HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-05-05 City Council Summary Minutes 05/05/97 83-151
Regular Meeting May 5, 1997
1. Presentation by Captain Michael A. Baker, NASA Astronaut, Who
Honored the City of Palo Alto by Carrying a Fire Department Uniform Shoulder Patch Aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis on the Mission to the Mir Space Station..................83-153
2. Appointments to Public Art Commission.................83-154
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS........................................83-155 APPROVAL OF MINUTES........................................83-155
3. Review of Consultant Scope of Services for Request for Proposals for Industrial Wastewater Discharge Evaluation - Refer to Finance Committee............................83-155 4. Review of Consultant Scope of Services for Landfill Closure/
Postclosure Plan Update and Phase II-B Closure Plans and Specifications Preparation - Refer to Finance Committee83-155 5. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and PARC Environmental Contractors for Civic Center Asbestos Removal.........83-155
6. Resolution 7662 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Compensation Plan for Management and Confidential Personnel and Council Appointed Officers Adopted by Resolution No. 7627 to Amend the Salary
and Benefits for Council Appointed Officers≅ .........83-156 7. Amendment No. 1 to Consultant Agreement C7085061 between the
City of Palo Alto and Kennedy/Jenks Consultant, Inc. for Surveying Services for Amarillo Avenue and Embarcadero Way
Relief Sewer Project .................................83-156
05/05/97 83-152
8. Ordinance 4414 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 16.50 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Regarding Interim Regulations Governing Historic
Designation and Demolition of Residential Structures Built Before 1940 by Adding Section 16.50.085"..............83-156
8A. Ordinance 4415 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 13.12.050 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code Relating to Deleting Territory From Parking
Assessment District Boundaries≅ .......................83-156
9. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 22.04 [Park and Recreation Building Use and
Regulations] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Timothy Hopkins Creekside Park, Scott Street Minipark, and Don Secondino
Robles Park ..........................................83-156
10. Recommendations for Continued Use of the Terman Community Center................................................83-159
11. Conceptual Approval of Long-Term Council Chamber Improvements 83-162
12. Audit of Building Inspection Practices................83-177 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m............83-189
05/05/97 83-153
05/05/97 83-154
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Council Chambers at 7:11 p.m. PRESENT: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss (arrived at
7:13 p.m.), McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Presentation by Captain Michael A. Baker, NASA Astronaut, Who
Honored the City of Palo Alto by Carrying a Fire Department Uniform Shoulder Patch Aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis on
the Mission to the Mir Space Station
Resolution 7661 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the
City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Captain Michael
A. Baker, NASA Astronaut≅ MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to adopt the Resolution.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
Captain Michael A. Baker, NASA Astronaut, presented to Mayor Huber
a certificate authenticating that a Fire Department=s Uniform
Shoulder Patch was on board the Space Shuttle Atlantis. Fire Chief Ruben Grijalva circulated a photo showing Mr. Baker and the patch in space.
Vice Mayor Andersen asked about Mr. Baker's perspective of the world while in space.
Mr. Baker said the biggest thing one noted was how fragile planet earth was with a thin layer of atmosphere around it and that there
was nothing else around it for miles. The need to take care of our planet was quite apparent. Council Member Fazzino appreciated the opportunity to spend some time with Mr. Baker at the Black and White Ball. He thanked him
for the honor and hoped he would soon become a Palo Alto resident.
Council Member Schneider asked how Mr. Baker happened to agree to carry the Palo Alto Fire Department patch.
Mr. Grijalva had asked Mr. Baker's sister-in-law, a Palo Alto resident, if he would honor Palo Alto by carrying the Fire
Department patch with him into space.
05/05/97 83-155
Council Member Schneider said the Palo Alto Fire Department once
again showed itself as being a creative force. Mr. Grijalva said the honor was also meaningful because the space
program had done so much to benefit the fire service. In addition to the advances in medicine and technology, the space program was
responsible for improvements such as the self-contained breathing apparatus, fire retardant material used in the turnouts, and encapsulated suits for entering hazardous materials environments,
which all came out of the space program. Palo Alto firefighters were safer today due to the space program.
2. Appointments to Public Art Commission
Council Member Eakins said it was a pleasure to interview such an inspiring body of applicants for the Public Art Commission (PAC).
