Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-11-14 City Council Summary Minutes 11/14/2011 Special Meeting November 14, 2011 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 6:04 P.M. Present: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein arrived @ 7:00 P.M., Price, Scharff, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh arrived @ 7:00 P.M. Absent: STUDY SESSION 1. Joint Study Session with the Architectural Review Board. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) members presented an overview of their recent efforts, noting the volume of meetings and development projects, clarifying overlap and coordination with the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC), and discussing key questions. The City Council asked questions regarding processes, spoke regarding the key questions, and encouraged the ARB in their efforts to bring up various issues and coordinate with the PTC. MOTION: Mayor Espinosa moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to move Agenda Item Nos. 2 and 3, to become Agenda Item Nos. 7a and 7b. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 2. Study Session with Pacific Gas & Electric Company on Gas Transmission Lines. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 3. Community Presentation by the Downtown Street Teams. Staff requested Agenda Item No. 4 be moved to a date uncertain. 4. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Sandra C. Brown Upon Her Retirement. 2 11/14/2011 5. Resolution 9210 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Scott Wong upon His Retirement”. Council Member Price read the Resolution into the record. MOTION: Council Member Price moved, seconded by Council Member Klein to approve the Resolution expressing appreciation to Scott Wong upon his retirement. Council Member Price thanked Mr. Wong for his years of service. Council Member Klein described Mr. Scott as a great Palo Altan and a dedicated Police Officer. Eleanor Perkins stated she had been a volunteer in the Police Department for many years and had always been impressed with Mr. Wong’s knowledge and skill, as well as his personality and sense of caring. She thanked him for his service. Mark Petersen-Perez stated that he considered himself a staunch critic of the Palo Alto Police Department, but thanked Mr. Wong for the assistance he had offered to him in the past. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Scott Wong thanked the community, members of the Police Department, and Council for the privilege and honor of working for the City of Palo Alto for the previous 29 years. He thanked his fellow Officers for all of their support over the years. He noted the high quality of the Police Department employees and urged Council to place high value on their institutional knowledge. Mayor Espinosa thanked Mr. Wong for his service and thanked all of the Police Officers for putting their lives on the line to protect the citizens of Palo Alto. Dennis Burns, Police Chief, stated as past President of the Palo Alto Police Officers Association, Mr. Wong had set the standard for maintaining great relationships with both the Union and the City. He thanked Mr. Wong for his leadership and support. 3 11/14/2011 6. Appointments for Three Positions on the Parks and Recreation Commission for Three Year Terms Ending on December 31, 2014. First Round of voting for three positions on the Parks and Recreation Commission for three-year terms ending on December 31, 2014: Voting For Stacey Ashlund: Holman, Price, Schmid, Yeh Voting For Tricia Baker: Espinosa, Scharff, Shepherd Voting For Ty Butler: Voting For Deidre Crommie: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein, Price, Scharff, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh Voting For Hank Edson: Burt, Klein Voting For Pat Markevitch: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein, Price, Scharff, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh City Clerk, Donna Grider announced that Deidre Crommie with 9 votes, and Pat Markevitch with 9 votes were each appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission for Three Year Terms Ending on December 31, 2014. Second Round of voting for one position on the Parks and Recreation Commission for three year term ending on December 31, 2014: Voting For Stacey Ashlund: Burt, Holman, Price, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh Voting For Tricia Baker: Espinosa, Klein, Scharff Voting For Ty Butler: Voting For Hank Edson: City Clerk, Donna Grider announced that Stacey Ashlund with 6 votes, was appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission for a three year term ending on December 31, 2014. 4 11/14/2011 7. Appointment for One Unexpired Term on the Public Art Commission Ending on April 30, 2012. First Round of voting for one unexpired term on the Public Art Commission ending on April 30, 2012: Voting For Richard Ambrose: Burt, Espinosa, Holman, Klein, Price, Scharff, Schmid, Yeh Voting For Harriet Stern: Voting For Arlene Stevens: Shepherd City Clerk, Donna Grider announced that Richard Ambrose with 8 votes, was appointed to one unexpired term on the Public Art Commission ending on April 30, 2012. