HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-11 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting
December 11, 2006
1. Presentation of Proposed Expansion Project for Stanford Shopping Center ..... 162
2. Selection of Applicants to Interview for the Parks and Recreation Commission 162
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS .................................................................................. 162
3. Resolution 8676 entitled “Council of the City of Palo Alto Declares Weeds to be a Nuisance and Setting a Hearing on January 16, 2007 for Objections to
Their Proposed Destruction or Removal” .................................................... 164
4. Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office Quarterly
Report as of September 30, 2006 ............................................................. 164
5. Approval of Amendment Number 4 to add $150,000 to the Contract with
Carollo Engineers for Additional Engineering Support Services for Phase I
Water Distribution System Improvements and Emergency Water Supply and
Storage Draft Environment Impact Report Projects, for a Total Contract Not to Exceed $2,726,462. ............................................................................ 164
6. Approval of Record of Land Use Action for 195 Page Mill Road and 2825,
2865, 2873, 2891 & 2901 Park Boulevard, and Approval of Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration ............................................................................... 164
7. Approval to Appropriate Additional Funds to Existing Blanket Purchase Orders
with Cooper Power Systems and Howard Industries for the Purchase of
Electric Distribution Transformers required for Capital Improvement Projects
and to provide service to New Customers. .................................................. 164
8. Colleagues Memo from Council Members Cordell, Drekmeier and Klein re
Decision-Making Process on Use of Tasers by Palo Alto Police Department. .... 165
9. Transmittal of Final Library Service Model Analysis and Recommendations (LSMAR) Report and Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to
Undertake Community Polling Prior to Final Decisions on Library Service and
Facility Enhancements ............................................................................. 169
10. Transmittal of a Study by Group 4 Architecture on Library Space Needs at
Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, Main Library, and Branch
12/11/06 101-160
Libraries; Library and Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendations
Based on the Group 4 Architecture Report; and Staff Recommendation to
Undertake Polling Prior to Final Decision on Library Facility Enhancements ..... 170
11. City Council Direction to Identify One of Two City-Owned Site Options for
Auto Dealer Retention and Expansion and Direct the City Manager and City
Attorney to Work with the Director of Administrative Services and Director of
Planning and Community Environment to Negotiate a Lease That Will Retain Anderson Honda in Palo Alto..................................................................... 175
COUNCIL COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND REPORTS FROM CONFERENCES ...... 178
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:37 p.m. .............................. 178
12/11/06 101-161
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council
Chambers at 6:08 p.m.
Present: Barton, Beecham, Cordell, Drekmeier, Kishimoto, Klein,
Kleinberg, Morton, Mossar
STUDY SESSION
Mayor Kleinberg noted: 1) Council Member Cordell would not participate in
Item No. 1 due to a conflict of interest because she was employed by
Stanford University; 2) Council Member Klein would not participate in Item
No. 1 due to a conflict of interest because his wife was employed by
Stanford University; and 3) Council Member Mossar would not participate in
Item No. 1 due to a conflict of interest because her husband was employed
by Stanford University.
1. Presentation of Proposed Expansion Project for Stanford Shopping
Center
No action required.
Mary Carlstead, 147 Walter Hays, stated concern that the Association of Bay
Area Government’s (ABAG) new quotas for affordable housing would
overextend the City’s resources.
Norman Beamer, 1005 University, urged the influx of traffic be ameliorated
away from main streets throughout the City.
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
2. Selection of Applicants to Interview for the Parks and Recreation
Commission
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Drekmeier, to
interview all seven candidates for the Parks and Recreation Commission.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Don Letcher, 788 N. Rengstorff, Mountain View, spoke regarding the public
process in Palo Alto; he felt the Human Relations Commission should advise
the Council without input from City staff.
12/11/06 101-162
Mark Petersen-Perez, 434 Addison Avenue, spoke regarding illegal
installation of phone wire taps.
Aram James spoke regarding wrongful convictions which result from the
interrogation process.
Joy Ogawa requested consideration of a policy where public comment would
be heard after the project applicants spoke.
Mayor Kleinberg introduced the Palo Alto High School football team, the
Vikings.
Assistant Coach Steve Foug stated this season the Vikings had the most wins
in the School’s ninety-six year history. The team was invited to play in the
California State Championship football game in Los Angeles.
