HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-22 City Council Summary Minutes
Special Meeting April 22, 2002
1. Resolution 8149 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Palo Alto Blue
Ribbon Task Force Members for Outstanding Public Service”...51
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m...................51
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS..............................................52
1. Phasing Options for Library and Community Facility Projects and Determination of City Facilities to Survey for November
Bond Measure................................................52
APPROVAL OF MINUTES..............................................58
2. Ordinance 1st Reading entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 22.04.34 of Chapter 22.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prevent the Use of
Motorized Vehicles or Mopeds ‘Off-Road’ in Open Space Areas”......................................................59
3. Approval of Fiber to the Home Trial Participant Fee.........59
4. Resolution Making a Determination of Zero Property Tax Exchange on the Annexation of Lands of Conroe at 800 Los
Trancos Road to the West Bay Sanitary District..............59
5. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Sposeto
Engineering, Inc. in the Amount of $149,432 for Curb and Gutter Replacement and Storm Drain Repair Project (Storm Drainage Capital Improvement Project #47711)................59
6. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Offset Agri Industries, Inc. in an Amount Not To Exceed $120,00 per
year for the Transportation and Recycling of the Ash from the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant..........59
6A. Mayor Ojakian and Council Members Freeman, Kishimoto, and
Lytle re. Improving Communications with City Hall...........59
COUNCIL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS...................61
04/22/02 94-49
7. Conference with City Attorney - Existing Litigation.........61
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m...................61
04/22/02 94-50
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:50 p.m.
PRESENT: Freeman, Kishimoto, Lytle, Morton, Mossar,
Ojakian ABSENT: Beecham, Burch, Kleinberg
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
1. Resolution 8149 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Palo Alto Blue
Ribbon Task Force Members for Outstanding Public Service”
Resolution 8150 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Palo Alto Neighborhood Disaster Activities (PANDA) Members for
Outstanding Public Service” Resolution 8151 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Palo Alto Explorer Scouts Post 5 Members for Outstanding Public
Service” MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve the resolutions. MOTION PASSED 6-0 Beecham, Kleinberg, Burch absent.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m.
04/22/02 94-51
Special Meeting April 22, 2002
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Burch, Freeman, Kishimoto, Kleinberg, Lytle, Morton, Mossar, Ojakian
ABSENT: Beecham
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Barbara Higgins, 3407 Brunell Drive, Oakland, spoke regarding modern Pentathalon World Championships.
Ed Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding a letter in Palo Alto Daily News about destroying small harbor in Palo Alto in
1985. Shelby Valentine, 3116 Stelling Drive, spoke on public libraries. Lynn Chiapella, 631 Colorado Avenue, spoke regarding contracts
for outside attorneys and responsible spending. Mayor Ojakian introduced two girl scouts from Troop 958 who had
an assignment to do a mock City Council meeting.
REPORT OF OFFICIALS
1. Phasing Options for Library and Community Facility Projects and Determination of City Facilities to Survey for November Bond Measure
Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison gave a presentation on the
New Library Plan (NLP) Project. The three items that needed to be accomplished were as follows: 1) to review the options for phasing the capital program for libraries and other community facilities and determine the preferred option, which will be the basis for a second community survey in May 2002; 2) to approve
the recommended approach to funding library staffing for the period of January 2003 to July 2004; and 3) provided a bond
measure for renovating the Resource Libraries is successful in November, to work with the Library Advisory Commission (LAC) to prepare a staffing plan and related funding options. Options
will include both expenditure and service reduction options within the General Fund budget as well as new revenues. She also spoke on the background of the project. In May 2000, the LAC brought forward the New Library Plan (NLP). It was adopted
in concept in October 2000 and Council directed staff to proceed
04/22/02 94-52
with Phase I, which included feasibility and cost studies for expansion of the Resource Libraries and completion of a
consultant study of staffing requirements, job assignments, and a transitional plan. The Program Study showed the projected square footage for Resource Libraries was 205,000 square feet. Existing footage was 75,500 square feet. Conceptual design was done on the Mitchell Park Community Center and Library, Main Library, and
the Children’s Library. Staffing requirements to implement the Plan were presented to Council in January of 2002. The recommended options were: Option 1) a single bond measure for all
facilities; Option 2) two bond measures, one in 2002 for Mitchell Park Center and Children’s Library and a $5 million contribution
to Art Center project, and one in 2010, for the Main Library; Option 3) two bond measures, one in 2002 for the Children’s Library and Mitchell Park Community Center, with reduced Mitchell Park Library and reduced Main Library and a $5 million contribution to the Art Center project, and one in 2010 for the
remainder of projects for Mitchell Park Library and Main Library; and Option 4)a single bond measure in 2002 for the Children’s Library and Mitchell Park Community Center, with reduced Mitchell Park Library and Main Library and a $5 million contribution to the Art Center Project.