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager, James Keene, stated that in order to improve the holiday shopping and dining experience in downtown Palo Alto, the City had extended parking hours for the downtown public parking garages from November 15, 2011 through the end of the year. Phase two of the San Antonio Road Landscaping Median and Road Improvement Project was scheduled to begin construction on November 28, 2011. In order to minimize traffic disruptions, at least one lane of traffic would remain open in each direction of San Antonio Road. He announced that the Public Art Commission had invited Palo Alto Teens to a meeting workshop to brainstorm ideas for an upcoming interactive mural at the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center teen room. The meeting would be held Monday, November 21, 2011 at Cubberley room A2 from 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ilanit Gal introduced herself as the President of Friends of the Children’s Theatre and announced that the Children’s Theatre was celebrating its 80th anniversary. She discussed the various activities of the Children’s Theatre. Sylvia Sanders spoke regarding programs provided by the Children’s Theatre and presented the City with a check for $80,000. Zarek Siegel introduced himself as President of the Teen Art Council and spoke about programs they offered. The Teen Arts Council sought to promote art within the community and encourage teen wellness. They received a great deal of support from the Friends of the Children’s Theatre. 5 11/14/2011 Eric Diesel identified himself as a neuroethicist and a member of the Laura and Aldous Huxley Foundation. He discussed the problem of elder abuse and claimed that a real estate fraud ring was using the City as their base of operations. Wynn Grcich spoke regarding the Flouride Action Network, which was working to stop global water fluoridation. She played a recorded portion of an interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola regarding his activism against fluoridation. Sandy Peters introduced herself as a 43-year resident of the Professorville neighborhood. She spoke regarding parking issues in Professorville and read an excerpt from the City’s Comprehensive Plan. She asked the City to institute a residential parking permit program. Ray Dempsey spoke regarding Professorville parking issues. He supported the encouragement of commercial enterprise, as stated in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, but noted that the Plan also stated that encouragement should not come at the expense of the cities residential neighborhoods. He urged the City to address the problem by instituting a residential parking permit program. Walt Hayes thanked the community of Palo Alto for giving a strong vote of confidence to Measure E. He urged Council to move expeditiously in the exploration of organic waste alternatives and to keep the composting facility operating in the City, pending a decision on organic waste alternatives. Bob Wenslau spoke regarding Measure E, urging Council to address the issue by mid 2012. Carolyn Curtis spoke regarding Measure E, noting that the public was very interested and involved in the issue. PaloAltoFreePress stated the City Attorney’s Office did not recognize them as print media or as a newspaper, but instead designated them as a blog. He stated the City was the only municipality that did not recognize PaloAltoFreePress.com as print media. Aram James made an oral Public Records Request for the names of each of the Palo Alto Police Officers who assisted in the beating of Oakland protesters on October 25, 2011 and November 13, 2001. He asked individual Council Members to take time to meet with the Community Cooperation Team. 6 11/14/2011 Michael Francois played a recording of an interview with Jeff Green regarding the elimination of water fluoridation. Alex DiGiorgio indentified himself as a member of the Clean Coalition, an energy policy organization based in Palo Alto, who had also worked on Measure E. He suggested Council consider a source-separated residential organics program focused on food scraps, similar to the program implemented by the City of San Francisco and Alameda County. Cedric de la Beaujadier spoke regarding the passage of Measure E. He urged Council to retain the composting facility after the closure of the landfill, and explained the benefits of doing so. 7b. (Former No. 3) Community Presentation by the Downtown Street Team. Chris Richardson, Operations Manager for the Downtown Streets Team (DST), thanked Council for its ongoing support of the organization through both Human Services Resources Allocation Process and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding. He explained that the contract with the Business Improvement District was not limited to cleaning the downtown streets and garages, but allowed for outreach to the un-housed population. In an average week, team members provided over 400 man- hours of cleaning services for downtown streets, garages, and alleys, in addition to acting as additional “eyes on the street.” They also worked closely with the Palo Alto Police Department and the Community Services Department. The DST program in Palo Alto had recently grown from two to nine staff members and now had over 40 team members (the un- housed). Recently, the DST became a certified Community Development Based Organization (CDBO) and was awarded a CDBG grant to add an Employment Development Specialist and a Case Manager, charged with doing “whatever it takes” to graduate team members into employment. In less than four months, they had exceeded their quota for the year and experienced two consecutive record-breaking months, despite the tough economy. Two current team members, Michael Davis and Shannon Giovacchi, shared their personal stories of how the DST had helped them transition from homelessness to employment and housing. 