HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-30 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting May 30, 2000
1. Joint Meeting with Palo Alto Unified School District re Overview of the Present and Future Delivery of Community Services to Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Unified School District and Consideration of a Service Delivery Master Plan Process..........................................................195
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS..........................................................209
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. to a Closed Session...........................................................209
2. Conference with City Attorney--Potential/Anticipated Litigation..........................................................209
3. Conference with Real Property Negotiator..........................................................210
FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m...........................................................210
05/30/00 90-194
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:05 p.m. COUNCIL PRESENT: Beecham, Burch, Eakins, Fazzino, Kleinberg, Kniss, Lytle, Mossar, Ojakian PAUSD PRESENT: Barton, Kroymann, Lowell, Price, Tuomy SPECIAL MEETING 1. Joint Meeting with Palo Alto Unified School District re Overview of the Present and Future Delivery of Community Services to Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Unified School District and Consideration of a Service Delivery Master Plan Process Mayor Kniss said the Council would hold an overview meeting with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) Board to discuss how the City and the PAUSD could deliver services jointly. The PAUSD included all of Stanford University and part of the City of Los Altos Hills. PAUSD Board President Cathy Kroymann said the PAUSD’s immediate problem was finding a third middle school. In the search process, the PAUSD realized that there were some long-term issues present such as other school sites that were currently housing community facilities and programs. The PAUSD believed it was important to begin the process of working together to take a long-term look at the enrollment, projections, and needs of the community as a whole. The PAUSD was aware its mission was to educate the children; however, extracurricular activities were also important. She attended a symposium in Sacramento entitled “Schools as Centers of Communities.” The PAUSD welcomed the opportunity to begin to look at all of the needs of the community. City Manager Frank Benest said PAUSD School Superintendent Don Phillips and staff were proposing a joint master plan because the Board of Education and the City Council had both identified the need for a closer partnership between the City and the PAUSD to address the needs of its community. Developing a joint master plan for school and community facilities was one of the top five priorities for the Council as identified at the Council retreat. Superintendent Phillips would discuss student enrollment projections and related school facility needs. Community Services Director Paul Thiltgen would discuss a number of community service
05/30/00 90-195
and community facility needs. He would wrap up the discussion with staff’s proposal to move forward. In the early and mid-1980s, the PAUSD experienced a significant drop in enrollment and sold or leased a number of school sites to the City. The City used the school sites as facilities from which to directly provide children, youth, senior, and family services or leased the facilities to other organizations that provided an array of community services. The school sites for community services were critical in south Palo Alto. Three significant school sites for community services, Cubberley, Terman, and Ventura Community Centers, were located in south Palo Alto. The only other community center in south Palo Alto was located in Mitchell Park. With an increased school-aged population, the PAUSD needed to reclaim one or several school sites or find other sites. The community was faced with a complex issue. Both an excellent educational system and outstanding community services were directly linked to the quality of life in Palo Alto. A growth in jobs and housing, plus changing demographics created higher demands on both education and community services. The City faced higher community expectations on education and community services for children, youths, seniors, and families. Moreover, there was less available land for new schools and community facilities in a built out city such as Palo Alto. Skyrocketing real estate costs further complicated the issue. PAUSD School Superintendent Don Phillips said creative solutions were needed to address quality of life issues not only for the students but also for the broader community. Student enrollment in 1967 was approximately 15,575 students. There was a decline in 1989 to 7,452 students and an increase in later years to the present with approximately 10,000 students. The City could potentially increase to 14,000 students by 2011. Elementary, middle, and high school enrollment was projected to increase through the first decade of the new century. Between 1991 and 2000 there was an increase of 2,076 students. With the median projections at the elementary school level, the PAUSD would need an additional elementary school. With a high projection, the PAUSD would need two or three additional elementary schools. At the middle school level, the PAUSD exceeded capacity. With the high projections in 2011, the PAUSD would fill more than three middle schools with close to 1,000 students. At the high school level, the PAUSD would exceed capacity and would have to open a small high school or open a third high school to manage the growth. Potential sites the PAUSD considered were Fremont Hills school site where Pinewood was located, the Garland site located near Jordan, the Cubberley site, the Greendell site, the PAUSD Office on Churchill Avenue, the Terman site, the Ventura, and Deer Creek Road site which was a proposal by Stanford University for the middle school. The timeline for the third middle school called for hiring a principal in the summer of 2000, with plans set for September 2000. The PAUSD would renovate the Garland site beginning in January 2001 and open in August 2001. Garland would be an interim middle school site while the community waited for a permanent site. In