Library Advisory Commission Vice-Chairperson Tony Angeleto spoke
regarding telescoping the library project noting the Commission preferred Option 1. The Commission regarded the options for two bond measures for capital improvement as more costly to Palo Alto
home and property owners, as well as to the New Library Plan (NLP). The two single bond measure options affected taxpayers
the least. The LAC preferred Option 1 because of the cost to the NLP.
Library Advisory Commissioner Lenore Jones wanted to speak on the staffing aspect. However, information for phasing the Library
was not received in time for review. It would be reviewed and a recommendation would follow. Library Advisory Commissioner Mary Jean Place spoke regarding long-term planning for libraries.
Paul Grimsrud, 3955 Bibbits, spoke regarding concern over too many infrastructure projects in an uncertain economy.
Mary Carey Schaefer, 742 De Soto Drive, spoke regarding saving
the Main Library and the expansion of the Mitchell Park Library.
04/22/02 94-53
Stanley R. Smith, 610 Wildwood Lane, spoke regarding the high cost for new libraries and the effect of the digital revolution.
Wayne Martin, 3687 Bryant Street, spoke regarding the spreadsheets he distributed and the use of systematic management charts. Ellen Wyman, 546 Washington Drive, spoke regarding the survey for
the library bond measure and the error in bundling projects in the options.
Karen White, 146 Walter Hays Drive, spoke regarding the range of facilities, the recommendation for parallel measures on the
ballot, and for consideration of an Option 5. Stephen W. Player, 1874 Guinda, Palo Alto, spoke regarding the survey and requested the inclusion of monies to support the Art Center.
Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, spoke regarding phasing options for library and community facility projects in the survey for the November bond measure.
Lynn Chiapella, 631 Colorado Avenue, spoke regarding the amount of square footage for libraries.
Richard Yankovich, 1490 Edgewood Drive, spoke regarding support for inclusion of the Art Center in the four options presented.
Carolyn Tucher, President, Palo Alto Art Foundation, 4264 Manuela
Way, spoke regarding the importance of the Art Center. Bob Moss, 4000 Orme Street, spoke regarding endorsing the survey
and stressed the necessity to do the project right the first time.
Mayor Ojakian said the Council was trying to determine what should be in the survey and not necessarily to approve a financing plan.
Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison agreed and stated the only financing issue was conceptual approval of staff’s approach to the short-term staffing needs.
Mayor Ojakian said the recommendation for the Community Survey
was to ask where Palo Alto should be in 10-15 years, to survey Option 1 versus Option 4, and to include the Art Center and Community Center in the package.
04/22/02 94-54
Ms. Harrison stated that Ruth Bernstein, who did the Community
Survey, said the survey was done to compare a full Library Plan implementation with the reduced plan, which was comparing full Library Plan implementation versus facility-by-facility selection.
Mayor Ojakian asked to recap the policy decisions made at the meeting regarding the new Library Plan.
Ms. Harrison said staff brought forward the Mitchell Park Community Center and Mitchell Park Library and site feasibility
to proceed in conceptual design with joint facilities. Ms. Harrison confirmed that Council made a policy decision two years prior directing staff to proceed in a joint planning process with Main Library and Art Center.
Council Member Morton asked to look at Option 1 as a full vision and Option 4 as the reduced plan and if staff would object to having a full vision adjustment for the Art Center. He proposed a 4 percent or $9,000,000 increase to the budget, which would
enable the Art Center to complete its full vision.
Ms. Harrison said that staff had no problem with that. Council Member Kleinberg asked if a survey could be done in
regards to establishing a Mello-Roos District. Ms. Harrison said Mello Roos was not being used because an allocation formula had
to be determined, which was a very complicated process and could physically not be completed before the November election.
Council Member Kishimoto said in reviewing options 1 and 4, the Tax Rate Analysis showed the tax for an average home with an
assessed value of a $500,000 was only $35 a year. There was a difference of 17 percent and she asked why the bottom line difference was so minimal? Deputy Director of Administrative Services Joe Saccio said the
principal amount of the bond issue was taken into consideration and issuance costs decrease when there was a lower total bond amount. The cost for projects had been inflated up to the year
when the bond issue took place.