7a. (Former No. 2) Study Session with Pacific Gas & Electric Company on Gas Transmission Lines. PG&E Representative, Todd Hogenson, gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding their Gas Transmission System Pipeline Safety Enhancement Plan (PSEP) within the City of Palo Alto. The presentation provided general information on pipeline routes, age, and weld types for the three gas transmission lines in Palo Alto (Lines 109, 132, and 101). He also 7 11/14/2011 discussed PG&E’s current program to monitor and test the pipelines and their plans for future maintenance and replacement. Several items required PG&E follow-up, which they agreed to complete. CONSENT CALENDAR Staff requested Agenda Item No. 9 be pulled to be heard on November 28, 2011. Staff requested Agenda Item No. 11 be moved to a date uncertain. MOTION: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Yeh to approve Agenda Item Nos. 8,10, and 12-13. 8. Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept the City Auditor’s Office Fiscal Year 2012 Proposed Workplan. 9. Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance Amending the Fiscal Year 2012 to Provide Additional Appropriations of $1,210,704 to the Planning And Community Environment Department, $247,427 to the Public Works Department, $62,295 to the Fire Department, and $935,600 to the Information Technology Department to Fund the Implementation of the Blueprint Process Plan for the Development Center. 10. Approval of a Contract With Signs & Services, Inc. in the Amount of $474,403 for Signage for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (CIP PE-09006 and LB-11000). 11. Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Amount of $111,487.75 to Fund the Purchase of seven (7) Diesel Particulate Filter Devices; the Approval of a Purchase Order with Emissions Retrofit Group in an Amount Not to Exceed $60,550.72 for the purchase and installation of four (4) Diesel Particulate Filter Devices and the Approval of a Purchase Order with Diesel Emission Service in an amount not to exceed $50,937.03 for the purchase and installation of three (3) Diesel Particulate Filter Devices (Vehicle Replacement Fund Capital Improvement Project VR-07002) of a Budget Amendment Ordinance for Staffing Changes in the Development Center. 12. Approval of a Three Year Contract in the amount of $323,232 with Downtown Streets, Inc for Janitorial Services for the City's Five Downtown Parking Garages, Downtown Sidewalks and Alleys. 8 11/14/2011 13. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Delegation Affirmation of Council Member Price. MOTION PASSED for Agenda Item Nos. 8, 10, and 12-13: 9-0 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS Council Member Shepherd asked whether Agenda Item No. 9 had been pulled from the Agenda. City Manager, James Keene, stated the Item had been pulled by Staff and that Staff was targeting November 28, 2011 as a possible return date for the item. ACTION ITEMS 14. Adoption of the Revised Rail Committee Guiding Principles for City Council. Deputy City Manager, Steve Emslie, stated the Rail Committee Guiding Principles were first adopted in 2009, after the passage of Proposition 1A. He described the High Speed Rail (HSR) Project as extremely dynamic and ever changing. The Rail Committee decided to update their Guiding Principles in order to reflect some of the more substantial changes. Council Member Klein stated most of the changes had been approved unanimously. He explained that in light of the recent release of the California High Speed Rail Authority’s (CHSRA) Business Plan and the recent court decision on the lawsuit regarding the Environmental Impact Report, he planned to propose several amendments to the document. MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Shepherd to approve the revised Rail Committee Guiding Principles. Herb Borock proposed amendments to Guiding Principles No. 3 and 14. He asked Council to officially oppose HSR, to urge Caltrain to terminate its agreement with the CHSRA for joint planning of the Caltrain Corridor, and to ask Senator Simitian to sponsor a bill calling for a new vote on HSR. Bob Moss agreed with Mr. Borock that Guiding Principle No. 14 should explicitly state that grade crossings would be paid for by the CHSRA, not the cities. He stated the CHSRA was expecting several billion dollars in funding to come from local governments, a plan which the City should officially object to. He recommended a verification election, since the information used to convince voters to support the original proposition was 9 11/14/2011 inaccurate. He added that nothing in the CHSRA Business Plan suggested that HSR would ever make enough money to repay the cost of the bonds. AMENDMENT: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to amend the Guiding Principles by adding Roman Numeral I-Overall Policy and Roman Numeral II-Guiding Principles: I - Overall Policy City Council believes that the 2012 business plan of the High Speed Rail (HSR) Authority shows that HSR costs are too high, and its projected ridership too low, and therefore urge our legislators to terminate the HSR program or as an alternative place the matter on the November 2012 ballot for the people to decide the issue. II- Guiding Principles If HSR project moves forward the City’s Guiding Principles shall be: 1. The City is opposed to an elevated alignment of HSR/Caltrain in Palo Alto. 2. The City’s preferred vertical alignment of fixed rail in Palo Alto is below grade. 