05/30/00 90-196
August 2002, the PAUSD would open with a sixth and seventh grade at the Garland site and conduct renovations in October 2002. Renovations would be completed in July 2003. The PAUSD was looking at the Garland site as a 13th elementary school once it stopped serving as an interim middle school site. Greendell could be a 14th site, and Fremont Hills could be a 15th elementary site. The PAUSD considered adding permanent construction for 1,800 high school students. The Cubberley site was considered for a small high school program as an option. If enrollment exceeded 1,800 high school students, the PAUSD would consider opening a comprehensive third high school. Community Services Director Paul Thiltgen said some of the same problems the PAUSD faced were also faced by the City which was providing facilities for its services. He reviewed the sites the City obtained from the PAUSD to give an indication of what programs were present. The Terman site was where the Jewish Community Center (JCC) was located. The JCC was one of two full-service community services in south Palo Alto. The JCC was the only center for activities in the southwest part of Palo Alto and provided the only City library service for southwest Palo Alto. The Cubberley site operated at near-capacity. Over 80 agencies and individuals leased or rented at the Cubberley site. Foothills College had a site at Cubberley. Over 400 separate events were held at Cubberley each year. The Ventura Center was the home of Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) offices and an infant, child, and toddler program. The Ventura Center had a private child care program, a police substation, teen center, and activities. The Ventura Center also provided community meeting space needs and an athletic field. Athletic fields were a major problem the City faced. Between the schools and parks, there was not much green land that was not used most of the time. Eighty-five different user groups representing 23,000 players utilized the athletic fields. Part of the problem was that there was a change in the use pattern. The athletic fields were used not only by the children, but also by the young adults, the middle-aged adults, and the seniors. Nontraditional sports were increasing. Many facilities within the City were old and too small for many programs. The average age of a City facility was 45 years, some were older. Cubberley ran at 95 percent capacity during prime hours. Lucie Stern and Mitchell Center turned away 75 percent of requests for rooms. One in four requests for childcare were successful in the City. There were not enough finances to support the child care program. The City partnered with PAUSD on many issues. When the City went through the leasing covenant not to develop a few years prior, the City maintained fields for the community, created childcare sites, worked on the Terman lease purchase, and the Ventura site which was put to community use. In addition, the City took on a joint project to maintain PAUSD fields. The City provided school crossing guards and school resource officers, The Children’s Theatre, the Arts Center, and Junior Museum programs operated in both City facilities and school sites to help provide additional
05/30/00 90-197
services for the students. The HSRAP program provided on-site adolescent counseling services on the high school sites and the middle school sites. The Comprehensive Plan spoke specifically that the City should work directly with the PAUSD on both facility and service issues. Finally, the City contributed $6 million to the schools. Mr. Benest emphasized four key issues, 1) the school-community facility issue was a major challenge; 2) the City and the PAUSD needed to work as partners in addressing the challenge; 3) the City and the PAUSD needed to take a long-term and comprehensive view as opposed to a short-term and piecemeal approach; and 4) the City needed to emphasize creative solutions for land use and facilities design in terms of access, safety, and joint use, and be creative in looking at long-term funding. Mayor Kniss said the Council’s and the PAUSD’s goal would be to either direct the City Manager to go forward with the master plan or to not proceed with a master plan. Council Member Mossar asked what the City’s mechanism was in evaluating an impact that the Council made in a land use decision on the PAUSD and what vehicles were available to the City to protect the PAUSD resources. Mr. Benest said since the passage of Proposition 1A, the City could not deny a residential development on the basis of the school impact. Proposition 1A was primarily focused on additional bonding capacity at the state level for additional school development. A part of Proposition 1A was the City could not deny developments as they related to schools. Proposition 1A put the City in a difficult situation. While there were still school impact fees, in many cases, the fee did not cover the impact of the development. PAUSD Board Member John Tuomy noted that Mr. Benest made clear that development could not restrict schools because it would tax the infrastructure of the community. Mr. Benest said as part of the City’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), if the development impacted any number of infrastructure, system the City could make considerations in terms of denying or shaping the proposal. The City could not legally deny a development solely on the basis on the impact to schools; however, the City could be an advocate in terms of the impacts on the school system. Mr. Phillips said many people asked why the City could not do a better job in predicting the future. There were issues that were difficult to predict such as the “dot com” revolution and the economy taking off. Depending upon the land use decisions made by Stanford University, the City of Los Altos Hills, and the City of Palo Alto, PAUSD’s enrollment could either increase or decrease.