Council Member Kishimoto said feedback from the public indicated there was insufficient information received after the survey in terms of tripling and quadrupling the space being offered. She
04/22/02 94-55
questioned what public information process could be anticipated prior to the second survey.
Ms. Harrison said the survey would provide the information required, the direction of the focus, and what the public did or did not understand.
Council Member Lytle asked what the median homeowner would pay for the bond measure.
Mr. Saccio said the additional tax for a home assessed at $285,000, which was the median point, would be $140 per year for
Option 1. Council Member Lytle asked if half of the single-family homeowners in Palo Alto paid $140 or less, how much of an increase would there be if the budget were to include an increase
of 4 percent or $9,000,000 for completion of the Art Center? Mr. Saccio said it would be approximately $.55 per $100,000 for each million.
Council Member Lytle asked if there would be enough time for the people to have an effective campaign if a decision was not made
until July? Ms. Harrison said staff could not make a decision on the Main
Library and get an environmental report done until mid-June.
Council Member Freeman asked if Option 4 represented the 17 percent reduction that was previously evaluated.
Ms. Harrison said it did and the LAC referred to it as the “17 percent solution.”
Council Member Freeman asked if the Children/Teen Center was taken into consideration and was found to be beneficial, would it be kept in the Plan?
Ms. Harrison said Council’s direction was to have the City Manager look at the “17 percent solution.” She did not recall specific directions in terms of the Teen Center or any other
components of the solution.
Ms. Harrison confirmed Council Member Freeman’s question that the $20,000 survey would take into consideration each one of the facilities identified in a priority fashion.
04/22/02 94-56
Council Member Freeman said the first survey ranked the various facilities, and the Art Center was at the bottom of the list. In
each one of the options, the Art Center was included because the $5,000,000 request was small compared to the entire request of this bond measure. She asked if that was correct. Ms. Harrison said that was part of the reason. It was not the
insignificance of the dollar amount, but it was the importance of the proposal going forward together and the support that it brought. She emphasized the attractiveness of a public/private
partnership in terms of the ballot.
Council Member Freeman asked for a description of the suggested movement the of storm drain subsidy from the General Fund to libraries. Ms. Harrison said the General Fund continued to subsidize the
ongoing maintenance and operations of the Storm Drain Fund by approximately $1,000,000 per year. If the storm drain fee election were successful in the spring, funds would be freed up from the General Fund that could be used toward the $3,000,000 for ongoing library staffing, maintenance and operations costs.
Council Member Freeman asked Mr. Benest for an explanation why
storm drain funds normally were not taken from the General Fund. Mr. Benest explained that storm drains were one of Palo Alto’s
six utilities. They were managed like a business where the maintenance and operations, plus capital expenditures, were part
of the business and revenues paid for the expenses. Because of a quirk in Proposition 218 (Prop. 218), staff’s legal opinion was to get property owners to approve rate increases for storm
drains. Fees for all other utilities were raised on an ongoing basis to cover costs, but storm drain fees were not increased
because of Prop. 218. General Fund monies used for general government purposes (police, fire, maintenance, libraries, parks and recreation) are diverted to support a utility because of Prop. 218, which makes it impossible to get a positive vote from property owners. Mr. Benest said it was hopeful that a Blue
Ribbon Committee recommendation would reflect that property owners of Palo Alto wanted to allocate general-purpose revenue, particularly for library staffing.
Council Member Freeman asked why in Option 1 and Option 4 that
two issuances of bonds were necessary even though there was only one vote.
04/22/02 94-57
Ms. Harrison clarified that under Federal law, there were three years from the time debt was issued to spend proceeds of that
debt before incurring significant settlement costs. It was impossible to build $90,000,000 worth of projects in three years. Capitalized interest cost was also incurred during the time unspent money was held. MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Mossar, to approve the staff recommendations to survey Option 1 versus Option 4; in Option 1, to reflect a City contribution to the
public/private partnership of Art Center funding of $9 million; and in Option 4, reflect a City contribution to the
public/private partnership of $5 million to Art Center funding and to include spaces for teens in the amount of $500,000 at Main Library.
Council Member Freeman wanted to state for the record that she
was puzzled over the fact that staff continued to present only bundled options when she did not recall Council voting for
bundled options only. If staff went in that direction, it should be noted on the report why there were no unbundled options. She supported looking at Option 1 and Option 4, but heavily supported
Option 1 because it meant over half of the community would be paying less than $140 per year for new community facilities.
MOTION PASSED 8-0, Beecham absent.
