Bank Service Charges 375 375 Computer Expenses 3,500 3,500 Dues, Fees and Subscriptions 7,000 0 City already subscribes(or not req'd). Postage and Delivery 250 250 Security System 132 132 Supplies 1,000 1,000 Telephone/Internet 1,700 1,700 Subtotal,Office Expense 28,957 21,957 Professional Fees County Administrative Fees 5,000 5,000 City will still pay County for tax collection charges(BA est.) Audit 10,000 5,000 City will integrate accounting into existing CAFR(50%savings, BA est.) Accounting 3,500 0 City will use existing City accounting(after setup&transition) (BA est.) Legal Fees(BA adjusted for typical yr) 3,000 0 City will use current City attorney(City est.) Consulting/Outside Services 0 0 Subtotal,Professional Fees 21,500 10,000 Subtotal,Administration 77,957 31,957 1/29/20 Page A-2 of 5 Table A-1 RRRPD Budget vs.City Option-Detail with Comments RRRPD City Options Item Estimated FY19-20 Comments Facility Capital costs separate;City estimates$50,000/yr. Building and Yard See"Personnel"for building and grounds maintenance staff costs. Maintenance&Repair 2,500 2,500 Supplies 2,500 2,500 Outside Services 28,000 14,000 Includes parts.City staff provides portion of this item?(see"personnel-maintenance"). Subtotal,Building and Yard 33,000 19,000 Pool City"Pool"costs assumed comparable to RRRPD costs. Pool Chlorine&CO2 12,000 12,000 Pool Maintenance&Supplies 15,000 15,000 Subtotal,Pool 27,000 27,000 Utilities City"Utility"costs assumed comparable to RRRPD costs. Gas and Electric 36,500 36,500 Water 13,500 13,500 Garbage 3,000 3,000 Subtotal,Utilities 53,000 53,000 Depreciation "Depreciation" is a non-cash accounting expense. Subtotal,Depreciation 73,000 73,000 Subtotal,Facility 186,000 172,000 Subtotal,Facility(net of depreciation 113,000 99,000 Programs Advertising 10,000 10,000 Correspondence with City 1/9/20. Program Supplies&Related 14,500 14,500 Snack Bar Expenses 1,700 1,700 Subtotal,Programs 26,200 26,200 Correspondence with City 1/9/20. 1/29/20 Page A-3 of 5 Table A-1 RRRPD Budget vs.City Option-Detail with Comments RRRPD City Options Item Estimated FY19-20 Comments Personnel Full-time Personnel General Manager 104,700 172,362 City Costs include full-time General Manager(no program manager). Accounting&Records Manager 66,200 City's costs included in payroll services below. Not a separate full time position. Program Manager 57,800 City Costs include full-time General Manager(no program manager). Building Maintenance 117,109 City Costs include-Full-time building maintenance position with benefits. Includes health benefits,retirement cost, FICA,and Workers Comp),assumed similar ratio for RRRPD(from RRRPD response)and City.City benefits and costs may be Full-time,Taxes and Benefits 37,800 0 16.5% greater than RRRPD.City Positions costs include benefits. Subtotal, Full-Time 266,500 289,471 Part-time Personnel Maintenance RRRPD cost estimate assumes 1/2 time,$25/hour;City cost included under"Full-time Building Maintenance 26,000 Personnel" RRRPD Grounds Maint.cost in"Outside Services" ($30,000);City Cost includes part- Grounds Maintenance 23,422 time grounds maintenance with benefits RRRPD estimates assumes 22.4%taxes and benefits(approximate ratio shown in response to data request). City benefits and costs may be greater than RRRPD.City Maintenance Staff,Taxes and Benefits 5,824 positions costs include benefits. Subtotal, Maint. (inc.taxes/benefits) 31,824 23,422 1/29/20 Page A-4 of 5 Table A-1 RRRPD Budget vs.City Option-Detail with Comments RRRPD City Options Item Estimated FY19-20 Comments Program Staff RRRPD Regular pay(RRRPD response to data request);City cost Includes salary only. Program Staff Pay 257,400 340,453 Benefits included below. Includes OT,health benefits, FICA,and Workers Comp),assumed similar ratio for Program Staff,Taxes and Benefits 57,658 20,711 22.4% RRRPD and City. No retirement benefits are included in total. Subtotal, Program Staff 315,058 361,164 Other Personnel Costs Payroll Tax Expense see staff categories above for est'd allocations of taxes&benefits. Health Benefits see above see above Retirement Benefits see above see above Insurance-Worker's Comp see above see above Mileage Reimbursement 600 600 Staff Development 5,000 5,000 Education and Seminars 3,000 3,000 City's Accounting and Records management is part of the City's Cost Allocation Plan. Payroll Service 5,000 20,000 This is not a separate full-time City position. Subtotal,Other Personnel Costs 13,600 28,600 Subtotal,Personnel 626,982 702,657 TOTAL EXPENDITURES(before CIP or rest 917,139 932,814 (less) Depreciation(non-cash expense) (73,000) (73,000) TOTAL EXPENDITURES(net of deprecia 844,139 859,814 ANNUAL SURPLUS 51,361 57,586 Annual Surplus(excluding depreciation) 124,361 130,586 1129120 1/29/20 Page A-5 of 5 APPENDIX B RRRPD PROGRAMS AND PRICING www.berksonassociates.com Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District 6) Programs Description, participants, hours, etc. Swim Lessons Program Summary The most popular program at Rancho Rinconada is private swim lessons. The 1:1 instructor to student ratio is an effective teaching method which allows for the best progress for a wide variety of students. The downside is that private lessons are both labor and administratively intensive when compared to group lessons. Each lesson is 25 minutes long and consists of a brief warm-up, lesson time, brief play time (where appropriate), and a check-in with parents after the lesson ends. In some cases, advanced students take back to back lessons effectively creating a 50-minute lesson. The lessons come in two-week blocks called sessions. The number of lessons per session varies between two to eight depending on the season. During the summer, the weekday sessions have eight lessons while the weekend sessions have four lessons. The off-season lessons are more flexible with as little as two lessons per session. Typically, the off-season patrons opt for one, two, or three lessons per week (2, 4, or 6 lessons per session respectively). There are roughly 8,450 lessons delivered annually with the majority clustered in the summer months. The typical age for students is between 3 and 13 years old, however, adults and students with special needs are not uncommon. Program Details The swim lesson program has three distinct seasons (spring, summer, and fall) and one sub-program (precomp). Spring and fall are functionally identical but with lower demand in the spring. The pricing per lesson is identical but the hours, lesson time, participant demographics, and number of lessons are different. Lessons per Total Lesson Time Price per Session Season Lesson format week Lessons(#) (minutes) lesson ($) Price ($) Off-season once perweek 1 2 25 30/25 60/50 Off-season twice per week 2 4 25 30/25 120/100 Off-season Ithree per week 3 6 25 30/25 180/150 Summer Weekday 4 8 25 30/25 240/200 Summer Weekend 2 4 25 30/25 120/100 Summer Precomp 4 8 50 30/25 240/200 *Pricing is shown as non-resident/resident The availability of lessons is based almost exclusively on the number of instructor with available hours. Demand is nearly limitless with the exception of early spring, late fall, and summer morning hours. Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District Off-season Swim Lessons Spring- Mid-March through early June Fall - Mid to late August through October 3:30 pm to 7:00 pm on weekdays 10:00 am to 12:00 pm on weekends In the off-season, swimmers can select the day, instructor, and time of their choice. In addition, the minimum number of lessons per session is reduced to two (one lesson per week). This allows for flexibility for busy schedules. Typically, swimmers will select between one to three days per week. The minimum age is 5 years old and there is no maximum. There are between 0 and 11 instructors available at any one time and lessons begin every half hour. A deck supervisor will generally be assigned when there are more than 5 instructors in the water. In 2018, 1174 spring lessons and 1366 fall lessons were delivered. Summer hours Early June through mid-August 9:00 am to 12:00 pm Monday through Thursday 3:00 pm to 8:00 pm Monday through Thursday 9:00 am to 12:00 pm Saturday & Sunday (most but not all weekends) In the summer, swimmers do not directly select their instructors as it would be administratively burdensome to do so. Instead, the scheduler matches students and instructors based on their profiles and requests. The minimum age is 3 years old and there is no maximum. There are typically between 9 to 12 instructors on weekends, 10 to 12 on weekday evenings, and roughly 4 to 9 on weekday mornings. As a result, a deck supervisor is always assigned. In 2018, there were 5918 summer lessons delivered. Precompetitive Swim Training Aligned with summer weekday sessions and created on an as-needed basis in the off-season 7 to 8 pm Monday through Thursday Precompetitive Swim Training (precomp) bridges the gap between a 25-minute private lesson and the endurance heavy 1-hour competitive swim team practices. Precomp is 50 minutes long and uses a small group format with a ratio of between 2 and 4 students per instructor. Roughly half the time is used for advanced racing techniques and terminology that is unnecessary for recreational swimmers (pulldowns, backstroke flip turns, finger drags, racing dives, IM order, introduction to swim sets, etc.). The other half of the time is used for endurance training that will be essential for competitive swim practice. Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District Youth Swim Team Program Summary The Rancho Youth Swim Team provides a competitive outlet for swim lesson students looking to go to the next level. Training is 1 hour long and is run by two swim team coaches. Certain swimmers push their limits and swim for 2 hours. The participants are grouped into lanes with similar swim ability. The minimum requirements to join the youth swim team are as follows: swim 50 yards of freestyle, backstroke, breaststroke, butterfly, a dive, a flip turn, and be under 18. Completing at least one session of precomp is recommended. Due to the high requirements, the swimmers are mostly between 8 to 14 years of age. The Swim Team serves as an important source of new qualified employees for the District. More recently, the Rancho Swim Team has begun to move beyond the cabana club leagues to participate in the national organization USA Swimming. Within the last year, several members of the swim team have qualified for, and competed in, the Junior Olympics and the more prestigious Far Western Championships. Program Details As with many of the programs at Rancho, the Swim Team is year-round. The program swells in the summer and fall before dropping to an all-time low in the spring. Pricing $100 per month, $90 for the second sibling, $80 for the third sibling $75 annual registration fee Off-season Hours 4 pm to 7 pm Monday through Friday Summer Hours 9 am to 11 am Monday through Thursday 4 pm to 8 pm Monday through Friday Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District Public Swim Program Summary Public Swim is the second most popular program at Rancho Rinconada. This program is notable as most pools require a membership for entry. In Cupertino, BlackBerry Farm is the only one available and it is only open for 100 days per year. There are at least 8,781 public swim entries annually and could be significantly higher. An exact count is made difficult by the prepaid passes and folks who swim twice per day in the summer. The public swim program is remarkably popular but is also very heavily subsidized by other programs. Program Details Public Swim May through mid-June, mid-August through September Saturday & Sunday 12 to 3 pm Mid-June through Mid-August Weekdays 12 to 3 pm Weekends 12 to 6 pm Type of Entry Non-Resident Special Day pass (4+years old) 6 4 10 passes 54 36 Family pass (up to 4) 250 200 Add 1 to family pass 25 25 Group rate (10+) 4 4 The main public swim program has single lap lane open for exercise swimming, a 9.5 ft deep end for diving, and a shallow end appropriate for weak or non-swimmers. The visitor demographics is families with young children and children attending with summer camps. The program is split between recreational swim where all swimmers are welcome and adult swim where only adults and adults with infants are allowed. The recreational swimming portion is the first 45 minutes of every hour while adult swim is the last 15 minutes of every hour. The ratio of swimmers to lifeguards is as follows: On-Duty Lifeguards Total Lifeguards Maximum Swimmers 1 2 20 2 3 50 3 4 75 4 5 100 Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District One lifeguard is always kept on reserve in order to treat any injuries (usually bee stings, nose bleeds, or a minor scrape), answer questions, or to assist on-duty lifeguards (typically to bring water if needed). The main program is supplemented by two dependent programs (snack bar and BBQ rentals) and a separate sub-program (lap swim). These will be discussed in more detail in the following section. BBQ pool party rental The hours are concurrent to public swim $75 for 3-hour rental $120 for 6-hour rental $4 per swimmer up to 25 swimmers The BBQ rental is a space adjacent to the pool. It has its own private gate to both the parking lot and to the pool. It is suitable for parties between 15 and 40 people. The rental is allowed to have as many as 25 swimmers. It comes with a canopy, a BBQ grill, and three picnic tables. Snack Bar Open during adult swim (excludes first and last hour) $1 per item During adult swim, typically only one lifeguard is needed. This frees up the other lifeguards to operate the snack bar. The snack bar is meant to be a convenience hence all snacks are priced at $1. The food is prepackaged which eliminates handling and preparation. This is one of the amenities that is mentioned often by patrons. Adult Lap Swim Weekdays 7:00 am to 9:00 am year-round Type of Entry Non-Resident Special Day pass (4+years old) 6 4 10 passes 54 36 3 month pass 125 100 Lap swim is a year-round program dedicated to exercise swimming for individuals 15 and up. This program is particularly important for adults with health issues that prevent non-aquatic exercise (arthritis, back issues, etc.). Lap swimmers tend to skew older than the public swimmers. These swimmers tend to be working professionals between the late 30s to early seventies. Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District Swim Camp Program Summary The swim camp is the newest program at Rancho Rinconada. The idea was first presented to the Board of Directors in late 2017 and was rolled out in 2018. As with many new programs, the camp struggled to break even in its first year. At the end of the season, the Board of Directors approved a host of recommended program improvements. The camp, now in its second year, is operating at full capacity with a wait list and has a positive net revenue. In terms of search results, the swim camp is the third most popular program at Rancho Rinconada. The swim camp is a full day program with extended care option. Parents can register children from kindergarten through 5t" grade on a weekly basis. The swim camp focuses much more on recreation, cooperation, swimming, and fun! As the name suggests, swimming is a big part of the camp. Each week of camp includes four group swim lessons (maximum of 1:3 instructor to student ratio) and supervised recreational swim times every day. When the campers aren't swimming, there is a variety of daily activities. For example, art projects, making slime, or balloon racing. There is also a field trip to Sterling-Barnhart Park on Fridays. Program Details Pricing $300 camp fee $100 deposit (refundable) $12 shirt fee $50 optional extended care Hours 8:30 am to 4:30 pm Monday through Friday 4:30 pm to 6:00 pm extended care Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District Rentals Pool Rental Summary The pool can be rented for private events but is not a particularly popular.The pool is too large and the cost is too high for most parties. In addition,the best pool times are already reserved for public swim or other programs.The BBQ rental seems to fit the cost,time, and party size requirements instead. The hourly cost is divided into the rental cost and lifeguard cost.There is also a refundable $500 security deposit. Hourly Rental Lifeguard Total Hourly Maximum Swimmers Fee($) Fee ($) Cost($) 40 100/80 60 160/140 75 100/80 90 190/170 100 100/80 120 220/200 Recreation Partners Recreation partners offer services to the community that the District does not have the ability or desire to. Currently,this is limited to two different scuba outfits and a separate swim school. In the past,several other swim teams rented the pool.The pricing is $18 per lane and insurance is required. Hall rental The recreation hall can be rented for private events.This is a fairly popular option for residents as the recreation hall is very affordable and is close to home. It is ideal for entertaining a large gathering when the home is not quite big enough.There are roughly 100 chairs,ten 2.5 x 6 tables,ten round 4-foot tables, and a full kitchen. The pricing is divided between peak and off-peak times. Peak hours are Friday evenings and Saturday&Sunday afternoons. Off-peak is everything else.The hall is rarely if ever rented out during weekday days. There is a refundable $500 security deposit. Rental Time Rental Fee ($/hr) Peak 80/60 Off-Peak 60/40 Recreation Partners Recreation partners offer services to the community that the District does not or cannot.This can include yoga classes, after school care, religious and/or cultural gatherings, or music events.The recreation partners pay the special fee and generally rent on a regular basis. APPENDIX C RRRPD STAFF INFORMATION www.berksonassociates.com Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District 1) Salaried Staff (GM, PM, A&R) 1a. Written job descriptions (other than the 2019 Salary Review descriptions) if available The Board has not approved of any job descriptions for any of the salaried employees. This issue will be addressed once a 3rd Board Member is seated. 1b. Contracts and/or other agreements Please see the attached General Manager Employment Contract (item 1b) approved at the Regular October 2018 Board Meeting.The contract expires in 2020 and is the first and only employment contract. 1c. Current salary See table in section 1e. 1d. Summary of benefits 50% ER contribution towards the following health benefits: • Kaiser Silver 70 HDHP HMO 2000/20% health insurance plan (see attached 1d 1) • Delta Dental Premiere 1500 Plan (See attached 1d 2) • MES Vision (see attached 1d 3) 4% employer match to defined contribution 401a/457b plan Worker's Compensation Unemployment 120 hours PTO 1e. Tax and benefit costs per position Position Annual Health Retirement Tax costs Estimated Worker's Unemployment Total Salary Cost Cost (FICA) Compensation*(3.11%) Cost General Manager 104,737 2,181 4,036 8,291 3,257 pay per claim 122,503 Accounting&Records Manager 66,150 533 2,646 5,021 2,057 pay per claim 76,408 Program Manager 1 57,750 1,670 1 2,310 1 4,049 1 1,796 1 pay per claim I 67,575 Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District 2) Part-time/seasonal positions 2a. Written job descriptions The job descriptions exist as part of the staff policy and training manuals. 1. General Policy (item 2a 1) 2. Accounting Policies (item 2a 2) 3. Lesson Manager (item 2a 3) 4. Deck Supervisor (item 2a 4) 5. Instructor (item 2a 5) 6. Pre-comp (item 2a 6) 7. Swim Team Manager (item 2a 7) 8. Swim Team Coach (item 2a 8) 9. Lifeguard Manager (item 2a 9) 10. Senior Lifeguard (item 2a 10) 11. Lifeguard (item 2a 11) 12. Camp Manager *New Position 2018* (item 2a 12) 13. Camp Staff *New Position 2018* (item 2a 13) 14. Office Manager Draft *New Position 2019* (item 2a 14) 15. Events & Marketing Draft *New Position 2018* (item 2a 15) 16. Scheduler (item 2a 16) 17. Office staff (item 2a 17) 18. Maintenance &Janitorial — No job description or training manual 2b. Number of staff by position, hours/week and annual There were 14,759 part-time hours worked in 2018. The hours are skewed heavily towards the summer months as shown in the following graph. 