She was impressed with the range and background of the applicants, their experiences, and their interests. She urged those who were not interviewed to apply again especially Gene Jacobson. It was a tough decision. She supported Kathryn Carleton, Tim Broderick, and Kathryn Dunlevie on the first ballot.
Vice Mayor Andersen said while he was unable to participate in the interviews, he had made contact with several of the candidates. He supported Kathryn Carleton, Timothy Broderick, and Bridget Barton on the first ballot. He was impressed with Kathryn Dunlevie and
encouraged her to apply again. Council Member Schneider intended to support Bridget Barton, Kathryn Carleton, and artist Ron Cooper on the first ballot.
Council Member Fazzino intended to support incumbent Kathryn Carleton, Bridget Barton, and Kathryn Dunlevie on the first ballot.
RESULTS OF THE FIRST ROUND OF VOTING FOR PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
VOTING FOR BARTON: Andersen, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss,
Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR BRODERICK: Andersen, Eakins, McCown
VOTING FOR CARLETON: Andersen, Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss,
McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler VOTING FOR COOPER: Kniss, Schneider
VOTING FOR DUNLEVIE: Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, McCown,
Rosenbaum, Wheeler
05/05/97 83-156
City Clerk Gloria Young announced that Brigid Barton, Kathryn Carleton, and Kathryn Dunlevie received five or more votes and were appointed on the first ballot.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
T. J. Watt, believed the Council and City Attorney should be defeated in the next election.
Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding civic
responsibility. Lynn Chiapella, 631 Colorado Avenue, spoke regarding backup for the
code enforcement officers.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Vice Mayor Andersen moved, seconded by Schneider, to approve the Minutes of April 8, 1997, as submitted. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Eakins Αnot participating.≅ CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Andersen, to
approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 3 through 8A. 3. Review of Consultant Scope of Services for Request for Proposals for Industrial Wastewater Discharge Evaluation - Refer to Finance Committee
4. Review of Consultant Scope of Services for Landfill Closure/
Postclosure Plan Update and Phase II-B Closure Plans and Specifications Preparation - Refer to Finance Committee
5. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and PARC Environmental Contractors for Civic Center Asbestos Removal
6. Resolution 7662 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Compensation Plan for
Management and Confidential Personnel and Council Appointed Officers Adopted by Resolution No. 7627 to Amend the Salary
and Benefits for Council Appointed Officers≅
7. Amendment No. 1 to Consultant Agreement C7085061 between the
City of Palo Alto and Kennedy/Jenks Consultant, Inc. for Surveying Services for Amarillo Avenue and Embarcadero Way Relief Sewer Project
05/05/97 83-157
8. Ordinance 4414 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 16.50 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Regarding Interim Regulations Governing Historic
Designation and Demolition of Residential Structures Built Before 1940 by Adding Section 16.50.085"
8A. Ordinance 4415 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 13.12.050 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code Relating to Deleting Territory From Parking
Assessment District Boundaries≅ MOTION PASSED 9-0 for Item Nos. 3-7. MOTION PASSED 8-1 for Item No. 8, Andersen Αno.≅ MOTION PASSED 8-0 for Item No. 8A, Schneider Αnot participating.≅
PUBLIC HEARINGS
9. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 22.04 [Park and Recreation Building Use and
Regulations] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Timothy Hopkins Creekside Park, Scott Street Minipark, and Don Secondino Robles Park
Director of Community Services Paul Thiltgen said the item was in response to and as a result of meetings with citizens in the park
areas who raised concerns regarding the consumption of alcohol in the three parks.
Vice Mayor Andersen asked about the criteria for the parks selected and whether Council should move ahead with a similar ban in other
parks. Mr. Thiltgen said while Mitchell and Rinconada Parks had not banned
alcohol, it was allowed on a permit basis only. The majority of Palo Alto parks did not ban alcohol. The criterion for banning
alcohol was basically the existence of problems. If complaints occurred, staff spoke with the neighbors to find out what problems there were and then a decision was made about whether to go forward with an alcohol ban. The other parks had not registered any complaints nor had problems occurred.
Vice Mayor Andersen asked whether there was potential for problems to transfer to other parks not identified.
