Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-22 City Council Summary Minutes10/22/2012 111- 466 Special Meeting October 22, 2012 CLOSED SESSION...................................................................................468 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS ........................................468 STUDY SESSION ....................................................................................468 2. City Council Study Session with Senator Simitian Proposed Topics of Discussion .....................................................................................468 SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY .................................................................469 3. Presentation From the City of Heidelberg, Germany ............................469 4. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Public Art Commission for One Unexpired Term Ending on April 30, 2015 ............469 5. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Library Advisory Commission for One Unexpired Term Ending on January 31, 2014 .......469 6. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Parks and Recreation Commission for Four Terms Ending on December 31, 2015 .................470 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS .....................................................................470 MINUTES APPROVAL ...............................................................................470 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ........................................................................471 CONSENT CALENDAR ..............................................................................471 7. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Report on the Status of Audit Recommendations (June 2012) ........................471 8. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of June 30, 2012 .........................471 MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-467 9. Approval of Increase to Purchase Order with One Workplace to Add $71,646 for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $703,794 for Standard Furniture for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center ..............472 10. Approval of Annual Report of Williamson Act Contracts Within the City of Palo Alto ....................................................................................472 11. Approval of a Contract with NOVA Partners, Inc. in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $756,933 for Construction Management Services for the Main Library Measure N Project - Capital Improvement Program Project PE-11000 ......................................................................................472 ACTION ITEMS .......................................................................................472 12. Approval of Letter of Intent to Participate in Cool Cities Challenge ........472 13. “Human Relations Commission Recommends Adoption of a Resolution In Support of an Amendment to the United States and California Constitutions to State "Corporations are Not People and Money is Not Speech" in Response to United States Supreme Court Decision of Citizen's United vs. Federal Communications Commission” ..................478 14. Colleague’s Memo from Mayor Yeh, Council Members Price and Shepherd Regarding a Council Youth Commission Liaison ....................482 COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS ............485 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:07 P.M. .........................486 MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-468 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 5:05 P.M. Present: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein, Price, Scharff, Schmid arrived at 7:05 p.m., Shepherd, Yeh Absent: CLOSED SESSION 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Kathryn Shen, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray, Val Fong) Employee Organization: Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) The City Council reconvened from the Closed Session at 6:05 P.M. and Mayor Yeh advised no reportable action. STUDY SESSION 2. City Council Study Session with Senator Simitian Proposed Topics of Discussion. Senator Simitian addressed Vice Mayor Scharff’s question regarding the regional housing needs allocation transfer request with Santa Clara County. He said the housing allocation should be a condition of the development so as not to aggravate the housing imbalance. He said there were challenges getting the State to understand the imbalance in part due to student housing. He addressed a Staff Member’s question regarding the California High Speed Rail and Caltrain rail corridor. He said there had been some good outcomes from the outreach of Palo Alto and other organizations including the commitment to a blended system and the projected cost of the total build out had been reduced dramatically. He encouraged the City to return to the Legislature again to get commitments confirmed. He discussed the issue of a raised tax vote by the people, the Governor’s office process and the opportunity for trigger cuts to be implemented depending on the upcoming election. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-469 Roland Lebrun spoke regarding Caltrain and county parks. Plan A for Caltrain should be a procurement approach similar to that of airlines which would keep $440 million here in California rather than paying a foreign manufacturer to build the trains. 