3. All neighborhoods in Palo Alto affected by HSR/Caltrain should be treated with equal consideration with respect to vertical alignment impacts. 4. The City believes that the pending program EIR for the Central Valley to San Francisco portion of HSR is fatally flawed and that the HSR Authority should reopen and reconsider its decision to use the Pacheco Pass route. 5. The City supports the findings of the Legislative Analyst’s Office, State Auditor and the HSR Peer Review Committee which question the viability and accuracy of the Authority’s Business Plan on such matters as the, ridership projections, identification of sufficient and reliable funding sources, project management and operations of HSR. 6. The City favors legislation which would enable effective implementation of the HSR Peer Review Committee authorized by AB 3034. 7. Palo Alto supports transit and urban design solutions that will be compatible with our economic development strategies, transportation goals, and vision of the transit corridor within our boundaries; HSR/Caltrain needs to complement the goals and strategies of our Comprehensive Plan. 10 11/14/2011 8. Palo Alto supports the use of the Context Sensitive Solutions related to HSR and Caltrain that is effectively funded and implemented by the Authority. 9. The High Speed Rail Authority should provide sufficient funding to affected Cities to allow them to hire experts to study reports requiring feedback and sufficient outreach to the community to capture their concerns and suggestions. 10. Proposed changes to the Caltrain corridor by either the Authority or Caltrain should provide realistic renderings of the various alternatives and also provide simulations that would help to provide an understanding of the sound and vibrations. 11. Palo Alto strongly supports Caltrain and the commuter rail service at the present or improved levels of service. 12. Palo Alto also supports the modernization of Caltrain, and/or as the lead agent for a phased alignment with but independent of HSR. 13. Palo Alto will work cooperatively with neighboring communities with respect to HSR and Caltrain issues of mutual concern through vehicles such as the Peninsula Cities Consortium. 14. Palo Alto expects all current rail crossings to remain active. In the event that the modernization of Caltrain and/or HSR increases train service from current 2011 levels, Palo Alto supports grade separation for the Alma, Churchill, East Meadow, and East Charleston crossings. 15. The Guiding Principles of the Committee incorporates Council adopted written comments to the Authority, the Caltrain Joint Powers Board, and other relevant agencies. Council Member Shepherd stated the Guiding Principles had been amended several times since their adoption, which was important because it allowed the City to accurately convey its position on HSR to the public. Council Member Holman expressed support for the Amendment, which she described as clarifying. Council Member Burt noted that the Amendment identified the projected ridership estimates as “too low.” He did not believe that the projections were too low, but did have a great deal of skepticism regarding the projections for the first operating segment. He preferred the ridership projections to be identified as “fatally flawed,” rather than as “too low.” 11 11/14/2011 Council Member Klein agreed with Council Member Burt regarding the ridership projections language, but emphasized that the most important part of the Amendment was Council’s opposition to the HSR Project. He explained that Council had initially shied from the use of strong language in order to avoid compromising the City’s efforts to affect change, but he felt that it was now time to take a strong position. He asked whether Council was willing to go on record favoring termination of the Project or placement of the issue back on the ballot for the voters to decide. He stated the original project estimates now looked to have been off by approximately 70 percent, which was either attributable to remarkable incompetence or deliberate misrepresentation. INCORPORATED INTO THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to delete the words “ too low” in Roman Numeral I- Overall Policy, making the sentence “… and its projected ridership is fundamentally flawed…”. Council Member Burt noted that consideration of a policy in strong opposition to the HSR Project was very significant. He emphasized the need for extreme care in crafting opposition language and stated Council should be cognizant of the fact that their verbal comments were just as public as their actions. He added that the $99 billion estimated project cost included inflation estimates up to the year of completion. He cautioned Council against making any inaccurate statements that could be used against their position. Council Member Schmid thanked the Rail Committee for their work. He stated the Item was a