05/30/00 90-198
Enrollment projections, depending upon how much in-fill was realized over time, could have an impact in the type of housing and other needs within the broader community. Part of the master planning process would be to think through what the long-term plan for development in the community was, what the implications looked like for the schools, and what could be planned on. Mr. Tuomy asked to what degree did the enrollment projections include significant in-fill housing and multi-family housing in Palo Alto. Mr. Phillips said the enrollment projections included the projects approved through the City. The PAUSD worked directly with the City in terms of formulating the projections. Potential future use, redevelopment, or deployment of land for other uses were not included in the enrollment projections. Council Member Kleinberg asked whether the enrollment projections included the Stanford General Use Permit (GUP) proposals. Mr. Phillips said yes. Mayor Kniss clarified that anything the City suggested was included in the enrollment projections. The projects were not all approved but were suggested or could possibly be on the horizon. Mr. Phillips said the PAUSD tried to develop aggressive projections so it could plan for contingencies if in fact the projects came on line. A project was included in the enrollment projections if the PAUSD was aware of a project. Gail Price, PAUSD Board Member, asked to what degree did the school system utilize the Comprehensive Plan as a planning tool. The Comprehensive Plan identified various growth scenarios in terms of capacity for residential housing. She asked at what point was the Comprehensive Plan looked at as part of the planning process. Dr. Bob Golton, Business Manager, PAUSD, said the PAUSD employed Lapkoff and Gobalt Demographic Research, Inc. (LGDR) to perform the enrollment growth projections. LGDR used the major projects as discreet events in its projections over time. Smaller projects were fed into the projection and were assumed the projects would continue at approximately the same level over time. Council Member Fazzino said the question was long-term versus short-term projections. He was in the school system when the enrollment increased in the early 1970s. Many people in the community were surprised by the dramatic decline in enrollment during the 1970s. He asked the PAUSD how much time was needed in order to make knowledgeable planning decisions regarding new facilities.
05/30/00 90-199
Mr. Phillips said the broader national demographics such as the census study could be researched in terms of the longer-term trends. In the year 2011, the community could begin to see the fall-off of the Baby Boom; therefore, one could anticipate enrollments potentially decreasing. The PAUSD was also aware that some of the neighboring districts had the same kind of growth as the PAUSD. Similar patterns were noticed in the 1970s before the downturn in enrollment. The PAUSD was attempting to develop a set of contingency plans. The challenge was being able to dedicate land for other use which thereby would reduce the PAUSD’s flexibility in the future. The PAUSD understood the dedication of land for other uses might be a requirement in terms of moving forward with all community needs both for students and for the broader community services. He assumed that looking at how many sites the PAUSD would need, what the longer-term trend lines looked like, and what would happen if in fact land was dedicated and a school site was taken out of commission was part of the master plan. Council Member Fazzino asked how much time the PAUSD would need if it were given new and reliable information regarding a major change in enrollment, and action was needed to change the nature of a school or series of programs. Mr. Phillips said approximately three years. Council Member Lytle asked what the PAUSD was doing to give parents more certainty about its ability to project. Mr. Phillips said the PAUSD reworked the fundamental assumptions going into the enrollment projections and would have the aid of the census data; however, in terms of its own internal work with LGDR the PAUSD reworked all the assumptions on the conservative side, where before assumptions tended to be dramatically underestimated. He noted the prior two years were falling close to the median projection rather than exceeding the high projection. Council Member Mossar said