2018 Seasonal Variation in Part-time Hours 2000 L 1500 0 v E 1000 a 500 0 ti� N, 10 ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� ti� N, ti� N �\titi\ �\titi\ �\titi\ �\titi\ �\titi\ o\titi\ �\titi\ �\titi\ o\titi\ �o\titi\ yy\titi\ ��\titi\ Winter Spring/Fall Ramp Up/Down Summer Initial Data Request 2019-07-25 Rancho Rinconada Recreation and Park District There are distinct seasons which are outlined in the graph: winter, transition, ramp up/down, and summer. The type of part-time work available in each season is very different. The table below shows the number of scheduled weekly part-time hours by position. It does not include setup and cleanup which can add between 4 to 50%to the shift length. In addition, a single staff member may be counted in multiple positions due to extensive cross-training. Irregular or unscheduled work hours were either combined/averaged with other similar positions when possible or excluded. These types of shifts include occasional off-season swim meets, program planning, special projects (scanning, painting, shredding, etc.), rental supervision, or tabling. Department Position Winter Spring/Fall Ramp Summer #of staff Public Swim Lifeguard Manager 3 20 2 Public Swim Senior Guard 6 27 10 Public Swim Lap Swim Guard 20 20 20 20 7 Public Swim Lifeguard 18 108 35 Swim Team Swim Team Manager 3 20 1 Swim Team Coach 30 30 30 81 9 Lessons Lesson Manager 4 21 2 Lessons Deck Supervisor 4 4 38 7 Lessons Instructor 72.5 94 346 62 Lessons Precomp Instructor 8 2 Swim Camp Camp Manager 3 4 50 1 Swim Camp Camp Staff 127.5 8 Office Office Manager 6 1 Office Events& Marketing 6 1 Office Scheduler 6 20 1 Off i ce Office Staff 8 12 20 82 17 Maintenance janitorial 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 1 Maintenance Maintenance 8 8 8 8 1 Totals 79.5 157 230.5 999 2c. Hourly rate by position and/or staff person Maintenance $25 Managers $20 Training & Lifeguarding $15-16 All else $17-18 2d. Other taxes and benefits by position and/or total part-time Regular OT Other Tax Costs Benefits Estimated Worker's Compensation* Total Pay excess Pay FICA Sick Pay (3.11%, 12.38%) Unemployment Cost Part-time staff 257,413 13,762 111,534 1 20,886 1 167 21,217 pay per claim 314,979 *Not including surcharges or year-end refund $314,979/$257,413=122.4 CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File M 20-7452, Version: 1 Subject: Satellite Community Garden Project. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG STAFF REPORT For the Parks &Recreation Commission Meeting on May 14, 2020 Subject Satellite Community Garden Project Recommended Actions Receive an update from staff regarding the selection of potential Satellite Community Garden locations. Discussion The City Council approved the Community Garden at McClellan Ranch at their February 18,2020 meeting. $300,000 of the original funds were set aside last year for use in Satellite Gardens in other locations throughout the community. At the February 2020 Parks & Recreation Commission meeting, the Commissioners were asked to identify a few potential locations in Cupertino for further evaluation by each of the Commissioners. That list of potential locations was presented to the Commissioners at the March 2020 Commission meeting, however the COVID-19 shelter-in-place order has prevented the commissioners from performing all of the site visits necessary to evaluate the various locations. The project will resume once the shelter-in-place order is lifted. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact is associated with the receipt of this report, although there may be impacts when a Satellite Community Garden is constructed. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this report, although there will be fiscal impacts to the City when a Satellite Community Garden is constructed. Prepared and Approved by:Randy Schwartz, Interim Parks&Recreation Director Attachments: None CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File M 20-7453, Version: 1 Subject: Update on the Development of the Specific Plan. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG STAFF REPORT For the Parks &Recreation Commission Meeting on May 14, 2020 Subject Update on the Development of the Specific Plan. Recommended Actions Receive the update from staff regarding the Parks and Recreation Facilities Specific Plan. Discussion Staff from the Parks & Recreation and Public Works Departments are tasked by the City Council with the development of a Specific Plan that will categorize the recently approved Master Plan projects into "Immediate" (can be completed or constructed within the next two years), "Short-term" (three to seven years), and "Long-term" (eight or more years). During the Parks&Recreation Commission's March 2020 meeting,Commissioners Stanek and Tambe were appointed to serve on a committee to meet with staff and assist in the categorization process. An initial meeting was held on March 11t", with the two Commissioners and staff from both departments present, but subsequent discussions were cancelled due to the shelter-in-place orders related to COVID-19. Specific Plan meetings will continue once the shelter-in-place order is lifted. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact is associated with the receipt of this report. The sustainability impact for each project in this report will be assessed at the time when it may be considered for construction. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this report, although there will be fiscal impacts to the City when each project in this report is approved for construction. Prepared and Approved by: Randy Schwartz, Interim Parks&Recreation Director Attachments: None CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File M 20-7459, Version: 1 Subject: Discuss the Process and Timeline for Reviewing Community Funding Grant Program Applications. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting: May 14, 2020 Subject Discuss the Process and Timeline for Reviewing Community Funding Grant Program Applications. Recommended Action Review the new Community Grant Funding Policy and discuss the process and timeline for evaluating and recommending applications for the Community Grant Funding Program. Discussion City Council adopted an updated Community Funding Policy in January 2020 and approved a Community Funding Grant cap of$20,000 per applicant per year. The updated Community Funding Grant Program includes an updated application, an updated process, and newly developed evaluation criteria. The Community Funding Policy provides a framework for the City's Community Funding Grant Program and guides the administration of the program and Council's decision-making process. The updated Policy provides guidance on key aspects of the City's Community Funding Grant Program processes including: Eligibility, Evaluation Criteria, Restrictions/Guidelines, and Procedure. City Council will make the final decision as part of the budget process. Eligible applications are forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Commission for a review and recommendation to the City Council regarding grant approval and funding amounts. The updated Grant application process also includes a more robust outreach method including social media,the City's website, and emails to 100+non-profits that serve the Cupertino community. The Parks and Recreation Commission will establish a process and timeline for evaluating the Community Funding Grant applications and will then provide their recommendations regarding approvals for applications and funding to City Council. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact is involved with discussing the policy and evaluation process. Prepared by: Whitney Zeller,Administrative Assistant Reviewed bv: Christine Hanel,Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation Approved for Submission by: Randy Schwartz, Interim Parks and Recreation Director Attachments: A-Community Funding Policy B-Community Funding Grant Application C-FY19/20 Evaluation Criteria Rating Sheet Fiscal Policies - Community Funding Grant Policy PURPOSE The City of Cupertino currently provides funding to local non-profit organizations in the areas of social services, fine arts and other programs for the general public. The policy provides a framework for the City's Community Funding Grant Program and guides the administration of the program and decision-making process. It also provides guidance on key aspects of the City's Community Funding Grant Program processes including: Eligibility, Evaluation Criteria, Restrictions/Guidelines, and Procedure. SCOPE All requests for funding must comply with this policy. POLICY During the annual budgeting process,the City Council will determine the amount to appropriate for the Community Funding Grant Program. The Administrative Services Department shall approve or deny an applicant's request based upon the eligibility criteria set forth below. Community Grants, subject to availability of funds, shall not exceed $20,000 per applicant, per year. In all cases, the City reserves the right to reject any and all applications in the event the Administrative Services Department identifies a potential conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest.Submission of an application in no way obligates the City to award a grant and the City reserves the right to reject any or all applications,for any reason, at any time. Eligibility To receive consideration for a Community Funding Grant, grant requests must: • Be made or sponsored by a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization with experienced staff capable of implementing and managing the program/project/event. • Identify how the funds will be used to benefit the Cupertino community. • Be for one-time, project specific needs and not ongoing, operational costs. • Have more than 75% of the requested funds allocated for direct service costs versus administrative costs. • Be complete and submitted by the application deadline. Evaluation Criteria • Impact on and benefit to the Cupertino community • Community need for the program/project/event • Alignment with City priorities • Uniqueness of the program/project/event • Qualifications and experience of the organization and its staff • Reasonable cost • Demonstrated effort to secure funding from other sources and/or establishing partnerships with other community or city organizations • Clarity, completeness, and accuracy of grant application • Past performance and compliance with requirements if a recurring applicant Applications will be sorted into two categories: • New applicants • Past recipients Applications in each category will be evaluated using a tiered structure based on the dollar amount requested for award as follows: <$999.99 • $1,000.00-$4,999.99 • $5,000.00—$9,999.99 • $10,000.00-$20,000.00 Restrictions/Guidelines • An organization that is applying for multiple grants shall only submit one application. • Proceeds generated from the funded activity may only be used for the conducted activity. • If requested, recipients must provide full financial statements for the organization. • Admission to or participation in the event must be "free of charge" unless approved by Parks &Recreation Commission. • If an applicant makes a grant request directly to a member of the City Council, whether individually or as a group, the Council shall refer the applicant to the Administrative Services Department for a Grant application to be reviewed in accordance with this policy. • Grant recipients shall acknowledge the City contribution in formal promotional materials and efforts related to the funded activity. Any use of the City logo must be approved by the City's Public Information Officer. Procedure 1. Applicants submit timely and complete grant applications by March 1 to the Administrative Services Department for review. 2. The Administrative Services Department reviews application for compliance with eligibility criteria and availability of funds. Staff may seek additional information from applicant as necessary. 3. Eligible applications will be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission for a recommendation to the City Council regarding grant approval and funding amounts, which typically happens in April. All applicants are strongly encouraged to attend the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting in April. 4. City Council will make the final decision on grant amounts for each applicant as part of the budget adoption which typically happens in June. 5. Grant recipients shall submit a written report to the Administrative Services Department to show proof that the grant funds have been spent in the manner and for the purposes stated on the application,including information about the number of persons served and other results that benefit Cupertino. o Due by the 151h business day of July following the Fiscal Year in which grant funds are disbursed. o Failure to submit a written report by the July deadline could result in the loss of grant funding eligibility in the future. Embedded Secure Document The file https://cupertino.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=8432371&GUID=B7FO6AOE-2318-4174-BF96- 73249B888AOC is a secure document that has been embedded in this document. Double click the pushpin to view. Community Funding Program FY19/20-Evaluation Criteria Rating Sheet Applicant: Program/Project/Event: Total Program/Project Event Budget: Amount requested in current FY: If applicable,amount provided in prior FY adopted budget: Maximum Points Points Given* Criteria Notes Impact on and benefit to the Cupertino community • #of total residents served • #of Cupertino participants served 20 • Anticipated cost per Cupertino participant Community need for the program/project/event • Demonstrated community impact 20 • Is the program/project/event available to the entire community? Alignment with City priorities • Smart City *Financial Sustainability •Public Engagement and Transparency 15 *Community Livability and Sustainable Infrastructure •Operational Efficiency *Public and Private Partnerships Uniqueness of the program/project/event • Unduplicated service 15 • Level of collaboration if a duplicated service Qualifications and experience of the organization and its staff 5 Reasonable cost 10 • How will the organization use the grant funds? Demonstrated effort to secure funding from other sources • Non-City funding sources 10 • Alternative forms of funding Past performance and compliance with requirements if a recurring applicant 5 • How were prior disbursed funds used? Total possible points 100 0 *Higher number =higher rating CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File M 20-7454, Version: 1 Subject: Update on the Coronavirus' Impacts to Cupertino Parks and Recreation Programs. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG STAFF REPORT For the Parks &Recreation Commission Meeting on May 14, 2020 Subject Update on the Coronavirus' Impacts to Cupertino Parks and Recreation Programs. Recommended Actions Receive an update from staff regarding the impacts of the Coronavirus on the Parks and Recreation programs. Discussion Beginning in March 2020, with the impacts of the coronavirus felt in Santa Clara County, the City of Cupertino has taken multiple actions for the public's health and safety. This update focuses on the current status of the actions and impacts on the Parks and Recreation Department's programs. All facilities used for recreation programs were closed in mid-March and all programs, rentals and special events have now been cancelled through the end of April. All staff are working from home except for the Parks Rangers who are still working on the trail and a few employees who are tending to the animals at McClellan Ranch. We are answering phone calls, returning emails, processing refunds for the cancelled classes, amending budgets and tending to other administrative tasks. Parks and Recreation staff is also working closely with the other departments to update the community on a regular basis through daily reports, social media, signage in City parks, etc. Some of our staff are working with the County and several non-profit agencies on distribution of food and other basic supplies — mostly to senior citizens. Over 60 seniors are receiving phone calls from our staff on a regular basis (some daily)to keep their spirits up and stay connected with the community. The Case Management program is also still active helping those most in need of assistance. The Virtual Recreation program that began in late March is getting good response, with over 100 people recently"attending"a recent exercise class and over 50 in a chair exercise class. Staff is now conducting 10 or more on-line classes each week and work to expand that program, with the assistance of the IT and Communications Departments. At the same time as facilities were shut down and Virtual Recreation classes were ramping up, staff has been preparing for the time when sheltering is no longer needed in our communities, by establishing new protocols for operation. Despite not being able to offer summer jobs to high school and college students until a determination is made if such programs will be held in 2020, staff is interviewing candidates via telephone or Skype and hope to have employees ready to go if needed. Protocols regarding facility use include continuing the reduction of room capacities to allow better distancing and intensified cleaning schedules. The facilities have all had intensive cleaning during the current closures and the newly created schedules will be put in place when facilities open. Classes will not be scheduled back to back, but with additional time in between to allow for social distancing and cleaning.We are also working to ensure social distancing at each of the facilities' front office counters. Although these steps will result in a slight reduction of programs and participation, they will greatly improve the safety of those participating in and working for those programs. More recent information will be provided orally at the meeting. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact is associated with the receipt of this report. Fiscal Impact There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this report. Prepared and Approved by:Randy Schwartz, Interim Parks&Recreation Director Attachments: None CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File#: 20-7455, Version: 1 Subject: Outreach to the Public and Mechanisms for the Public to Contact Staff. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting: May 14, 2020 Subject Outreach to the Public and Mechanisms for the Public to Contact Staff. Recommended Action Accept the report on Parks &Recreation COVID-19 Public Outreach. Discussion On March 16,2020,the City of Cupertino's Parks&Recreation Department(Parks&Rec) closed its facilities based on the County of Santa Clara Public Health Department's Shelter- in-Place Order in response to the ongoing COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic. These facilities included: Cupertino Sports Center, Cupertino Senior Center, Blackberry Farm Golf Course,Quinlan Community Center,Monta Vista Recreation Center,Environmental Education Center at McClellan Ranch Preserve, Creekside Park Building, and the Wilson Ceramic Studio. The City notified the community about the closures in numerous ways, including; 1) placing a notice of the facility closure at the top of each facility's webpage, 2) including facility closure information in the City's daily COVID-19 report; 3) posting closure information on multiple social media platforms (Nextdoor, Facebook, and Twitter), and posting signage in the door and windows of affected facilities. Parks &Recreation followed this action by canceling or postponing its in-person classes, programs, events, and rental bookings—which has now been extended through May. Parks & Recreation notified those affected by these actions through email, phone, social media, daily COVID-19 report, and updates to the City's website and Facebook events calendars. On March 24, Parks & Recreation rolled out a Virtual Recreation initiative to encourage residents to remain active while at home: www.cul2ertino.org/virtualrecreation. The subpages included "Stay Active," "Exercise Your Brain," "Stay Healthy," and "Stay Informed." They focused on providing an online resource to residents for fun, educational, and healthy activities—including indoor and outdoor options—to exercise the body and mind. Outreach included an email notification, social media postings, and creation of a Virtual Recreation banner on the City's homepage. On March 30,Parks&Recreation began offering live virtual recreation classes led by Parks &Recreation instructors.By April 6, Parks &Recreation expanded these offerings to two virtual classes each day, Monday through Friday. These classes gave our community an opportunity to participate in workouts led by familiar instructors. Classes have included cardio, strength, flexibility, and balance training. As of April 22, Parks&Recreation held 24 classes with an average participation of 108 attendees. (During this time period,Parks & Recreation needed to create large 24 by 36-inch signs to promote social distancing in response to increasing crowd sizes on the Steven Creek Corridor Trail.) On April 23,Parks &Recreation announced its #CupertinoCares initiative.This initiative focuses on the importance of remaining connected with our families, neighbors, and community as we navigate this difficult time at home. Each Friday, the City will post a fun activity for residents of