05/05/97 83-158
Mr. Thiltgen said while the problems could transfer, it had not
happened in the past. The parks in question were adjacent to creeks and another was adjacent to railroad tracks. Robles and Scott Parks were generally Downtown. Those three areas tended to
have people congregating and consuming alcohol during the days and evenings. The same problems did not arise in any of the other
areas. There were problems at Mitchell and Rinconada Park because those parks were heavily used on the weekend, and the City was having problems with large groups of people drinking a lot of
alcohol. The rest of the parks did not have many group picnic areas.
Mayor Huber declared the Public Hearing open.
Roger Craig, 101 Waverley Street, lived adjacently to Timothy Hopkins Park. He thanked staff for its work on the problems of
public drunkenness in the parks. Since the banning of alcohol in Johnson Park, he had seen an increase of alcohol use in Timothy Hopkins Park. Because of the number of people who lived in the creek, the drunkenness was more of a problem. The ban would help to reduce the trashing of Timothy Hopkins Park and the antisocial
behavior in the neighborhood. He read comments from Suzanne Chesson, 115 Waverley Street, who lived near San Francisquito Creek and Timothy Hopkins Park, and supported the ban on alcoholic
beverages. He said neighbors= Lynnelle and Jim Mimmick, 320 Palo Alto Avenue, also encouraged support of the banning of alcohol in
the neighborhood parks. Michael Midolo, 362 Channing Avenue, represented himself and Neil O'Sullivan, and said the situation was terrible. Scott Street Mini Park was very small, and it was immediately adjacent to a senior
citizen home. He urged support of the ban. Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, said one of the parks on the proposal was Hopkins Park, which ran along San Francisquito Creek. El Palo Alto Park was not on the list, and a portion of that park
ran along the creek between Emerson Street toward El Camino Real. He queried whether not including El Palo Alto Park was an oversight. Mr. Thiltgen said El Palo Alto Park was not presented as a drinking
issue, but rather a park which did not contain an alcohol ban.
Mayor Huber declared the Public Hearing closed. Council Member Fazzino believed the concerns of many of the
neighbors in the Downtown North area had to do with Timothy Hopkins Park extending to El Palo Alto Park. He asked whether the inclusion of El Palo Alto Park could be part of the second reading.
05/05/97 83-159
City Attorney Ariel Calonne said given the agenda notice, there was not sufficient description under the Brown Act. Therefore, he would return with an ordinance for first reading at the same time
as the second reading.
Council Member Fazzino clarified Council would act on the proposal before it that evening, and when the second reading returned, another item on that agenda would represent the first reading of an
ordinance to prohibit alcohol consumption at El Palo Alto Park.
City Manager June Fleming said the item could appear on the Consent Calendar.
Mr. Calonne said that was correct. He asked Council to direct staff by motion to include the ordinance for El Palo Alto Park.
MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Wheeler, to introduce the ordinance amending Palo Alto Municipal Code 22.04 prohibiting alcohol consumption at Timothy Hopkins, Scott, and Robles Parks. Further, that staff be directed to return with an
ordinance prohibiting alcohol consumption at El Palo Alto Park.
Ordinance 1st Reading entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of
the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 22.04 [Park and Recreation Building Use and Regulations] of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code to Prohibit Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Timothy Hopkins Creekside Park, Scott Street Minipark, and
Don Secondino Robles Park≅
Council Member Fazzino thanked Mr. Borock who continued to amaze
him with his knowledge of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). He thanked the Police Department for its efforts to work closely with the neighbors in each of the affected areas over the past year to
document problems. The ordinance before the Council was undergirded by a significant amount of evidence, and he supported
it. Vice Mayor Andersen said it appeared that alcohol was
systematically being banned from City parks. He was interested in having staff notify neighborhood associations that the Council had
taken the action of banning alcohol in some parks, and finding out whether there were concerns in other neighborhood parks. Rather
than waiting for complaints and problems, he asked whether it might be possible to find out if neighborhoods would like to see the changes made, and if so, could return to Council at another point.
Council Member Fazzino had no problem with staff simply sending a letter to neighborhood associations indicating the action Council
05/05/97 83-160
had taken that evening and asking for any additional information
regarding problems in neighborhood parks related to alcohol. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to notify the neighborhood associations of the Council=s action that evening and to request that the neighborhood associations provide the City with any problems or concerns in their parks which are associated with alcohol usage. MOTION PASSED 9-0.