the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) set target housing starts for each community in the Bay Area to handle population projections. She asked whether the City and the PAUSD factored in population growth as part of the decision process in determining future needs. Mr. Benest said staff was in the process of updating the zoning ordinance. As part of the process, staff had to take into consideration the regional Fair Share Housing Allocation (FSHA). As the City and PAUSD jointly developed a master plan, housing starts needed to be focused on. Staff would be utilizing the ABAG projections. Mr. Phillips said the City was not required to directly produce the FSHA; rather, the City was required to facilitate the City’s fair
05/30/00 90-200
share. Typically the fair share was greater than most communities could produce. Staff could provide data to ABAG to suggest that its numbers were not accurate. The negotiation was difficult as ABAG spread its projections over the entire region. Council Member Mossar asked whether the PAUSD participated in the process and whether ABAG’s projections were used in its planning. Dr. Golton said the demographers reviewed the numbers; however, the way the demographers projected was based on cohort survival and birthrate. Mr. Benest believed the numbers from the Planning Department were more realistic than the ABAG and FSHA numbers. He believed it was beneficial that the City was cooperating in terms of the projections. PAUSD Board President Cathy Kroymann said comments made at that evening’s meeting pointed out the need for a master plan and the fact that the master plan needed to incorporate flexibility. When the master plan was developed, the City and PAUSD needed to ensure the contingencies were built into the master plan, that it was not just a fixed plan, and there were ways to make changes in worse case scenarios. PAUSD Board Member Mandy Lowell supported a process where there was a more collaborative relationship. She suggested the master plan have a feedback loop so once information was provided, there was a mechanism to provide feedback regarding changes. Mr. Phillips said the PAUSD would continually work with the City and review the City’s numbers annually as the PAUSD updated its enrollment projections based upon each year’s incoming kindergarten class. Vice Mayor Eakins said the assumption planners made was the higher the price of housing, the less likely it was that there would be large families; however, that was not the case in the City. She asked whether the PAUSD assumed with the high cost of housing, there would be smaller families with less children. Mr. Phillips said the problem was that if decisions were made based upon the current trend, many faulty judgements would be made, hence the importance of reviewing multiple sources, contingency plans, and long-term planning. Council Member Kleinberg was impressed with the amount of preparation that the PAUSD and City staff did. She understood the fastest growing population within the City was the senior citizens. She wanted to be sure that as the City did master planning, it took into account all of the services needed including smaller, affordable housing for people on fixed incomes. There were many
05/30/00 90-201
nonprofits that provided services to the community and enhanced services the City or the PAUSD could provide. She called upon the City to do an evaluation of the projected needs of the nonprofit community. She suggested beginning with when leases were due, the required square footage, and square footage projected for the nonprofits needs so the City would have a better understanding of the services provided. PAUSD Board Member John Barton asked whether the City’s master plan involved thinking through the range of services and re-thinking services in terms of broader community changes. Council Member Ojakian said the Council had an all or nothing proposition in terms of land. He asked whether the Council and PAUSD would get to the point where they shared reviewing of sites and development and talking about multi-story building to maximize the limited land. Mayor Kniss was on the PAUSD in the 80s. She had promised that no sites would be sold at that time; however, sites were sold before her time and the PAUSD agreed not to sell other sites. Of the sites still available, another 4,000 children could be incorporated. She asked whether the available