Council Member Barton, Drekmeier, Klein and Morton stated their
congratulations and support for the Vikings.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Klein, to approve
Consent Calendar Items Nos. 3 through 7.
Mayor Kleinberg stated Item No. 6 had an error related to 195 Page Mill
Road.
City Attorney Gary Baum stated the matter was to approve the Record of
Land Use Action. The Council would adopt, reject, or edit the findings. In
the event the Council chose to reject the findings, the project would proceed
but would be more susceptible to legal challenge.
Council Member Barton asked whether the Council would be able to act on
Agenda Item No. 6.
Mr. Baum stated the Council could act on the approval of the Record of Land
Use Action.
Council Member Mossar stated she would vote no on Agenda Item No. 6.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto stated she would vote no on Agenda Item No. 6. She
asked whether the process would return to the Architectural Review Board
(ARB).
12/11/06 101-163
Director of Planning and Community Environment Steve Emslie stated the
project would be referred back to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) for
resolution.
Council Member Barton stated he would vote no on Agenda Item No. 6.
Robert Moss, 4010 Orme, asked the Council to disapprove the 195 Page Mill
Road project.
Sanford Forte, 280 College Avenue, stated his support for the 195 Page Mill
Road project.
Mayor Kleinberg stated she would vote no on Agenda Item No. 6.
Council Member Klein stated the Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed
environmental matters. They would review the appearance of the wall for
this project.
3. Resolution 8676 entitled “Council of the City of Palo Alto Declares
Weeds to be a Nuisance and Setting a Hearing on January 16, 2007 for
Objections to Their Proposed Destruction or Removal”
4. Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor’s Office
Quarterly Report as of September 30, 2006
5. Approval of Amendment Number 4 to add $150,000 to the Contract
with Carollo Engineers for Additional Engineering Support Services for
Phase I Water Distribution System Improvements and Emergency
Water Supply and Storage Draft Environment Impact Report Projects,
for a Total Contract Not to Exceed $2,726,462.
6. Approval of Record of Land Use Action for 195 Page Mill Road and
2825, 2865, 2873, 2891 & 2901 Park Boulevard, and Approval of
Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration
7. Approval to Appropriate Additional Funds to Existing Blanket Purchase
Orders with Cooper Power Systems and Howard Industries for the
Purchase of Electric Distribution Transformers required for Capital
Improvement Projects and to provide service to New Customers.
MOTION PASSED 9-0 for item Nos. 3-5 and 7.
MOTION PASSED 5-4 for Item No. 6, Barton, Kishimoto, Kleinberg, Mossar,
no.
12/11/06 101-164
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8. Colleagues Memo from Council Members Cordell, Drekmeier and Klein
re Decision-Making Process on Use of Tasers by Palo Alto Police
Department.
Council Member Cordell stated the Colleagues Memo with Council Member Klein and Drekmeier requested the City Council to establish a Taser Task
Force to recommend whether or not to allow the use of tasers by the Palo
Alto Police Department.
Council Member Mossar asked for clarification on expending funds from the COPS fund.
Chief of Police Lynne Johnson stated the COPS fund was an annual allocation
provided through the State. The Council had to approve how the funds
would be used.
Council Member Mossar clarified if the use of tasers was declined, a different
proposal would be presented to the Council.
Chief Johnson confirmed.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked whether there would be a policy advisory group
in addition to the auditor. According to the process, the Council would see
the taser use policy.
Council Member Cordell stated the process was for the Task Force to inquire
and study whether tasers be used.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked whether the Task Force committee meeting
would be publicly noticed.
Council Member Cordell stated it was required that all meetings must be
publicly noticed.
City Attorney Gary Baum stated the committee would be set up as a Brown
Act Committee with an agenda.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked how many times the Police Department needed
to use force.
Chief Johnson stated there were five incidents in 2005 and eleven incidents
in 2004.
12/11/06 101-165
Council Member Morton asked whether a yes vote meant the funds were
guaranteed indefinitely.
City Manager Frank Benest said the funds would not be used if the Council
did not approve the taser program.
Council Member Morton clarified the funds would be transferred to some
other program if the taser program was declined.
Mr. Benest stated the request for funds would be changed to an authorized
program.