REPORTS OF OFFICIALS 10. Recommendations for Continued Use of the Terman Community
Center Director of Community Services Paul Thiltgen said about two years prior, questions arose regarding what should be done with the recreation wing at the Terman Community Center (Terman). Staff was
directed to run a series of pilot programs which were unsuccessful. The Terman Community Center Advisory Committee (Advisory
Committee) was created to generate recommendations on what to do with the site. While there were slight differences between the recommendations from the Advisory Committee and staff, the basic
recommendation was to move forward and make the building available to lease. Before that could occur, however, changes needed to be
made in the Terman Specific Plan. The major difference between the two recommendations was the long-term presence of the library facility. Since Council would receive a Library Master Plan in the near future, staff did not want to take away from anything contained in that plan; therefore, staff did not make the
recommendation to make the library a long-term facility. Council Member Kniss said two closed educational sites in the City had become real community centers, Terman and Cubberley. She asked how staff saw the use of the City's recreational facilities
changing. Mr. Thiltgen said the advent of the Cubberley Community Center (Cubberley) changed the picture of how all the City's community centers were used. There was much more community center space
available in the City which adjusted the need for space and how the other centers were used. The additional space would have a long-
term impact on the Mitchell Park Community Center (Mitchell Park), and it had definitely had an impact on Terman. No impact had been noted on the Lucie Stern Community Center (Lucie Stern)partially
due to its tradition and history. If Cubberley had not happened, the City would probably have seen different activity at Terman and Mitchell Park.
05/05/97 83-161
Council Member Kniss said occasionally the City had received complaints that all the activities congregated in the Downtown area. She heard from people in the community with respect to
having Cubberley and Terman as anchors had made a significant difference. While the Cubberley site had not been a community
center for very long, she understood patterns had emerged which pulled neighborhoods together.
Mr. Thiltgen said Cubberley offered a dynamic range of activities which did not exist at that end of town before. Terman had not
succeeded with programs which were successful elsewhere in the City because there was an active community center in the same area, i.e. the Jewish Community Center (JCC). In terms of whether the JCC
affected all the citizens, the answer was Αyes≅ and Αno.≅ However, the JCC had changed its pattern of operation and had become much more flexible and open in the use of the facility. While the JCC had made a real effort to try and bring the whole community into their area, it was not totally accepted at that point. If the JCC
were not already there, there might have been a very different activity level and use patterns at Terman. Also, the City did not
have the funding to support making the Terman facility something different. Realizing the Terman Community Center approach might not be achievable was not easy for the Advisory Committee since
many were part of Terman=s initial set up. It was hard to fight with the fact that despite good efforts to make Terman work as a community center with good programs was unsuccessful. While it was hard to give up the community center concept, he believed the Advisory Committee recognized there was a better use for the
facility other than letting it sit idly.
Council Member Kniss said Council really had made an attempt to provide valuable community services in each segment of the community.
Council Member Wheeler clarified that after the appropriate changes
were made to the Terman Specific Plan staff intended to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to various entities in the community to occupy the 30's wing or portions thereof.
Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison said yes.
Council Member Wheeler asked whether any criteria beyond what was contained in the staff report (CMR:211:97) had been determined? Ms. Harrison said no, but staff would return to Council with the
RFP.
05/05/97 83-162
Council Member Wheeler had attended several of the last ditch
effort meetings at which the Community Services staff and the community laid out plans to forcefully attempt to get people into the center to take advantage of the classes to be offered. She
followed those efforts and shared the disappointment of the Advisory Committee and the neighborhood as well as the realistic
appraisal that the best efforts did not work. Several years prior, Mr. Thiltgen said there needed to be a critical mass in order to make a city community center really viable and active, and having
one and one-half wings of an old junior high school would not be sufficient. Like many of the neighbors, she had hopes. She could
attest to the fact that staff and the neighborhood tried its best to make Terman viable as a community center and she reluctantly arrived at the same conclusions as staff.