sites would enable the PAUSD to proceed without taking down schools and putting them up again. Mr. Phillips asked whether the Cubberley site was included. Mayor Kniss said yes. She included the Cubberley site because the Council noted there would be a time when the PAUSD would need to utilize the Cubberley site; therefore, the City would not dispose of the Cubberley site. Jerome Coonen, 4035 Orme Street, encouraged the Council to cooperate with the PAUSD on negotiating with the Elks for public use of a portion of its property. There was a well-publicized increase of interconnected City-school issues such as the location in southwest Palo Alto of a third middle school, the future of the Terman site, the future of the JCC, and the location of the PAUSD, and possible money to relocate it. All issues affected his family. Cathy Jensen, 1365 Forest Avenue, spoke on behalf of Rebecca Stolpa. She urged the Council and PAUSD to postpone the decision regarding how to solve the problem with overcrowded schools and to give the citizens more time to develop a course of action which may financially enable the City to broaden its list of options. The door should not be closed on possible solutions without exploring a few more alternatives. There were financial resources within the City that were yet untapped. There were individuals willing to commit large sums of money for the future of the schools and the City. Palo Alto was at a crossroads. The City and the PAUSD indicated their desire to create a united vision for Palo Alto. She applauded the cooperative interaction; however, if the Council
05/30/00 90-202
and PAUSD provided their community with an overall vision, before committing to over-compromised decisions, the citizenry would come together financially and organizationally to make the vision happen. She urged a creation of a foundation to allow the financial wealth of the community to be used for the future of its schools and City. Diane Foote, 734 San Jude Drive, said the Gunn High School Parent Student Teacher Association (PTSA) voted to support the PAUSD in its idea of opening Terman as a site for a middle school. She hoped the Comprehensive Plan would address safety issues. One of the reasons the PTSA approved of the third middle school site in the Terman area was because it would eliminate the children crossing railroad tracks, Alma Street, and El Camino Real. Karen White, 146 Walter Hays Drive, agreed that the Elk’s land be acquired for a public facility site and also accommodate the relocated JCC. Cynthia Cannady, 1982 Louis Road, opposed any plan that involved a relinquishment of the public’s right to 25 Churchill Avenue or any other land asset that could be used for the City’s schools to any private entity. Fifteen years prior, Palo Alto planned to sell or commit to a long-term lease for the Jordan Middle School property. Palo Altans objected to the plan and defeated it. In retrospect, selling or entering into a long-term lease for Jordan Middle School would have been a mistake. She was concerned that the City was rushing and taking short-term views. She was concerned with traffic and crowding at Palo Alto High School. Traffic was gridlocked at Palo Alto High School. The City could not accommodate more traffic, parking, or users on the site. The Council seemed interested in limiting public debate on the topic. She requested the Council and the PAUSD disclose any financial interest from any persons or entities who had interest in financial or land transactions at issue in the master plan. Greer Wolfson, 222 Sequoia Avenue, was concerned about the traffic situation in her neighborhood. Elizabeth Allyn, 4186 Wilmar Drive, asked whether the City was taking back the Terman site only to give up the Palo Alto High School site. She asked whether the Council could sculpt the lease of the Palo Alto High School land to fit one party and keep other interested parties from bidding on the site. The California Education Code Articles 17455 and 17484 stated specific procedures in the sale or lease of public school sites which included timed guidelines for public notification and the opening of sealed and oral bids. The State Legislature thought so highly of the procedures that it amended the procedures in January 1998 to be sure the local citizens would be allowed to participate in the process. She asked why the Council would give preferential treatment to a regional center.