MOTION: Council Member Lytle moved, seconded by Morton, that the
recommended approach to funding library staffing for the period
of January 2003 to July 2004 be referred to the Finance Committee and the Library Advisory Commission. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Beecham absent.
RECESS: 9:15 p.m. to 9:22 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
BY A CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL direct the City Clerk’s Office to
bring back the March 18 and 25, 2002, City Council Minutes for approval. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Morton moved, seconded by Lytle, to
approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 2, and 4-6 with Item No. 3 removed by staff to be heard at a later date.
04/22/02 94-58
LEGISLATIVE
2. Ordinance 1st Reading entitled “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 22.04.34 of Chapter 22.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prevent the Use of Motorized Vehicles or Mopeds ‘Off-Road’ in Open Space Areas”
3. Approval of Fiber to the Home Trial Participant Fee Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting
Utility Rate Schedule EFTH-T of the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges Pertaining to Fiber to the Home
Trial Program Services 4. Resolution Making a Determination of Zero Property Tax Exchange on the Annexation of Lands of Conroe at 800 Los Trancos Road to the West Bay Sanitary District
Resolution 8152 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the
City of Palo Alto Making Determination of Property Tax Exchange Pursuant to Provisions of Chapter 282, Section 59, Part .05, Implementing of Article XIIIA of the California
Constitution Commencing with Section 95, Division 1, of the Revenue and Taxation Code”
ADMINISTRATIVE
5. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Sposeto Engineering, Inc. in the Amount of $149,432 for Curb and Gutter Replacement and Storm Drain Repair Project (Storm
Drainage Capital Improvement Project #47711)
City Attorney Ariel Calonne confirmed these improvements were for maintenance and there were no conflict of interest issues for Council Members whose homes were near the project.
6. Contract Between the City of Palo Alto and Offset Agri
Industries, Inc. in an Amount Not To Exceed $120,00 per year for the Transportation and Recycling of the Ash from the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant
MOTION PASSED 8-0 Beecham absent. COUNCIL MATTERS
6A. Mayor Ojakian and Council Members Freeman, Kishimoto, and
Lytle re. Improving Communications with City Hall.
04/22/02 94-59
MOTION: Council Member Freeman moved, seconded by Kishimoto, to
direct the City Manager to return to the Council in approximately 30 days with an implementation strategy for a forum based on the Council’s suggestions and staff’s innovations. Further, that the strategy take into consideration minimal staff effort with two caveats: 1) that there be no extra projects; and 2) that the City
Manager’s Office will follow up with the issues that emerge after the meetings.
Council Member Morton suggested sending the plan to the Policy and Procedures Committee and not burden staff with an additional
task. Council Member Burch felt that Council could organize itself regarding that task.
Council Member Kleinberg suggested that Council organize among themselves and direct the City Clerk to post on the website
where, when, and time certain for the forum. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to have a forum once in May on a trial basis and
schedule more forums in the fall after the summer break
Council Member Freeman wanted to ensure that the impact on staff would not be substantial and that there would be random selection of three groups of three, posters, press releases and follow-up forms.
Mr. Benest said he supported the plan and Council could either organize itself or organize through the public communications
office.
Council Member Freeman clarified the need for publication in newspapers.
Mr. Benest said in order to minimize publication costs, publication would be through press releases, Frank’s Memo, and
postings on the website.
Council Member Morton asked if the Improving Communications Plan was in addition to the “Mobile Mayor”.
Mayor Ojakian said the public expressed the fact they liked the “Mobile Mayor” and would also like to see other Council Members
out in the public.
04/22/02 94-60
MOTION PASSED 8-0, Beecham absent.
COUNCIL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Member Morton stated one of the points brought up at the Council Retreat was to attempt to minimize Colleagues’ memos. That goal was not being fulfilled and the Council should rethink the issue.
Mayor Ojakian pointed out according to the news release in the Council packet, there was now an officially appointed Storm Drain Committee chaired by former Mayor Larry Klein. He also stated there would be no Council meeting next week, and the next regular
City Council meeting will be held on May 6, 2002.
Council Member Kleinberg referred to the Colleagues’ memo from that evening and asked that her colleagues share with the entire Council the 28 issues that came about after meeting with
residents.
Council Member Freeman said she would be more than happy to present the 28 issues.
CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Ojakian announced the item would be continued to the regular City Council meeting of May 6, 2002, or to a later date.
7. Conference with City Attorney - Existing Litigation Subject: In re Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a
California Corporation, Debtor, U.S. Bankruptcy Court case No.: 01-30923DM
Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Item continued.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:46 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
04/22/02 94-61
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.
04/22/02 94-62