Council Member Mossar clarified that the taser use policy would become part
of the recommendation to the City Council to be made no later than March
31, 2007.
Council Member Cordell answered the policy would be developed only if the
Task Force recommended the use of tasers.
Council Member Mossar requested when the motion was made, the order of
Items No. 2 and 3 of the Colleagues Memo be adjusted.
Darlene Wallach stated she did not support the taser initiative.
Donna Wallach stated she did not support the taser initiative.
Don Letcher, 788 N. Rengstorff, Mountain View stated he did not support the
taser initiative.
John K. Abraham, 736 Ellsworth Place, stated he did not support the taser
Task Force initiative.
Wayne Martin, 3687 Bryant, stated his support for the use of taser, although
he did not support the Task Force initiative.
Aram James stated he did not support the taser initiative.
Mark Petersen-Perez, 434 Addison Avenue, stated he did not support the
taser initiative.
Paul Gilbert, ACLU, 2309 Rock St. #29, Mountain View, stated there was not
enough evidence to support the taser initiative.
Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, commented on the Police Auditor chairing the
Task Force on limited hours.
12/11/06 101-166
Council Member Cordell stated she did not have a position on the use of
tasers due to a lack of sufficient information.
MOTION: Council Member Cordell moved, seconded by Klein, to approve
the Colleagues Memo recommendations to:
1) Establish a Taser Task Force to recommend to the City Council
whether or not to allow the use of tasers by the Palo Alto Police
Department.
The Task Force is to be comprised of the following
representatives, appointed by the Mayor: one of our police auditors (the Task Force Chairperson); an ACLU representative;
a member of the Santa Clara County Public Defender’s Office; a
member of the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office; a
member of the Palo alto Police Department (designated by Chief
Johnson); two members of the Human Relations Commission;
two Palo Alto residents; a representative of the faith community;
a representative of the local NAACP, a medical expert, and a
representative of the Office of the City Attorney. One member of
the City Council will be designated as a liaison to the Task Force.
The meetings will be public meetings with agendas.
2) Direct the Taser Task Force to make its written recommendation
to the City Council no later than March 31, 2007.
3) Direct the City Manager to develop, with Chief Johnson, a Taser
Use Policy, which will be considered by the Task Force in making
its recommendation to the City Council.
4) Authorize Chief Johnson to request funding from the State
Citizens’ for Public Safety for the purchase of tasers, since the
deadline for a designation of the use of these funds is mid-
December 2006. However, in the event the City Council does
not authorize the use of tasers by the Police Department, then
Chief Johnson will submit to the City Council for its approval, a
proposal for an alternative use for these funds.
Council Member Klein asserted the Task Force membership would ensure a
thoughtful report enabling the Council to make an informed decision.
Council Member Morton said he supported the motion solely to earmark the
funding.
Council Member Drekmeier inquired of staff to comment on the notice of
application for funds in the paper.
12/11/06 101-167
City Clerk Donna Rogers read the notice from the Palo Alto Weekly
newspaper advertisement: “Public Hearing on Monday December 18, 2006
pursuant to Government Code Section 30061 Title 3 Division 3 relating to
the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund to consider the Police
Chief’s request to purchase electro-muscular disruption devises, tasers or
other equipment to be used by first line officers.”
Mayor Kleinberg asked Council Member Cordell whether the Police Auditor
stated that their participation in the Task Force would be an additional cost
to the City.
Council Member Cordell noted the cost had not come up in conversation.
Mr. Baum stated his department would offset any additional cost of the
Police Auditor to the City.
Mayor Kleinberg stated the City Attorney’s budget was meant for legal
expenditures.
Mr. Baum stated an attorney had been retained to provide legal services.
Mayor Kleinberg stated the Task Force did not provide legal services.
Mr. Baum stated the policy was legally based.
Mayor Kleinberg asked why diversity was not clearly supported in the Task
Force.
Council Member Cordell stated the Human Relations Commission had a
representative from the Hispanic community who was invited to participate
in the Task Force.
Mayor Kleinberg stated the Colleagues Memo required a legal seat on the
Task Force. The City Attorney funding the Police Auditor would be a conflict.
Mr. Baum stated an attorney from the City Attorney’s office serviced the
Task Force and, therefore, there was no conflict.