05/30/00 90-203
Bob Gillespie, 384 Whitclem Drive, said the buzz word a few months prior was affordable housing. Presently, the buzz word switched to schools. He lived in the Charleston corridor near the Elks Lodge. The residents of the Charleston corridor had discussion with the Elks Lodge and had a day school added. He recently learned that a plan for the Elks Lodge to build housing was placed on the back burner. He noted the traffic had increased within the City. He asked whether the Council looked into utilizing the school year round. Class size could be cut down and money saved. Leannah Hunt, 245 Lytton Avenue, represented the Government Relations Committee of the Association of Realtors. She applauded the decisions to address long-term planning issues. Palo Alto faced a different set of enrollment projections than those proposed by Jim Vann in 1984. She participated in many meetings regarding the closure of schools and consolidation. The realtor community recognized many homeowner and tenant interests and did not want a repeat performance of the previous decision-making process. There were many opportunities in the City and the realtor community recognized the land issues were complex. However, the land presented many challenges and opportunities. She believed the 25 Churchill Avenue property was the endowment the PAUSD had since it owned the property, and entering into any long-term lease would limit flexibility with regard to future needs. She urged all interested parties to work together to solve the problem regarding the limited number of facilities and the City’s growing population. She believed the availability of the eight-acre Elks property presented a unique opportunity. Joseph Hirsch, 4149 Georgia Avenue, supported the concept of a joint master plan. He was pleased to see the Council and PAUSD together in one meeting. He was concerned with processes and the comment in the joint release on May 23, 2000, by Mr. Benest and Mr. Phillips. A joint recommendation based on ongoing discussions among the PAUSD, the City, Stanford, and the JCC was returned to Council and the PAUSD to accommodate a middle school and a feasible and affordable relocation site in Palo Alto for the JCC. He urged the Council and the PAUSD to take consideration of the valuable services the JCC provided the community. Mark Shepherd, 1556 Madrone Drive, was concerned about input from the Palo Alto High School students and future Palo Alto High School students. He believed the message being delivered to the students was a mixed message. He agreed that there was a need for a third middle school; however, he asked whether the City could sacrifice the high school education by splitting up Palo Alto High School. Pete Slosberg, 27100 Moody Road, Los Altos Hills, represented the JCC. The JCC was a valuable community asset. Palo Alto citizens from seniors to children utilized the wide variety of programs offered at the JCC. Thousands of Palo Alto residents relied on the
05/30/00 90-204
JCC for important community services. The JCC supported the continued existence of the JCC and urged the Council and the PAUSD to ensure continued existence and uninterrupted service of the JCC in Palo Alto. Nancy Shepherd, 1556 Madrone, supported the investigation of purchasing the available land at the Elks Lodge which was approximately five acres. She cared about the future of the schools and community. She hoped the Council would take advantage of working with organizations to purchase key parcels of south Palo Alto to develop future infrastructure as Palo Alto continued to build out the available space. Kurt Reitman, 2740 El Camino Real, read a letter to the Council and PAUSD. The letter had approximately 20 signatures on it. As involved members of the Palo Alto community, the citizens wished to add their voice to the discussion that took place regarding a new Palo Alto Middle School and the continued existence of the JCC. The need for a new Palo Alto Middle School was in question, with only the location remaining an issue. The citizens supported a new middle school at the Terman site currently occupied by the JCC. The JCC was a valuable community asset. The proposal to allow the JCC to move to the 25 Churchill Avenue location was a winning solution. Such a move would solve the middle school dilemma and guarantee the continuing existence of valuable programs offered to all Palo Altans. The Council and PAUSD were encouraged to go forward with the compromise. Lane Liroff, 4221 Wilkie Way, said there was a residential community that bordered on the Elks Lodge property. He was disappointed by the suggestion to move the JCC to the Elks Lodge property. He urged the Council and the PAUSD to research other alternatives. Dan Logan, 126 E. Charleston Road, supported the Council and PAUSD working together. The YMCA was a close collaborator with both the City and PAUSD in ensuring services the people of Palo Alto needed were provided. Approximately 50 percent of the young people in the district enrolled in a YMCA program. The YMCA’s two largest programs were conducted on sites run by the PAUSD and the City. The YMCA’s basketball program increased 50 percent and the summer day camp program doubled. The overall membership served increased from 3,000 members to 11,000 in the past five years. More land was needed. He believed the City should communicate with Stanford regarding available land. Christine Shambora, 236 Tennyson Avenue, commended the Council and PAUSD for embarking on a collaborative effort to find solutions to the challenges the City faced. She believed any land exchange under consideration was only a short-term solution and not a good one for the long-term. What the City needed was more facilities and land.