perfect example of Council efficiency, in that Council had broken off into a smaller committee to research the subject thoroughly and craft a detailed and thoughtful approach. He asked whether Council Member Klein and Council Member Shepherd would agree to refer the Item back to the Rail Committee with direction to formulate a proposal and produce supporting information. He explained that it order to take a strong position on HSR, Council as a whole needed to clearly understand of all of the information used to support their position. Council Member Klein agreed with Council Member Schmid’s suggestion, but indicated he would like to hear from the rest of Council. He asked Staff to provide Council with copies of the Revised CHSRA Business Plan. He felt Council had enough information to either oppose the HSR Project or to vote to place it on the 2012 ballot. Council could adopt either of those policies and direct the Rail Committee to refine the language. Council Member Shepherd agreed that she would like to hear from the rest of Council regarding the issue. She asked whether it was critical for 12 11/14/2011 Council to decide on the matter at that meeting. Although she felt that Council was ready to decide whether the Item should be placed on the November 2012 ballot, she did not feel comfortable opposing the HSR Project without first understanding the political ramifications of that decision. Vice Mayor Yeh thanked the Rail Committee for their work and spoke in support of Council Member Schmid’s proposal. He hadn’t had the opportunity to review the CHSRA Revised Business Plan in-depth, a document which he felt was important and would serve as valuable justification for any Council decision. He explained that it could be in Council’s best interest to wait until after the November 15, 2011 HSR Hearing, which would likely offer insight into the nature of discussions occurring at the state level. He indicated support to send the Item back to the Rail Committee. Council Member Price agreed with Council Member Schmid regarding the importance of referring the Item back to the Rail Committee. She felt that a declaration of opposition to HSR would have many implications, both strategically and politically. A decision of the magnitude suggested was also likely to require a transmittal letter. She stated that the HSR issue had been extraordinarily difficult for her, as she had been a proponent of the concept since its inception. She explained that the quality of analyses and ridership studies presented by the CHSRA had completely undermined her confidence in their authority, and that it had been painful for her to watch the project implode. She hoped that Council would continue to discuss the importance of fixed rail and Caltrain on the Peninsula. Council Member Holman stated she would support referral of the Item back to the Rail Committee. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to; 1) refer this back to the Rail Committee to evaluate whether the Council should take the stance that they believe the 2012 business plan of the High Speed Rail Authority showed that the High Speed Rail costs are too high, and its projected ridership is fundamentally flawed, and therefore urge our legislators to terminate the HSR program or as an alternative place the matter on the November 2012, and 2) the Rail Committee is to return to Council with a recommendation. Council Member Scharff agreed with Council Member Klein that it might be time to take a strong stance in opposition to HSR, but suggested that Council should be careful not to make that decision too hastily. He felt that it was a significant decision and agreed that it could necessitate a transmittal letter. He indicated Council should be very deliberate in their thinking regarding the issue. The best way to do that would be to allow 13 11/14/2011 the Rail Committee to perform an in-depth analysis of the Revised Business Plan and court decision and to return their findings to Council. Council Member Schmid felt Council had been moving towards a position of opposition for some time, but it was important to allow the Rail Committee to return with a clearly articulated motion, supported by data. Such action would allow those Council Members not involved with the material on a day-to-day basis to confidently support their position. Mayor Espinosa indicated his support for the Substitute Motion and for the language in the original Motion. He hoped the Rail Committee’s recommendation would incorporate the spirit of the original Motion. Council Member Klein emphasized that he did not object to the Substitute Motion, but would have preferred it to include stronger language. He preferred the Substitute Motion to read “return the matter to the Rail Committee to draft language and rationale for the City to go on record urging the California State Legislature to terminate the HSR Project or to place the issue on the November 2012 ballot.” He interpreted the current Substitute Motion as directing the Rail Committee to analyze whether Council should adopt a stance in opposition to the HSR Project and/or recommend the issue to be placed on the ballot. SUBSTITUTE MOTION RESTATED: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to return the matter to the Rail Committee to draft language and rationale for the City to go on record urging the legislature to terminate the High Speed