Mayor Kleinberg stated when two participants employed by a service were
involved in the Task Force there would be no clear separation of
responsibility.
Mr. Baum stated the Police Auditor reports to the Council.
12/11/06 101-168
Mayor Kleinberg stated the Police Auditor reported to the Council for Police
Auditor business. The City Attorney’s office paid for Task Force work,
therefore, they reported to the City Attorney office.
Mr. Baum stated the Council decided to whom the Police Auditor reported.
The City Attorney’s office utilized available funds to simplify the funding
complication.
Mayor Kleinberg stated there was not enough information regarding the
taser issue to support it.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto stated she supported the Taser Task Force.
Council Member Mossar stated she supported the application for the funds
although not necessarily for tasers.
Council Member Klein stated he supported the tasers and the Task Force.
Council Member Cordell responded to concerns brought to the table; the
Police Auditor’s position on the Task Force was necessary because of his
position to the Police Department. The purpose for a Taser Task Force was
an in depth review of every aspect of the taser.
Council Member Barton stated there was a question in the community
regarding tasers. The Council was requested to put together a group of people from the community whose expertise was political and police
oriented, guided by a trusted person who had investigated police issues.
Mayor Kleinberg stated the time was wrong to support the taser issue.
MOTION PASSED 7-2, Kleinberg, Mossar no.
Mayor Kleinberg announced Agenda Items No. 9 and 10 would be heard
together and that the public testimony was closed on December 4, 2006.
9. Transmittal of Final Library Service Model Analysis and
Recommendations (LSMAR) Report and Request for Approval of Staff
Recommendation to Undertake Community Polling Prior to Final
Decisions on Library Service and Facility Enhancements (Item continued from
12/4/06 – PUBLIC TESTIMONY CLOSED)
10. Transmittal of a Study by Group 4 Architecture on Library Space Needs
at Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, Main Library, and
Branch Libraries; Library and Parks and Recreation Commission
Recommendations Based on the Group 4 Architecture Report; and
12/11/06 101-169
Staff Recommendation to Undertake Polling Prior to Final Decision on
Library Facility Enhancements (Item continued from 12/4/06 – PUBLIC TESTIMONY
CLOSED) Council Member Barton introduced the Colleagues Memo authored by himself
and Council Member Klein who were both Library Advisory Commission
Liaisons. The Colleagues Memo was written to maintain the distributive
library system; it discussed the programs and recommended upgrades to
the facilities, operations, collections, technologies, and meeting space uses.
Council Member Mossar stated the Council had been explicit in the desire for
a branch or distributive library system.
Council Member Morton stated his support for the full implementation of the
library system upgrade project with the rebuild of the Mitchell Park Library
being the priority.
Council Member Drekmeier asked the City Attorney whether polling would be
public information.
City Attorney Gary Baum stated the results of the poll would be public
information.
Council Member Drekmeier commented that combining the Safety Building
with the Library Bond could result in the City ending up with neither.
Council Member Beecham stated the issue before the Council was how the
polling would be handled.
Council Member Barton stated the Council was committed to both the Public
Safety Building and the Library programs.
MOTION: Council Member Barton moved, seconded by Klein, to take the
following actions:
1. Thank and laud the Library Advisory Commission (LAC) for its hard
work, dedication and vision in creating the LSMAR Report and the
Council also thanks and acknowledges the hard work of the Library
staff, City Manager’s office, Public Works department and our
consultants in the work to manage and complete the LSMAR Report.
2a. Approve the staff recommendation to begin polling on the library and public safety buildings with added language that the polling is
one tool amongst many to shape the proposal for voters and that
Council is committed to proceeding with library improvements.
Further staff shall return to the Council with a report from which the
Council will select between Options 2, 2a, 3 or 3a for the Mitchell
12/11/06 101-170
Park Library expansion. Implicit in this motion is the rejection now
of Option 1.
3. Approve the highest tier collections recommendations of LAC
including the growth of the collection consistent with the expansion
of the Mitchell Park Library.
4. Approve the technology recommendation of the LAC.
5. Table the discussion of staffing recommendations (and staff costs)
until the City Auditor’s report is complete and ask for LAC review
and comment on that report. (This has already been acted upon by
Council but is included here for clarity.)