05/30/00 90-205
Deborah Ju, President, Charleston Meadows Association (CMA), 371 Whitclem Drive, said the Charleston Road and Arastradero Road corridor was one of the most heavily congested roads in the City. The corridor was often at a standstill during the morning commute. A significant percentage of the traffic during the 8 a.m. peak was due to the fact that there were currently seven schools along the corridor. Some of the schools served neighborhoods, some citywide enrollment, and some had regional draw. The CMA had grave concerns regarding opening another middle school site along Charleston and Arastradero Roads. The corridor already had one-half of middle school and high school students traveling it. The new middle school should be more centrally located. Regardless of whether the new middle school was located on the other side of El Camino Real, cars driving students to the school would be on the corridor after the children were dropped off. Larry Klein, Board Chairman, Avenidas, 872 Seale Avenue, said the Ventura site was owned by the City and the PAUSD had an option to reacquire it at fair market value. PACCC was located at the Ventura site. He said the Council needed to focus on services provided to the pre-schoolers, afterschool children, and seniors. Heidi Stein, 4134 Amaranta Court, supported the Terman site as a new middle school and the JCC relocation to south Palo Alto. An issue being lost was that the PAUSD was under time pressure. The City and Stanford had a responsibility along with the PAUSD. She urged the PAUSD to not make a bad decision because of time limitations. She urged the City to take the responsibility to link development to the infrastructure needed. Bob Woo, 557 Maybell Avenue, urged the Council and PAUSD to make a decision quickly. He wanted to see school land remain school land. Denise Schoenberger, 125 Primrose Way, requested the Council and PAUSD make decisions and plans towards acquiring more land and space for the needs of the City’s children and families. Maryanne Welton, 660 Kendall Avenue, commended the Council and PAUSD for their joint effort on a master plan. She asked the Council and PAUSD to keep in mind the needs of the entire community as the plans were developed. She urged the Council to look at the options to increase density, maximize usage, and provide more services on less land. Becky Epstein, 256 Edlee Avenue, supported the continued existence of the JCC in Palo Alto. She was concerned about any proposal or suggestion that the JCC be moved to the Elks Lodge site. The Elks Lodge site was an inappropriate site that was next door to the Hyatt site. She reminded the Council that Hyatt was planning a hotel and conference facility and a housing project. Even if the Hyatt project were cut in half, her neighborhood could not absorb
05/30/00 90-206
the impact of two large, intensive land uses such as the JCC and the Hyatt. Brian Dahlquist, 1595 Mariposa Avenue, supported the formulation of a master plan. The Council had an opportunity to create new community and school resources for the first time in decades. He hoped the Council would take the opportunity to improve the quality of life for both students and residents. He believed more land was appropriate for the community. He urged the Council to consider high density, multi-story facilities. Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, recalled when Cubberley was closed the site was chosen because if either of the other high schools were closed, the land would revert to Stanford. He asked if the JCC was relocated to PAUSD property whether the land would also revert to Stanford. Mayor Kniss indicated the decision on any real estate issue should be made in open session. He believed an open session was a good idea. He doubted any Stanford sites, such as Deer Creek or sites along the El Camino Real, would be chosen if the decision was made in open session. In terms of financing, the Utilities User Tax in Palo Alto subsidized the education of students, Stanford faculty, and residents of Los Altos Hills in the PAUSD. At the time the Utilities User Tax was adopted the community was informed $1 million would be applied to other General Fund purposes. Currently the City was spending more money in cost to the PAUSD than it was receiving in Utilities Users Tax. Predictions of future enrollment would be better if students from outside the district, Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills, and within Stanford segmented the predictions. Mayor Kniss clarified the site the Council and PAUSD were speaking of was not on Stanford property. Dorthea Almond, 4135 Old Trace Road, said the JCC and the middle school were two worthy institutions. She suggested a different solution which would create space for the increased school population and at the same time preserve the JCC in its present space. The PAUSD operated two high schools and two middle schools. Space was at a premium. She asked whether the City could afford to require schools be on 25 acres of land and one story. She suggested shifting the school population so the over capacity children could be accommodated in additions or large spaces at the present high schools. Since the preferred location was at the southern end of the City, the open space at Gunn High School would be desirable. There was space for expansion at Palo Alto High School as well. Ken Poulton, 884 Los Robles Avenue, said long-range planning was important and should proceed. He urged the Council not to delay the middle school plan. He supported turning the Terman site back into a middle school. The JCC had a large number of users from throughout the Peninsula but most heavily from south Palo Alto. Although the JCC was not a City facility it did serve community