25 percent of the California park system has been turned over to the conservation plan. The Palo Alto parks were going to be used to widen Highway 101. The parks belong to Palo Alto not to the county and should not be used that way. Herb Borock spoke regarding the High Speed Rail. He discussed a long history of speed tests that seemed to be going backwards instead of forward and provided documentation to Council. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 3. Presentation From the City of Heidelberg, Germany. Thomas Fehrenbach, Economic Development Manager, gave a background of discussions between the City of Heidelberg, Germany and the City of Palo Alto. He described the interest in exploring a relationship between the two cities. He introduced Michael Kelly, local resident and former resident of Heidelberg, Germany who gave a presentation highlighting Heidelberg’s attributes and areas of potential partnership with Palo Alto. Peter Graf, an executive for SAP, which had locations in the Heidelberg region and the City of Palo Alto followed with his perspectives on tangible projects between the two cities, especially as it related to engaging the respective communities towards sustainability goals. Mayor Yeh noted that Staff would bring forward an item at a future meeting for Council to consider entering into a partnership agreement or Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Heidelberg. 4. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Public Art Commission for One Unexpired Term Ending on April 30, 2015. MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Scharff to direct Staff to recruit for additional applications for the Public Art Commission. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 5. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Library Advisory Commission for One Unexpired Term Ending on January 31, 2014. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-470 MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Scharff to direct Staff to recruit for additional applications for the Library Advisory Commission. Council Member Klein said it seemed there was a succession of people resigning prior to the end of their term dates and there were fewer applicants for openings. He requested information regarding the viability of the Commission. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER before starting the recruitment, to request Staff to advise Council on the viability of the Library Advisory Commission given the reduction in applicants, and the number of resignations prior to the completion of their terms. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 6. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Parks and Recreation Commission for Four Terms Ending on December 31, 2015. MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to direct Staff to bring back on the Consent Calendar the appointment of the two incumbents, and reopen the recruitment for the remaining two vacancies. MOTION PASSED: 8-1 Schmid no CITY MANAGER COMMENTS James Keene, City Manager, spoke regarding 1) A Public Works community meeting related to improvements in the California Avenue area and 2) the new Development Services Director, Peter Pirnejad. MINUTES APPROVAL MOTION: Council Member Espinosa moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to approve the minutes of September 18, 2012. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-471 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Tony Kramer spoke about the Planning and Community Environment Department's interpretation of the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance regarding approval of the AT&T DAS Phase 2 project. Any noise source in a residential area had to satisfy the residential noise standard. He formally appealed approval of the AT&T DAS Phase 2 project. He asked the Council to remove his appeal from the upcoming Consent Calendar and to schedule it for a public hearing. Rita Vrhal requested the application for 1095 Channing Avenue be rescheduled from the November 5, 2012 Consent Calendar to December 10, 2012. As an alternative, she requested the portion of the application concerning the proposed rerouting of school traffic be removed from the calendar to allow investigation of alternate traffic patterns. She discussed the matter with the applicant, who indicated he would discuss the alternate traffic pattern with all appropriate parties. She requested additional time to continue negotiations with the applicant. James Lee, Cofounder of Peninsula Direct Action, indicated Redwood City had a dearth of affordable housing. He asked the Council to ensure the City had affordable housing, because actions in Palo Alto affected the rest of the Peninsula. Approximately 200 people currently residing at Pete's Harbor in Redwood City faced losing their homes. He asked Council Members to assist with this problem. Stephanie Munoz remarked that the Council's consideration of redeveloping Buena Vista Mobile Home Park violated the spirit of Proposition 13. The Council's support of affordable housing programs while evicting low-income homeowners from the Mobile Home Park was hypocritical. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to approve Agenda Item Nos. 7-11. 7. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Report on the Status of Audit Recommendations (June 2012). 8. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of June 30, 2012. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-472 9. Approval of Increase to Purchase Order with One Workplace to Add $71,646 for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $703,794 for Standard Furniture for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center. 10. Approval of Annual Report of Williamson Act Contracts Within the City of Palo Alto. 11. Approval of a Contract with NOVA Partners, Inc. in a Total Amount Not to Exceed $756,933 for Construction Management Services for the Main Library Measure N Project - Capital Improvement Program Project PE-11000. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 ACTION ITEMS 12. Approval of Letter of Intent to Participate in Cool Cities Challenge. Phil Bobel, Assistant Director of Environmental Service for Public Works reported the discussion was a follow-up to the Study Session regarding the Cool Cities Challenge. Over the next three years the program hoped to involve 25-75 percent of Palo Alto residents in neighborhood-based groups to decrease their carbon footprint by 25 percent with 40 percent of them retrofitting their homes. Other benefits of the program were cohesion of the community and use of groups to build community awareness. The small groups would be composed of neighborhoods, businesses, faiths, and a range of other possibilities. Groups would provide platforms for Utilities programs and Public Works programs. The principal sponsor of the program was the Empowerment Institute. The City would provide a Letter of Intent to indicate its willingness to be involved in the process; however, the Letter was not a commitment. Following a fund-raising period, Palo Alto would be invited to formally apply to the program. If Palo Alto became a formal member of the program, it would join two California communities and three communities in Brazil. Those six communities would form the basis of a friendly competition. Four cities had signed the Letter of Intent. During the first year of the program, cities would be selected and would customize individual programs. Palo Alto would want to integrate existing programs. The second phase was a three-year campaign to form small groups that would strive to achieve greenhouse gas reductions. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-473 Sandra Slater felt the Cool Cities Challenge was a platform for the City to review its sustainability through citizen engagement and green economic development. Many environmental groups in the area agreed the program could drive carbon reduction in Palo Alto. The program was an attempt to quantify data and determine which efforts worked to reduce greenhouse gases. Carroll Harrington initiated and coordinated the Palo Alto Business Goes Green for the Chamber of Commerce. She urged the Council to accept the recommendation to issue a Letter of Intent for the Cool Cities Challenge. It was the logical next step in implementing the Climate Protection Plan. Palo Alto's participation was important to leading other cities to reduce greenhouse gases. Council Member Espinosa recalled at the prior discussion Acterra expressed concern regarding the approach of the program and potential partners. Ms. Slater stated the Cool Cities Challenge would be the business development arm of Acterra, because Acterra would have the opportunity to perform the retrofitting. After discussing the Cool Cities Challenge with Acterra, they supported the program. Council Member Holman expressed concern regarding Staff involvement in the program, and asked for Mr. Keene's thoughts. James Keene, City Manager, could not answer the question definitively. Between the time of signing the Letter of Intent and submitting a proposal, Staff would get a better sense of the amount of work involved in the project. The program called for an intensive, sustained effort. Staff had always been interested in achieving grassroots change; however, the program would require more effort than program funding alone could provide. The City's stakeholder groups and citizens wanted the City directly involved. It would be inaccurate to indicate Staff could completely outsource program work with available funding. The City had not agreed to participate in the program yet, but Staff had expended a fair amount of time and energy in preparing for Council discussion. Council Member Holman inquired whether signing the Letter of Intent implied the City would apply for the program. Mr. Keene suggested the Council not sign the Letter of Intent if it was not interested in pursuing the program. The Letter of Intent was an important prerequisite to effective fundraising. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-474 He recommended the Council keep its options open. Staff would need to perform outreach to certain stakeholder groups and to assess Staff capacity before submitting a proposal. Should the Council submit a proposal, there was no guarantee Palo Alto would be selected as a participant. Council Member Holman inquired whether Staff had considered the amount of time they could spend performing outreach to the community during the first year of the program. Mr. Bobel reported fundraisers hired by the Empowerment Institute would perform community outreach; however, the fundraisers could not work effectively without some involvement of City Staff. Staff would estimate the amount of Staff time required for the program in the coming year. Vice Mayor Scharff inquired about Staff's activities during the year between signing the Letter of Intent and submitting a proposal. Mr. Keene indicated Staff would stay in contact with the Empowerment Institute regarding fundraising efforts. If fundraising efforts were unsuccessful, Staff would not spend much time on the program. The City had an obligation to inform the community about the program. The amount of Staff time would depend on the sort of feedback and information Staff received from the community. In their proposal, Staff needed to be clear concerning the possible impacts and risks to the City. Vice Mayor Scharff inquired whether marketing materials for fundraising purposes would indicate the City of Palo Alto was participating, if it signed a Letter of Intent. He expressed concern that donors would mistakenly believe signing the Letter of Intent was a commitment to the program. Ms. Slater reported the first phase of fundraising would be building out the Lawrence Berkeley Lab metrics which would benefit all participants. Project materials would name the five cities who would apply, assuming the details worked out. The program would not have progressed to the current point if it had not already determined Palo Alto stakeholders were prime prospects for engaging in the Cool Cities Challenge. Vice Mayor Scharff asked if the Eco Teams were groups of people who made lifestyle changes to reduce their carbon footprint. Ms. Slater stated the teams would make lifestyle changes in addition to other ways to reduce the carbon footprint. Vice Mayor Scharff asked if it was renovations along with lifestyle changes. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-475 Ms. Slater answered yes. One change could be turning down the thermostat on water heaters. Vice Mayor Scharff inquired whether all changes were listed in the Low Carbon Diet book or would more changes be developed. Ms. Slater felt the changes would be those listed in the book and others. Each community would decide its focus for change. Vice Mayor Scharff wanted to know who would be making the decision on which changes to implement. Ms. Slater reported the project would provide the Low Carbon Diet book along with a Palo Alto version of the Low Carbon Diet, which may have expanded programs. The Low Carbon diet was a living document based on the community. Each Eco Team would decide where to make changes, and each household within the Eco Team would decide what it wanted to change. Each Eco Team and each household could be different. Mr. Bobel indicated participating cities would have a role in focusing changes. For example, greenhouse gas emissions from transportation was the least addressed area in Palo Alto, while emissions from electric utilities was the most addressed area. It would be appropriate for the City to focus changes on transportation. He did not believe the decision on which changes to implement would be left to the individual Eco Teams without some community push. Vice Mayor Scharff was concerned about community enthusiasm for the program because no public speakers appeared. Mr. Bobel felt the community spoke at the Study Session and did not suggest more speakers appear for the current discussion. Vice Mayor Scharff asked for the percentage of Palo Alto's electric households participating in Palo Alto Green. Mr. Bobel was unsure of the exact percentage. Vice Mayor Scharff believed it was approximately 20 percent. Mr. Bobel agreed. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-476 Vice Mayor Scharff inquired whether Staff expected to obtain a higher percentage of participants for the Cool Cities Challenge. Palo Alto Green was the most successful program of its type throughout the United States. Mr. Bobel stated the Cool Cities Challenge was an effort to increase participation on a whole new scale. No one knew whether it would be successful because it was an experiment. Council Member Shepherd felt the Council should sign the Letter of Intent. She asked what aspect of the program changed after the Study Session to make it more compelling for community members. Ms. Slater indicated people wanted to connect with their neighbors. Council Member Shepherd asked which groups Ms. Slater had contacted after the Study Session. Ms. Slater contacted many organizations to determine possible support. She felt people wanted to connect with their neighbors and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Council Member Shepherd inquired whether Acterra would be the non-profit affiliate to implement the program. Ms. Slater indicated the program would work with a number of different organizations and community groups. The program could not depend on only one organization to reach the projected scale of participation. MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to authorize the City Manager or his designee to sign the Letter of Intent to participate in the Cool Cities Challenge. Council Member Shepherd acknowledged the program needed more development and could become a burden to Staff. She wanted to have a sustainability director seated before proceeding with the program and believed the program could have multiple positive impacts. Council Member Klein felt the City's environmental programs targeted things within the control of the City. The effort to change individual behavior was necessary and the community was waiting for leadership to make those changes. The Cool Cities Challenge offered one possibility for making individual changes. The Cool Cities Challenge offered many benefits, even if its environmental goals were not achieved. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-477 Organizing the community to achieve necessary reductions in the carbon footprint was essential. The City needed to proceed with the Cool Cities Challenge. Council Member Schmid assumed Palo Alto was the only candidate city that had its own municipal utility. This was a process to engage 50 percent of households in three years. The Cool Cities Challenge could incorporate the existing City Utility programs to encourage effective results. The City had some obligation to the 50 percent of the community who chose not to participate in the program. He asked Staff to discuss methods for incorporating current City programs into the Cool Cities Challenge and for disseminating information to those members of the community who did not wish to join a block program. Mr. Bobel reported the neighborhood-based groups would be a platform for existing and future City programs. The City had partners who provided information about existing Palo Alto programs to small groups. As far as informing the 50 percent who did not participate in neighborhood-based groups, the City needed some companion programs. Staff still had to address that issue. Ms. Slater stated Palo Alto would decide the percentage of its population to engage. The goal was to make behavioral changes to the social norm. Council Member Price felt the program was a good concept and a Letter of Intent had a low risk factor. This type of program identified and articulated many of the beliefs and values the Council espoused. The goal was to make changes during the three-year window and maintain and sustain those changes. Mayor Yeh suggested the Council discuss the structure and staffing of the program. Discussions with community partners would be helpful to understand how they would choose to engage in this type of initiative. After signing the Letter of Intent, the Council should review community goals for carbon reduction that would be incorporated into the application. A menu of ways for community members to engage in the program was the foundation of community connection. Mr. Keene indicated Staff would discuss staffing by the end of the first quarter of 2013. At any point the Council could review its timelines and goals for the Climate Protection Plan because the City had achieved some success in the first phase. The Climate Protection Plan alone would not allow the City to reach all its goals. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-478 Mayor Yeh clarified the Climate Protection Plan was the policy context under which the City was pursuing greenhouse gas reductions. The Climate Protection Plan did not have a goal consistent with the program's level of ambitious undertaking. The Council needed to review the policy context before submitting a formal application. It would be difficult for the City to proceed with an application that had a cohesive set of goals. Mr. Keene stated participation in the Cool Cities Challenge required a review of benchmarks for the Climate Action Plan. Vice Mayor Scharff felt participation in the Cool Cities Challenge would distract Staff from programs that would reduce greenhouse gases. He did not believe the City could achieve a participation rate above 15 percent. He could not support signing a Letter of Intent because the program was too ambitious and too unlikely to occur. MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Price to call the question. MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Scharff no MAIN MOTION PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Scharff no Council Member Schmid left the meeting at 10:00 P.M. 13. “Human Relations Commission Recommends Adoption of a Resolution In Support of an Amendment to the United States and California Constitutions to State "Corporations are Not People and Money is Not Speech" in Response to United States Supreme Court Decision of Citizen's United vs. Federal Communications Commission.” Minka van der Zwaag, Community Services Manager, reported the Human Relations Commission (HRC) passed a Resolution in response to the United States Supreme Court decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Communications Commission. Claude Ezran, Chair of the Human Relations Commission, stated on September 13, 2012, the HRC unanimously, with one Commissioner absent, passed a Resolution brought by the Santa Clara County Chapter of the national Move to Amend organization. That organization sought to amend the United States and California Constitutions to state that corporations were not people and money was not speech. The HRC also unanimously voted to forward the Resolution to the Council for approval. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-479 The Supreme Court's decision in January 2010 allowed corporate spending to influence the outcome of electoral campaigns. An Amendment to the Constitution would allow Congress to regulate electoral spending by artificial entities such as corporations or other organizations. Capitalism was by far the best economic system but it needed to be protected against its own excesses in order to maintain prosperity over the long term. A decade of deregulation and inattention led to the 2008 financial crisis. The Citizens United decision eroded democracy and placed the nation on a path of gradual decline. This situation impacted the U.S. and specifically the City of Palo Alto and its finances. The HRC Commissioners were swayed by Justice Stevens' arguments. At the HRC meeting, Commissioners discussed Proposition 16, the Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) initiative on the June 8, 2010 ballot. He recalled the Council's discussion and action on February 1, 2010 regarding Proposition 16. The City spent $10 million on employee medical costs in 2002 and that number was projected to be $27 million in the current fiscal year. The relentless surge in healthcare costs affected the amount of money available for other City needs. Insurance companies were major obstacles to serious healthcare reform. Additional reforms would be needed; therefore, the people needed a fair national debate on healthcare. Residents of Palo Alto worked to limit carbon emissions and to use renewable energy. Residents were concerned about climate change and the possibility that the Bay's waterline could rise. Nationwide, powerful oil and coal industry interests blasted messages stating that climate change was a hoax; therefore, inaction was the best course of action. These powerful interests also wanted to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) among other things. Palo Alto was affected by this negative dialog and the lack of action. The HRC hoped the Council would join cities in California and across the country in passing the Resolution. James Lee asked the Council to pass the Resolution so that other cities would follow suit. He asked candidates for public office to consider disclosing all campaign funding voluntarily and Council Members to consider moving City assets from big banks and endorsing independent candidates. Mary Colleen Klein was involved with the Move to Amend effort in Campbell. She obtained signatures of supporters in Palo Alto. The U.S. Constitution was an attempt to balance the interests of individual citizens and government. It was time to reset the balance. Debbie Mytels stated the rights of corporations impacted the residents of Palo Alto. Residents looked to elected representatives to ensure the rights of citizens were not dismissed. Corporations with unlimited funds could distort local decision-making. Amending the Constitution would not occur at the national level without strong local support. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-480 Thomas Atwood indicated the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) membership was not unanimous regarding this issue. The premise behind the Citizens United decision was that the people were powerless to regulate unrestricted flows of cash in democratic elections. If citizens did not stop these legalized intrusions on the civil liberties of natural persons, they were disempowering themselves. He urged the Council to pass the Resolution. Karen Harwell embraced the Resolution for its potential to evoke conversations across the country. It was time for local involvement if the country was to be a functioning democracy. Stephen Rosenblum urged the Council to approve the Resolution. He was aghast at the amount of corporate money flowing into the current election cycle. A Constitutional Amendment was needed to overturn the Supreme Court's decision. Gregory Slater felt it was important to encourage all communities to adopt Resolutions of this kind. It was obvious that corporations were not people. Corporations were obligated to maximize profits and did not recognize social contracts. The only means to addressing the problem was through local involvement. Aram James read from an amicus brief on behalf of Citizens United. The First Amendment protected robust political debate. The vast amount of money influencing politics came from rich individuals. The issue was complex. Stephanie Reader, Board President of the Peninsula Peace and Justice Center and member of the ACLU, noted the division among ACLU members regarding the Citizens United decision. The ACLU asked the Council to consider a position of corporations were not people and money was not speech. Stephanie Munoz stated corporations influenced healthcare reform in 2010. The Council should adopt a Resolution stating it was against corporate influence. Kip Husty believed a corporation was not a person. Carol Broullet recalled a memorandum regarding corporations maintaining power and wealth. The Supreme Court gave greater and greater powers to corporations. She urged the Council to consider the Resolution as a means to reign in corporate power. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-481 Council Member Schmid expressed concern over a Constitutional Amendment stating money was not speech. One study determined there was no evidence that those who spent more money won elections. Election history in Palo Alto demonstrated that money did not buy elections. The key worry for democracy was not money as much as legislative incumbents who had the ability to cap expenditures of dissidents. Vice Mayor Scharff stated the issue was very complicated. This was not a local issue. The Council had to understand the consequences of the Resolution before it voted on it. He could support a Resolution stating the City of Palo Alto supported the dissent by Justice Stevens or opposed the decision in the Citizens United case. Most public speakers seemed to oppose the idea that a corporation must be treated the same as natural persons in the political sphere. He could not support a Resolution