6. Direct staff to use this report and its community support to
investigate funding sources for both capital and staffing expenses.
The Council is interested in looking at a variety of funding sources
but that investigation should not delay taking a bond, parcel tax or
other financing measure(s) to the voters.
7. Support the staff position to refer the possibility of City/School
partnerships for library services to the City/School Liaison
Committee. However, these discussions shall not delay taking a tax
measure to the voters.
8. Ask staff to carefully detail the components of the cost models such
that building, Fixtures, Furniture and Equipment (FF&E), escalation
and contingency costs are clear and consistent in format between
the Libraries and Public Safety Building.
9. Ask staff to return to Council with an updated timeline that takes
into account possible changes in election schedule for 2008.
Mr. Baum stated Item No. 3 needed to be moved to a later date.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded
by Morton, to reject the staff recommendation to begin polling and select
Option 3b for the Mitchell Park Library/Community Center expansion.
Council Member Morton stated separating the Libraries from the Community
Center would divide the population.
Council Member Mossar stated there had not been a sufficient amount of
education surrounding the issue to support an accurate poll.
Mayor Kleinberg stated the funding portion of Item No. 3 would be discussed
in Agenda Item No. 10.
Council Member Morton asked the City Attorney whether Item No. 3 should
be removed from the motion on the floor.
12/11/06 101-171
Mr. Baum noted most of Item No. 3 belonged in Agenda Item No. 9 and also
in a portion of Agenda Item No. 10. The vote order was at the discretion of
the Mayor.
Council Member Mossar asked whether the motion before the Council was on
Agenda Item No. 9 or 10.
Mr. Baum stated the motion was on Agenda Item No. 9.
Council Member Mossar stated Agenda Item No. 10 was about the Mitchell
Park Library and the predominant portion of the motion was regarding
Mitchell Park Library.
Council Member Barton stated the intention was whether the items needed
to be voted on separately or as a whole.
Mayor Kleinberg requested Mr. Klein to redefine the amendment on the floor
regarding polling.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN BY MAKER AND SECONDER.
MOTION WITHDRAWN BY MAKER AND SECONDER
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Barton, to take the following actions:
1. The Council thanks and laud the LAC for its hard work, dedication and
vision in creating the LSMAR Report and the Council also thanks and
acknowledges the hard work of the Library staff, City Manager’s Office,
Public Works Department and our consultants in the work to manage
and complete the LSMAR Report.
3. Approve the proposed facility improvements contained in the Group 4
Report and LSMAR for Main, Downtown and College Terrace libraries.
4. Approve the highest tier collections recommendations of LAC including
the growth of the collection consistent with the expansion of the
Mitchell Park Library.
5. Approve the technology recommendations of the LAC.
7. Direct staff to use this report and its community support to investigate
funding sources for both capital and staffing expenses. The Council is
interested in looking at a variety of funding sources but that
investigation should not delay taking a bond, parcel tax or other
financing measure(s) to the voters.
8. Support the staff position to refer the possibility of City/School
partnerships for library services to the City/School Liaison Committee.
12/11/06 101-172
However, these discussions shall not delay taking a tax measure to the
voters.
9. Ask staff to carefully detail the components of the cost models such
that building, FF&E, escalation and contingency costs are clear and
consistent in format between the Libraries and Public Safety Building.
10. Ask staff to return to Council with an updated timeline that takes into
account possible changes in election schedule for 2008.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
Council Member Drekmeier asked Council Member Barton whether keeping
the existing Library and Community Center, and expanding the Library was
the less expensive option.
Council Member Barton stated the less expensive option was Option Two
(New Mitchell Park Library).
Council Member Drekmeier clarified the reason Option One (Addition to
existing Mitchell Park Library) was withdrawn was because it was the least
attractive and the second most expensive option.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Morton, to reject the
staff recommendation to begin polling and select Option 3b for the Mitchell
Park Library/Community Center expansion.
Council Member Morton stated the community would support an election for
a single project.
Council Member Cordell stated the election would not be a single project. It
would be for a Public Safety Building and upgrading the Libraries.
Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison stated she met with the polling firm
and shared the project background. The firm recommended preliminary
polling to assess general public attitude towards local government.