05/30/00 90-207
needs. Making space available for the JCC at the Elks Lodge site solved two problems at once. He recommended the Elks Lodge site house significant City-supported services as well. More community services needed to be housed in south Palo Alto. He urged the Council to move forward. Edwin Morton, 1491 Kings Lane, said a key issue for the City was the PAUSD did not control any budget, enrollment, or community expectations. The PAUSD could only see part of the problem and parts of the solution. In effect, the City had some control of growth; however, for PAUSD, growth was an uncontrolled demand. He urged the Council to look for creative solutions. Wing-See Leung, Director, Palo Alto Family YMCA, 3412 Ross Road, said as the City looked at the projections of the City’s increased school enrollment, it should realize the demand for afterschool programming would also increase. Both academic and character building education were essential and irreplaceable. Swapping uses could not accommodate the need for land. The community did not gain any recreation space if the Terman site was taken from the JCC to create a new middle school. She suggested the Council review community space needs projections. She believed service providers would need as much new space as the PAUSD. Because of the limited number of space, the YMCA limited enrollment in a number of programs. Shelby Valentine, President, Friends of the Palo Alto Library, 3116 Stelling Drive, said with the passage of Proposition 14, the community could leverage state funds to launch a major capital improvement. Priority would be given to occupants who had joint use plans. She urged the Council to remember the community’s libraries and to actively pursue developing a joint usage plan for the libraries when formulating a comprehensive master plan. The projected ration was 65 percent of state money to be matched to the City’s 35 percent. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, said was concerned the Council was taking the wrong direction. There were two fundamental errors. First, with the high housing prices, people moving into the community would be older with older children. The projections would be inaccurate if the Council projected the number of children in secondary school based upon the kindergartners. Second, the number of children predicted for new housing units was too low. The City would lose valuable facilities and programs when the PAUSD took back a community center such as Cubberley or Ventura. The quality of life in the community would be affected with the loss of a community center. The City was not looking at other sites such as the Mayfield School site. He urged the Council to look creatively and at other options. Margie Groshart, 2331 Carmel Drive, believed the City needed to take care of all residents and its future. She supported using the
05/30/00 90-208
Terman site as a third middle school. She was concerned about the potential loss of playing fields at Palo Alto High School. Sports were important. She hoped the community could work together. Robert Horrat, 2066 Byron Street, supported the Council and PAUSD cooperative effort. He believed the City needed to rethink the way land was allocated. He did not believe the 25 Churchill Avenue site was appropriate for the JCC. Mayor Kniss understood that the PAUSD and the Council could direct staff to move forward with a Joint Master Plan. Ms. Kroymann said the question was not how the Council and the School Board would work together, but rather how the Council and PAUSD could work together and proceed expeditiously to serve the entire community. Council Member Fazzino thanked Mr. Benest and Mr. Phillips. BY A CONSENSUS OF THE CITY COUNCIL staff was directed to move forward with a Joint Master Plan as follows: 1. Conduct a Joint Master Plan of School/Community Facilities and Services, allocate sufficient resources for the joint study, and return with a draft for community input and Board and Council discussion within six months; and 2. As part of the Joint Master Plan, explore creative land use and design solutions, as well as investigate a variety of long-range funding sources for school/community facilities, including but not limited to development impact fees, certificates of participation, tax increment financing, and general obligation bonds. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, spoke regarding Closed Session Item No. 3. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. to a Closed Session. CLOSED SESSIONS 2. Conference with City Attorney--Potential/Anticipated Litigation Subject: Significant Exposure to Litigation Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(b)(1) arising out of Palo Alto Unified School District potential reuse of Terman
05/30/00 90-209
Community Center site and facilities [Gov. Code, §54956.9(b)(3)(B) & (E)] The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss matters involving Potential/Anticipated Litigation as described in Agenda Item No. 2. Mayor Kniss announced that no reportable action was taken on Agenda Item No. 2. 3. Conference with Real Property Negotiator Authority: Government Code section 56956.8 Property: Terman Community Center (excluding dedicated parkland) Potential Negotiating Parties: Palo Alto Unified School District and Jewish Community Center Subject of Potential Negotiation: Price and terms of payment The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss matters involving Real Property Negotiator as described in Agenda Item No. 3. Mayor Kniss announced that no reportable action was taken on Agenda Item No. 3. FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. 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.
05/30/00 90-210