Rail Program or place the matter on November 2012 ballot. AMENDMENT TO SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to add the word “evaluate” prior to the wording “the draft language”. Council Member Scharff stated he would like to send the issue back to the Rail Committee, with the assumption that they would take a stand in opposition to the HSR Project. However, the Rail Committee should be free to develop another recommendation based on their analysis and judgment. He expressed concern that Council not act too precipitously. Council Member Klein felt a Council decision would not be precipitous, as the HSR issue had been one of community concern for more than two years. He noted that a number of meetings and hearings had been held on the issue and emphasized that it was time for the City’s voice to be heard. HSR was not only bad for Palo Alto, but for the entire state of California. AMENDMENT PASSED: 8-1 Klein no 14 11/14/2011 SUBSTITUTE MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0 MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Yeh to refer to the High Speed Rail Committee alternative language to Guiding Principle No. 14 as follows: “…Palo Alto will consider grade separation solutions for the Alma, Churchill,…” and add language at the end of the sentence “…that is effectively funded and implemented by the lead agency.” Council Member Holman felt that Guiding Principle No. 14 represented an absolute statement that if the City experienced an increase, even by one train, it would support grade separations. The statement did not include any qualifiers to explain what type of grade separations would be supported or to identify the source of the funding. Council Member Shepherd stated the Guiding Principle document already incorporated the City’s opposition to an above ground viaduct. She felt that it would be redundant to reiterate that sentiment. She noted that Caltrain expected, as a part of their modernization, to add one more train in both directions. The addition of more trains would affect the City’s current at-grade crossings. She wanted to ensure that the City’s position was made clear. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Price to delete Guiding Principle No. 8- Palo Alto supports the use of the Context Sensitive Solutions related to HSR and Caltrain that is effectively funded and implemented by the Authority. Council Member Klein felt like the language was outdated and did not want the statement to be used to Council’s disadvantage. Council Member Price agreed and considered the language unnecessary. Council Member Burt disagreed with the Motion, stating that Caltrain modernization or HSR on the Peninsula could happen 5, 10 or 20 years down the road. It was clear that nothing was imminent, but Council should maintain their advocacy regarding what would have been, and what still would be, the right process, should those projects move forward in the future. Council Member Shepherd agreed with Council member Burt. She felt that Guiding Principle No. 8 was worth keeping. 15 11/14/2011 Vice Mayor Yeh commented that he would not support the Motion because Guiding Principle No. 8 would be essential if the previously mentioned projects were to move forward in the future. MOTION FAILED: 3-6 Klein, Price, Schmid yes MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to refer the entire Guiding Principles to the Rail Committee. Council Member Shepherd indicated she would not support the Motion because she felt it was important to get the Guiding Principles document operational as soon as possible. Sending the document back to the Rail Committee would further delay implementation. Council Member Schmid stated that he would support the Motion. He noted that Guiding Principle No. 12 discussed phased alignment, which he assumed Council would not support. He observed that Guiding Principle No. 15 “incorporated Council adopted written comments to the Authority, the Caltrain Joint Powers Board, and other relevant agencies.” He felt it was inappropriate to incorporate all of the strategic and tactical comments made in those correspondences into the Guiding Principles document. He suggested that if those letters contained particularly important principles, they should be added to the document on an individual basis.   MOTION PASSED: 8-1 Shepherd no COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Mayor Yeh stated he would be participating in Assembly Member Gordon’s Local Government Advisory Committee meeting on November 17, 2011. The City Council convened into the Closed Sessions at 11:06 PM. CLOSED SESSION 15. 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, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray, Dennis Burns) Employee Organization: Palo Alto Police Officers (PAPOA) Association Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 16 11/14/2011 16. 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, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray, Dennis Burns) - Employee Organization: Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (Sworn) - Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 17. 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, 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 Sessions at 12:15 A.M. and Mayor Espinosa advised no reportable action. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 A.M.