Council Member Cordell stated if there had there been a focus group in lieu
of a poll, it would have been less costly and more effective.
Ms. Harrison stated the option of a focus group had not been broached. A
Request for Proposal (RFP) would be sent out and the option of a focus
group could be added.
Council Member Mossar stated the previous polls were viewed by the public
as being biased.
12/11/06 101-173
Ms. Harrison stated the polling firm suggested the poll questions and
responses be generated to the newspapers to be viewed by the public once
the polls were closed. The firm also recommended a sub-committee to the
Council to advise the staff on the poll questions.
Council Member Mossar asked Mr. Baum at what point did polling become
advocacy.
Mr. Baum stated the City did not permit any form of advocacy; pollers
gathered information but could not tell people how to vote.
Council Member Klein was concerned that polling caused more confusion to
the issue.
Council Member Morton stated it was too soon to poll. The project(s)
needed to be formed and then brought to the community for polling.
Council Member Drekmeier stated he supported 2A.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto stated the City was better prepared to poll for the
current library project than four years ago.
Mayor Kleinberg stated in previous years she had heard the community’s
concern about the cost to the community.
MOTION FAILED 7-2, Klein, Morton yes.
MOTION: Council Member Barton moved, seconded by Beecham, to
approve Item 2a: Approve the staff recommendation to begin polling on the
library and public safety buildings with added language that the polling is
one tool amongst many to shape the proposal for voters and that Council is
committed to proceeding with library improvements. Further, staff shall
return to the Council with a report from which the Council will select
between Options 2a, 2b, 3a or 3b (CMR:434:06) for the Mitchell Park Library
expansion. Implicit in this motion is the rejection now of Option 1a and 1b.
Mr. Baum stated the vote was on Agenda Item No. 10 with consideration for
the motion 2a with the adjustments that had been made.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
REPORTS OF OFFICIALS
11. City Council Direction to Identify One of Two City-Owned Site Options
for Auto Dealer Retention and Expansion and Direct the City Manager
12/11/06 101-174
and City Attorney to Work with the Director of Administrative Services
and Director of Planning and Community Environment to Negotiate a
Lease That Will Retain Anderson Honda in Palo Alto
City Manager Frank Benest stated auto dealers were producing two million
dollars in annual sales tax revenue. In the past five years, Palo Alto has lost
three dealerships. Council had directed staff to work with the remaining
dealerships to retain them and help them grow in the City of Palo Alto. Staff
had investigated available sites along the 101 Corridor and City- owned sites
that would be used as auto dealer sites. Anderson Honda had come forward
with a proposed growth plan to lease one of two City-owned parcels.
John Andersen stated Honda Corporate required that franchises expand their
facilities. Anderson Honda was currently four acres short of land
requirements, and eight thousand feet short in building requirements. By
2010, Honda Corporate expected their franchise to be standardized. It was
proposed to lease the City-owned parcel at the end of Embarcadero Road by
the Airport. The second option was the treatment plant parcel. The location
would be used as a storage facility for vehicles with a building for new
vehicle preparation and detailing which would provide the land and building
requirements.
Mr. Benest said by leasing the site to Anderson Honda, an additional three to
seven hundred thousand dollars in sales tax revenue plus the lease revenue
would be generated. Staff recommended for the Council to identify land use for the retention of Anderson Honda and authorize the City Manager and City
Attorney to negotiate an appropriate lease to retain Anderson Honda in the
City of Palo Alto.
Council Member Drekmeier asked Mr. Andersen whether the site would be
illuminated.
Mr. Andersen stated there would be low level security lights.
Council Member Morton asked whether the Airport site was under the master
lease with the County of Santa Clara.
Mr. Benest stated that the Airport parcel was part of the leased land and
would need to be negotiated with the County.
Council Member Morton asked whether the County would expect a portion of
the lease revenue from Anderson Honda.
Mr. Benest stated the lease revenue was a minor portion of the revenue
generated by the retention of the dealership. The revenue sharing from the
12/11/06 101-175
lease with the County would be negotiated with the County during the
meeting with the City Manager, the City Attorney, and the County.
Council Member Morton asked whether sharing funds would be probable for
either site with the County or with Los Altos.
City Attorney Gary Baum stated the Airport was fully leased to the County.