supporting the proposed 28th Amendment because he did not know the consequences of the proposed 28th Amendment. Council Member Espinosa believed decision-making was skewed because of the millions of dollars poured into politics. Issues which the Council addressed or on which it took a position had to have a direct impact on the City. Personally, he supported the Resolution; however, he would not support the Council adopting the Resolution. Council Member Klein felt amending the Constitution should be carefully considered. Citizens United was wrongly decided and the flood of money resulting from the decision had an impact on politics. He could not support the proposed language of the Resolution because of possible unintended consequences. MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Shepherd that the City Council believes the Citizens United case was wrongly decided, we direct Staff to prepare and the Mayor to sign a letter for our federal office holders urging them to adopt a Constitutional amendment for submittal to the states which would have the effect of overturning the Citizens United case. Council Member Shepherd agreed corporations were not people. The Citizens United decision had an unfortunate consequence. She was interested in an initiative that did not have unintended consequences and could not support the language of the original proposal. Council Member Holman felt the Citizens United decision had local implications because money poured into local initiatives and referendums. She appreciated Council Member Klein's proposed language. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-482 Mayor Yeh appreciated the intention of the proposed 28th Amendment; however, the language was a concern. The Motion captured the dissatisfaction with the Citizens United decision. AMENDMENT: Mayor Yeh moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Scharff to add at the end of the Motion “such proposed amendment to be informed by the dissent of Justice Stevens in the Citizens United case.” Mayor Yeh stated Supreme Court dissenting opinions sometimes informed later Supreme Court decisions. The language was not prescriptive but highlighted the underlying rationale. Vice Mayor Scharff noted the decision overturned 100 years of precedent. Justice Stevens' dissent was well reasoned and balanced interests. Language in the proposed 28th Amendment was extreme. Council Member Burt believed the Citizens United decision was a bad ruling with significant consequences. It affected state and local law as well as federal law. Many Constitutional Amendments had been driven by grassroots movements. He supported the Motion. Council Member Price supported the Amendment because it provided guidance and underscored the value of the dissenting opinion. The decision was in error and this was a means for the City Council to express its view and provide guidance regarding the issue. It was important for the Council to support its values and opinions. Council Member Holman supported both the Amendment and the Motion. AMENDMENT PASSED: 6-2 Espinosa, Klein no, Schmid absent MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-1 Espinosa no, Schmid Absent 14. Colleague’s Memo from Mayor Yeh, Council Members Price and Shepherd Regarding a Council Youth Commission Liaison. Council Member Price reported the Colleagues Memo recommended the City Council create a Youth Liaison position to be appointed by the Mayor annually. This allowed the Council to integrate and coordinate youth issues. The proposal was an extension of the Council Priority of Youth Health and Well Being. The liaison would formalize relationships and ensure the Council was engaged with youth issues in the community. The liaison would attend meetings of a variety of youth-related organizations. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-483 The second part of the proposal was for Staff Reports to contain specific discussions concerning the impact on youth and young adults if it was germane to the specific Staff Report. The liaison's responsibilities would be attending the Palo Alto Youth Council and Project Safety Net meetings and outreach to other City-sponsored youth programs and organizations. The Memo proposed one Study Session each year where the City Council highlighted youth and teen issues and activities. Council Member Shepherd indicated the Memo was a response to the Project Safety Net team's request to have official Council actions. The Council had integrated youth into its Agenda and City-wide actions. The liaison position would reinforce those actions. Mayor Yeh stated the role of the Council liaison would be to inform the full Council of community events for youth and teens so the Council would know how best to participate in community events. This action was an affirmative step for Project Safety Net and would further the goal of institutionalizing a Council Priority. Council Member Klein recognized the good intentions of the Colleagues Memo but did not support it. There was no problem statement. If the issue was to involve youth in the process of government then youth should be given the resources, authority, and autonomy to do things meaningful to them. He noted the youth programs in Redwood City and Philadelphia. It was misleading to state the position would be a Council Youth Commission Liaison. This was a proposal to create a Youth Cabinet Officer. The proposal granted too much power to one Council Member and set a bad precedent for Council treatment of other issues. Vice Mayor Scharff asked why youth was different from other groups and why there should be a Council Member responsible for youth. Council Member Shepherd said the Council did have outreach for youth. There was a considerable amount of youth engagement in the community. The problem was the Council's lack of awareness of youth activities and the proposal was an attempt to mitigate that. Vice Mayor Scharff noted the Youth Council met on the same night as the City Council; therefore, the liaison could not attend both meetings. Council Member Shepherd indicated other group meetings were optional for liaison attendance. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-484 Vice Mayor Scharff stated the Council had a liaison for the Junior Museum and Zoo. Council Member Price explained the list of meetings for liaison attendance was intended to be illustrative. The proposal was an attempt to increase education and communication about youth issues. By having a liaison to youth groups, elected individuals could develop relationships with youth in the community. Related to Staff Reports, the proposal asked Staff to comment on the implications of Council decisions for youth. Vice Mayor Scharff inquired whether a youth liaison would require additional Staff time. Mr. Keene understood the liaison position would have an impact on the Council. Staff should include impacts on youth in the Staff Report when appropriate. He did not foresee an impact for Staff on this particular matter. Vice Mayor Scharff felt the workload would be burdensome for the Council Member appointed to the position. Council Member Price indicated the liaison would identify emerging issues and concerns. The Study Session was an opportunity for youth to discuss concerns and issues affecting their lives. With regard to the Council meeting conflicting with the Youth Council, the Council Member could perhaps arrive late to the Council meeting after attending the Youth Council. The proposal was not for mandatory attendance at each youth group meeting. Council Member Holman felt the goals and actions could be more clearly stated. MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to continue the Item and ask the authors to return at the earliest possible date with a revised Colleagues Memo better identifying the problems/goals intended to be resolved/achieved and clarity on how those would be achieved. Council Member Holman stated the proposal identified a purpose but not a problem. The proposal needed a clear framework so the Council could understand the operations and functions of the liaison position. Council Member Klein agreed with the impact statement. He suggested the authors review the overlap of responsibilities. The responsibilities stated in the proposal exceeded the usual role of a liaison. More importantly, youth should be given more responsibility. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-485 Council Member Espinosa favored the Motion, but expressed concern about the number of liaison positions in existence. He was interested in the Council discussing expectations for Council Members' time and attendance at various organizations' meetings before adding another position. The goal of the proposal was to share information with the Council. He questioned whether there was another method to structure information sharing with the Council. The Council should focus on the general issue and consider ways to solve it. Council Member Burt suggested the Council provide additional feedback regarding the proposal and refer it to the Policy and Services Committee. He expressed concern that the Youth Health and Well Being Priority would have a Staff Report while other Council Priorities would not. The Council would create a position and a responsibility, but may not have a Council Member willing to dedicate extensive time to the position. There were a number of complications; therefore, he supported further consideration of the proposal. Council Member Shepherd suggested the Policy and Services Committee determine the purpose of a liaison in response to Council Member Holman's comments. The Council provided good feedback to the proposal. Youth and seniors were the two groups showing the largest growth in Palo Alto demographics. Perhaps the authors of the Memo could find a balanced approach for both groups. Mayor Yeh agreed with the comments regarding a definition of liaison and the role of a liaison. The role of a liaison could fluctuate with the Members comprising the City Council. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Schmid absent COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Member Shepherd said she and Council Member Holman participated in the League of Cities Annual Event. She learned about 50 percent of Sacramento’s dollars went to education, about 10 percent to the criminal justice system, and about 23 percent to human services. Council Member Price and several other Council Members attended a pancake breakfast fundraiser for Project Safety Net which was sponsored by partners such as the Fire Department, Lucille Packard, and Stanford. Mayor Yeh said $4,500 was raised at the pancake breakfast. MINUTES 10/22/2012 111-486 Council Member Holman said she attended the event later in the day and was told over 800 people attended. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 11:07 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.