all ages at www.cul2ertino.org/cul2ertinocares, along with the City's social media platforms. These activities will allow the community to write, draw, dance, sing, and laugh together while at home. Residents are encouraged to share their experiences by posting photos and videos to their social media accounts with the hashtag #CupertinoCares, or by posting them in the comments sections. Community input on COVID-19 related topics is welcomed. Residents can find contact information on the City's COVID-19 webpage:www.cupertino.org/coronavirus.Resident and media inquiries can be directed to the Communications Officer Brian Babcock at brianb@cupertino.org. Sustainability Impact: No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact associated with this report. There are minor expenditures in the programs to pay the instructors to teach virtual fitness classes and printing of social distancing signs. Prepared by: Branton Curt, Community Outreach Specialist Reviewed bv: Randy Schwartz,Interim Parks&Recreation Director Approved for Submission by: Randy Schwartz, Interim Parks&Recreation Director Attachments: None CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File M 20-7456, Version: 1 Subject: Examination of Year-Round Special Events Offered by the City. CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM CITY OF PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT QUINLAN COMMUNITY CENTER 10185 NORTH STELLING ROAD • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3120 • FAX: (408) 777-1305 CUPERTINO CUPERTINO.ORG PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting: May 14, 2020 Subject Examination of Year-Round Special Events Offered by the City. Recommended Action Receive Report Discussion The Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department began a robust Neighborhood Events Program in the summer of 2018 with the goal of providing diverse events throughout the Cupertino community with the main objective of providing offerings at various neighborhood locations that encouraged walkability and increase in community engagement within the various neighborhoods throughout the community. Prior to this,most events had been held at Memorial Park. The Neighborhood Events program was quite successful,however,was promoted separately from other department summer events: Summer Concert Series, Cinema at Sundown and Shakespeare in the Park. Since all of these community events were sponsored by the Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department,it was recommended through program evaluations that all of the events be marketed together to avoid confusion amongst the public. In summer 2019, these events were all combined under one unifying title: "Summer Events". For planning purposes,the staff maintains an internal document that serves as the year- round schedule which is helpful to avoid multiple events in the community on the same date. The calendar incorporates all the summer events as well events offered throughout the year. The events that are included in the calendar are those that are open to the general public and are either free or may require pre-registration. Events that are targeted to specific program participants and/or have limited space availability are not included in the special event calendar. (I.e.: some senior and preschool events) At the January and February 2020 commission meetings,while the commission was developing the FY 20-21 work plan, Summer Events was a priority item that emerged to the top of the list for the upcoming Commission Work Program. During discussions, there was a suggestion to expand the "summer events" to year-round event offerings. As a result, staff felt it was important to share the current year round offerings to the Commission in an effort to demonstrate the already expanded offerings provided by the department— the commitment to diversity is highlighted through over 100 various events at twenty locations throughout the city while attracting people of all age groups and cultural backgrounds. The attached charts and map identify the various locations, events and months of the many community events. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact. Prepared by: Christine Hanel,Assistant Director Reviewed bv: Randy Schwartz,Interim Director Approved for Submission by: Randy Schwartz, Interim Director Attachments: A-Chart of Events Offered and Locations B-Map of Cupertino With Facility Locations Analysis of Cupertino's Special Events Locations and Frequency Locations #of Events w d ti ti d v� O Z Q BBF 4 1 1 2 City wide 1 1 Civic Center Plaza 6 2 1 2 1 Community Hall 2 1 1 Creekside Park* 5 1 2 1 1 De Anza College 1 1 Hoover Park 12 3 5 4 Jollyman 2 1 1 Linda Vista 2 1 1 Memorial Park 29 1 1 2 5 8 9 1 1 1 Monta Vista 2 1 1 Portal Park 1 1 Quinlan 12 2 4 1 1 1 3 Somerset 1 1 Sports Center 1 1 Sr. Center 5 1 1 2 1 Sr. Center Parking Lot 5 1 1 1 2 Three Oaks Park 12 3 5 4 Varian 1 1 Wilson 2 1 1 106 2 3 6 4 5 131 26 27 7 7 2 4 * Total does not include year-round Farmers'Market at Creekside Park Analysis of Special Events by Program, Month and Locations Events Total ti w d 0 z Q Locations <hack>Cupertino 1 1 Quinlan Art Show 1 1 Senior Center Big Bunny 5K 1 1 Civic Center Bike Workshop 5 1 1 1 2 Sr. Ctr.Parking Lot Bobateeno 1 1 Civic Center Breakfast with Santa 1 1 Quinlan Cherry Blossom Festival 1 1 Memorial Park City-Wide Garage Sale 1 1 City-wide Corridor Stroll 1 1 Blackberry Farm Cultures of the World 3 1 1 1 Quinlan Cupertino Campout 1 1 Creekside Park Dilli Haat Festival 1 1 Memorial Park Diwali Festival 1 1 Memorial Park Earth&Arbor Day Festival 1 1 Civic Center Fall Bike Fest 1 1 Civic Center Fit Fest 1 1 Quinlan Heroes Run 1 1 Civic Center Hidden Treasures-Bag Sale 1 1 Senior Center Hidden Treasures Sale 1 1 Senior Center Holi 2 1 1 Memorial Park Independence Day Events 3 3 BBF/Memorial/Creeks. Kids N Fun Festival 1 1 Memorial Park Kids Obstacle Course Event 1 1 Creekside Park Konark Dance/Music Festival 1 1 Memorial Park Mardi Gras Travel Party 1 1 Senior Center Monster Mash Youth Dance 1 1 Quinlan Movie in the Park 6 1 1 4 1 1 See below Jollyman/Memorial/Somerset/Three Oaks/Varian Night Market 1 l De Anza College Ornament&Wreath Party 1 1 Senior Center Pizza&Politics 1 1 Community Hall Pooch Plunge 1 1 Blackberry Farm Preschool Open House 1 1 Quinlan Relay for Life 1 1 Memorial Park Rotary Fall Festival 1 1 Memorial Park Shakespeare in the Park 9 4 5 Memorial Park Signing Santa 1 1 Quinlan Spelling Bee 1 1 Community Hall Sports Center Open House 1 1 Sports Center Summer Concert Series 14 4 6 3 1 See below Creekside/Jollyman/Linda Vista/Memorial/Monta Vista/Portal/Wilson Summer Events 26 1 1 1 7 1101 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 See below Creekside/Hoover/Linda Vista/Three Oaks/Wilson Toddler Movie Night 1 1 Quinlan Tree Lighting 1 1 Quinlan Veteran's Day Ceremony 1 1 Memorial Park Volunteer Fair 1 1 Civic Center WAFU Ikebana Flower Show 1 1 Quinlan Wildlife&Harvest