Therefore, all of the lease revenue would go to the County. The revenue
generated by the lease at the treatment plant would be split with Los Altos.
Council Member Morton clarified when the City moved on the Airport site the
lease was negotiated with the County to include sub-leasing and, therefore,
revenue would be split.
Mr. Benest stated the City wanted to retain the dealership and there were
two possible sites available to accomplish the task.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kishimoto moved, seconded by Beecham, to direct
the City Manager and the City Attorney to initiate appropriate negotiations
with Los Altos for the Los Altos Treatment Plant site for the auto dealer
usage and negotiate with Anderson Honda.
Mayor Kleinberg asked Mr. Baum whether the motion was to develop a lease
with the City as partial owners of the treatment plant.
Mr. Baum stated the City did not have control of the treatment plant site.
Mayor Kleinberg requested the motion language be changed.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto stated the dealership was important to the City. She
indicated her choice would be the treatment plant which complied with the
de-urbanization of the Baylands.
Council Member Beecham asked what the options were in gaining control
over the treatment plant.
Mr. Baum stated Los Altos had gone into closed session on the issue and it
was likely the matter would not be resolved for a few years.
Council Member Beecham asked Mr. Andersen what impact that timeframe
would have on his decision to stay in Palo Alto.
Ralph Britton, Palo Alto Airport Association, 240 Rinconada Avenue, stated
he did not support the Airport location for the dealership.
12/11/06 101-176
Emily Renzel, 1056 Forest Avenue, stated she did not support the lease of
City property.
Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, stated he supported the treatment plant location
for the dealership.
Council Member Drekmeier asked if there were other potential uses for the
site at Greer and Embarcadero competing against the resource recovery
center.
Mr. Benest stated it had been discussed that the Greer and Embarcadero
location would be used for some of the City’s environmental services
locations.
Council Member Drekmeier stated the Los Altos Treatment Plant would be
the preferred location with a minimum effect on the Baylands.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Drekmeier moved that the City commit
$10,000 to the eradication of invasive plants at the Baylands.
AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND
Council Member Beecham stated if there were appropriate budget funds
available to support the motion that would be fine.
Mayor Kleinberg suggested leaving the motion as stated.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto stated her support for the motion.
Council Member Morton stated he did not support discussion with the County
or with the treatment plant possibly taking a few years to make a decision.
Could the PASCO site possibly be a potential site.
Mr. Benest stated the PASCO site was not large enough to meet the Honda
Corporate criteria.
Council Member Mossar asked Mr. Benest to comment on the other available
privately-held location.
Mr. Benest stated the cost for leasing private land was too great.
Council Member Mossar asked if it were possible to consider redevelopment
of a desired private location for the use of retaining the dealership.
12/11/06 101-177
Mr. Benest stated the City was not currently able to establish redevelopment
area in the City.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto inquired on the potential of transfer development
instead of redevelopment.
Director of Planning and Community Environment Steve Emslie stated
transfer development was not usable in that scenario.
Vice Mayor Kishimoto asked staff and the Planning and Transportation
Commission to explore the Transfer Development Rights (TDR) process.
Mr. Benest stated staff would explore any idea that assisted in retaining
Anderson Honda in the City of Palo Alto.
Mayor Kleinberg asked whether the Palo Alto Harbor had potential for the
Anderson Honda site and if it was available.
Mr. Benest stated he was unaware of the availability of the Palo Alto Harbor.
Mayor Kleinberg stated the best potential site for the auto dealership was
the treatment plant location.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
COUNCIL COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND REPORTS FROM CONFERENCES
Council Member Drekmeier mentioned that the Mayor’s Green Ribbon Task
Force Report was included in the packet; it was an excellent report. He
noted he supported the 195 Page Mill Project because of the 20 percent
below market rate units.
Council Member Mossar reported she attended the National League of Cities
Annual Conference in Reno, Nevada, the prior week and her committee
successfully pushed through its policies on global climate change.
Mayor Kleinberg noted she also attended the National League of Cities
Conference and spoke on a panel regarding the Palo Alto Family Resource Center, which was well accepted.
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:37 p.m.
12/11/06 101-178
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto
Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing
Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the
preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing
Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the
meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to
during regular office hours.
12/11/06 101-179