Festival 1 1 Blackberry Farm Total Special Events: 106 2 3 6 14 1 5 13 1261271 7 1 7 2 4 Key: Require Payment/Registration Offered Through Other City Departments Analysis of Special Events by Locations (20 Locations) LOCATIONS EVENTS Blackberry Farm Corridor Stroll Pooch Plunge Wildlife &Harvest Festival Independence Day Events City-wide City-Wide Garage Sale Civic Center Big Bunny 5K 113obateeno lEarth&Arbor Day Festival Fall Bike Fest IHeroes Run I Volunteer Fair Community Hall Pizza&Politics I Spelling Bee Creekside Park Cupertino Campout IKids Obstacle Course Event I Independence Day Events Summer Concert Series Summer Events De Anza College Night Market Hoover Summer Events Jollyman Movie in the Park Summer Concert Series Linda Vista Summer Concert Series Summer Events Memorial Park Cherry Blossom Festival Dilli Haat Festival Diwali Festival Holi Independence Day Events Kids N Fun Festival Konark Dance/Music Fest Movie in the Park Relay for Life Rotary Fall Festival Shakespeare in the Park Summer Concert Series Veteran's Day Ceremony Monta Vista Summer Concert Series Portal Park Summer Concert Series Quinlan <hack>Cupertino Breakfast with Santa Cultures of the World Fit Fest Monster Mash Youth Dance Preschool Open House Signing Santa Toddler Movie Night Tree Lighting WAFU Ikebana Flower Show Senior Center Art Show Hidden Treasures: Bag Sale Hidden Treasures Sale Mardi Gras Travel Party Ornament&Wreath Party Somerset Movie in the Park Sports Center Sports Center Open House Sr Ctr Parking Lot Bike Workshop Three Oaks Movie in the Park Summer Events Varian Movie in the Park Wilson Summer Concert Series Summer Events imltz ' Elementary Gr ant Stocklmeir Park ; Elementary R a or Parr Parks & .,jSerra Park SUNNYVALE Recreation' LOS ALTOS , ■ Ortega a { WestValle Cupertino ParkDepartment . L ,{ diddle Elementary cho of 7 . Homestead Rd CUPERTINO 5 ''1' �. '■'• �'''1'. Little _ ':, ' �{ '" ��{ ", •.,`' . � Rancho ., ___ � Homestead � . { ''.■+' ,{'`■ {' ` 1 ■ High school, Franco Park - LP + " J Park r: ■ Map of { _ d III ' ' ' III + f EMI ting Space .41 1 1 a l 1 ■ 1 1 + 1 1 ■ 1 + 1 1 ■ 1 ' L { IF ;■, { , ■ • { , {' , , { , { 1' ■+, { , ■ • { , { . garden Gate d.{ " + + ■ + Rancho . + 1 + " + ■ Park 15 �-�} �} Ma v�rood • . • 1 • I ' • • 1 ,' 1 . EI men I ntar `a�� , r { •�'y " an' nto�nio':{ �, , .". _ � Park •, .,'{:•' '7 Rancho 1 ■ {•{+ ■ County 1 arli �I,■ { i+■ ■, ■ :"�+, l� -_ v '� Westwood . fan A�ntorii . , ! Lamson. ■ I '■'• Middle Collins { .{ 1 { .{ 1 .' �.� + Mar Ave -a; Oaks Park . ■ en Space "I a — . . , �rese , " , , •, . " ,;• ! ' school Elementar} a+ { rve: + + { . • { • + h,{ Canyon � Dog Park _ ff • teens Creek *i"i'•' 1'''{' ■+{; ��=' II','{' ■+{11,1` is:.'{ ■ . Yak ' Elementary ' J 1 - � � � _ Jenny Eisenhowerl l • � • . Park � � � � • 1 _ Elementary ,' 10 ' Hai n street " . {. • :. ��._ " Memorial 13 I Strand . ' ■ .;, .',. ",. + Park I 12 Per#al Parr Parr "{. {I ° { ,' 4 Varian Park ' + 19 • ••;I ` • : Park a { ; , , { . LUJ� 17k Blvd Sports Cen tern. ,.Town Square 4 L Cali dill r' r � • Stocklmeir Playa _ Ranch �. F ar i a Ce npte r iPark I . Cupertino Park and Trail e _ BI ackberry Fa rm El em entar ' it son * Golf Course De Anna City Hall ` 0 Park r ' Cupertino Community Parks Mon a Vista Recreation h .H i h School =. College I e e a ,. J � _ I Center & Park 11� 'o g Civic Communi 'Hall -` -F; " .. _. I --I Parka , a .•; John Large Neighborhood Parks • BI ackberry Farm Park4 Cupertino h , Mi se McClellan 6 6 � Iepan � Li brar - Sterling Par k Small Neighborhood Parks • �•� •�•� Flarich West =� Library Creeksi�e 1 Barnhart onta P Field a Park Sedgwick . � �Clf�f� . � � � ..• .�� Park ecial Use bites I Vista Percolation Elementary Archbishop c l el la n High Lincoln: Pond Eaton I Mitt High School Fields Managed b City ' Flanch School Elementary r Elementary school *� �+ H de Middle 09400041 Preserve school Rancho shared-Use Paths -- Deep Cliff' Kennedy Mi dd le s Rinconada - col f Course School 8 Cie Vargas Other Recreation Resources • -�� .$. IN a of Nyman Park Elementary •�•�•�• `•� " . �. R Lind Dilworth � _ � Local Parks open to Public a ' %_ vista Elementary County Parks Regional Open Space Preserves + ' {+', 9Park T _ - ! eyerhoIz Stevens ' ■ �. i . ■{ { �* � — Elementary Murdock-Portal CreekCounty', '# _ Elementary Schools and Colleges 11' I:: 1 {�rki � Miller " ' I Regnart ,a - Calabazas Middle �� .� golf Course 11:111 {I III � . -_ �-�' Elementary �r - — Park school !Murdock ''■ , ' I' ' - ' ' ; �- I Park r r CL+CJ�J L+ ri 7 C CJ •{ ' 11 ' i'• • v 1 ' Three Oaks Rain Dr Imi '��.� .�.�. �- " " •, • '+ " ��Y Recreation n#ersfFields � •. �- _ Park 13 " " " ' •� - ynbrook h ' . +{. ■ '1 .■{ • , I I L L� Rainbow Hghhoof Saratoga RecreationCenters/Facilities Creek ParkPark 1i � 0 Other Facilities I,J � . � r••r� ,••ram,■ ' r Creek•'' •+ { ''■�{''F:{' '': 'I + {: a f ., .{' :+{' '� ' : 'I + { Hoover Park Al 1 E Af J E I■ Reservoir- III IN F '1'■ { ■J{I;1• ':.+' + '■ Base dap Features �;' ' {■ {, • " {{ • . ' ,■ { ' �' { .{ FremontIde'r {' _ PT��L-ct Rd Cupertino itly� Boundarly� + 1 +{ I " ■ ".ti '' {� +, +{ 1 " ■ "JI ''.{ , + 1 a1��L-}Jy}en Spa ce . ' { { I■ : ; : I , , ' : ; : , Cupertino here of Influence * Pi1Jcche tti Ranch '+{ all • I '' " 11"• ' { '"}' " I " { • '' " { •� " IIJ '+{ ■ " " { P P • aJ�reserve .qqy en Space •11 + , , • +, • '•• ' •• ,'ll • •".+ •. , •• ••• ".+ :. '•• ' :• .'ll • ".+ {f Railroad MR L . ■{ ••, , •{+ i°' " •+ {, • { ■ "{+ ■ 1 ■■{ • + {, ■r ■ I ■■{ „ " �+ i, ■ {•■ _ , ! ... f` 1'■ +{ ■+ ■{ + ' 1'77 'I, ■ + ■ 1'■ +{ ■+ 5�i + I,I„ ''■• , • 1'"{ ■+ ■i + I,I„ I■• , 11 "{ ■+ ■i + . .. 4:4 Creeks and Channels MR,1 {' ■+ 1; ■■. '■'+ ■ ", " .1 ■+ 1; ■■+ ■'+ '■ "M1 " { • ,+ 1; ■■+ '■'+ ■ "+ + . 1 •{' ■+ ' in Water Bodies �'. •;• . ., 7 ,�•. , • � •;• . , 7 ,�•. ,' '•{ �. •;• . as ,7.• •• •,{ ,7 , '• ,;. 1 ■ I J 1 1` 1 + 1 ■ 1 ■ 1 1` 1 1 + 1 ■ 10 ■ 1` 1 1 14 ■ .,, ■ , • , ,,, ■ , • ,,, 1 ■ 1 ■ ■ {' ■ { 1 ■ '■■ { 1 ■ '■■ { 1 ■ Stevens' " 1 { 1 { ; ± i I,■ I I I i 1 { I,■ Creek�f+' I■ { 1,■ ,' : " ' " '". ■ ,"• ' + { , ,+',' : i' • " I'" County i{ , •+',' : ' • + 1•'• , ••1'1 • "• ' Miles • !! IS'I�IU ,,•••, ,� ■, , .', {, , , , { "{, ,,'••', ,• ■, . �', {. , , ,Park • ,,'•••, ' {, ',, 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 , • ,, , • ' , • ' h, February 2018 NI ■';' {','� ■';' ■';' {','� '{' • , ■'. Note. der Local Ag en cy Form at ion ornrnission { " Sources; City of Cupertino and Santa Clara County, 2017. 1 Blackberry Farm 4 Community Hall 7 Hoover 10 Memorial Park 13 Quinlan 16 Sports Center 19 Varian 2 City-Wide (not listed) 5 Creekside Park 8 Jollyman 11 Monta Vista 14 Senior Center 17 Sr. Ctr Parking Lot 20 Wilson 3 Civic Center 6 DeAnza College 9 Linda Vista 12 Portal Park 15 Somerset 18 Three Oaks CITY OF CUPERTINO CUPERTINO Legislation Text File#: 20-7457, Version: 1 Subject: Receive Monthly Update Reports from: - Director - Commissioners CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/14/2020 powered by LegistarTM