MOTION: Council Member Wheeler moved, seconded by Schneider, to
approve staff recommendation to: 1. Authorize staff to initiate the process to amend the Comprehensive Plan and the Terman Specific Plan to reflect a change of use of the 30's wing long-term rental space for
child care, nonprofit or educational community-based organizations and/or used as space for City programming. 2. Direct that funds generated by the rental of Terman site rooms be used for the continued maintenance of the site and the
enhancement of Terman Library services, if in accordance with the Library Master Plan, and/or the enhancement of Community Services in the Terman area through new events or programs. 3. Confirm continued use of the 20's wing as a library and the
continued use of the library meeting room for City programming rental activity.
MOTION PASSED 9-0.
11. Conceptual Approval of Long-Term Council Chamber Improvements
Director of Public Works Glenn Roberts said staff was seeking conceptual approval and policy direction for a future Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the renovation of the Council
Chambers.
Martin Dreiling, CSS Architects, presented an overview of the initial concept in response to considerable time spent with City staff to try and identify what was wrong or right with the present
Council Chambers. The modernization plan was in its early stages so there was plenty of time to further study anything Council was
interested in. In studying the Council Chambers, clearly a
05/05/97 83-163
substantial amount of money could be spent to reconstruct the room
to make it more traditional and easier to deal with. While the present configuration with the dais in the corner caused some of the problems with the presentation system visibility, it was also
one of the things which made the room unique compared to chambers throughout the Bay Area. While the red benches were uncomfortable,
the benches were striking and gave off a communal feeling among the public, which was a nice aspect of the room. One proposal was to redesign and reconstruct the benches to be comfortable but still
striking. Another major complaint was the sense of separation between the public, staff, and the dais. From the public point of
view, there was a fence which said "don't cross." The thought was to open up the front where people could see and pass things through, while giving off a sense of engagement. There was a sense
that the dais loomed over the staff area and the public. The dais was not tall but the Council Members all sat against a void
backdrop where there were curtains and windows and no sense of connection. It was like the dais was closed off and the Council was on the outside even further removed from the public. The initial concept proposed a backdrop which continued the architecture of the room and provided a nice place for a City seal
and potential storage space. The staff area railing was integrated into the architecture and was more built in to be part of an intended object rather than a lot of loose scattered furniture. There was a problem with the presentation system, and the concept was to return to a rear projection system in the wall, where a rear
projection booth already existed, using current technology so the screen could be seen in the daylight without loss of clarity. The system would be fully digital so slides could go in and digital input could occur, and the City Clerk could send images from her computer to the screen. On the right side of the rear projection
screen would be a dedicated screen for the agenda, voting boards, etc. There were some configuration issues with the room in terms
of Council's ability to see the big screen, and without redesigning the entire room, the solution was for each person on the dais to have individual screens which mimicked what was on the big screen.
The plan included an access component for persons with disabilities. One proposal was to remove some of the seats in the
front row and level a portion of the floor so that persons in wheelchairs had a place up front in the mainstream. That would bring that portion of the floor up to the level of the staff area,
and the remainder of the seating area would maintain the current gentle curve. The cable booth was clearly in a tough location at
the front door of the room. It blocked entry and view into the room. The proposal was to relocate the booth either somewhere else in the room or somewhere more remote. An entry element would be
included with a new louvered screen much like the existing architecture to provide a view into the room prior to entry. While
it would still provide the separation, one could see what was
05/05/97 83-164
happening prior to entering, and Council could see when someone
walked in. The concept was to maintain the overall architecture of the room. The louvered system, the glass, and the light were already there. It was fairly beautiful room, although somewhat run
down.
Council Member Wheeler queried how the space in the back of the Chambers toward the Police Department wing which contained a rounded element was envisioned.
Mr. Dreiling said it was one of the possibilities for the
relocation of a television booth. There was a substantial amount of space there with a rather nebulous definition. There was a real logic in keeping with the architecture of the room to place the
television booth in the back to provide the observation capabilities if necessary. The scheme also included facilities for
the radio booth to function as it did currently. Council Member Fazzino asked for clarification regarding the envisioned technology at Council places, and for assurances that the technology would be state-of-the-art by the time the proposal
was implemented. Mr. Dreiling said it was a fully digital system. The heart of the system would be a central processor, and the input components, video decks, slide readers, etc., was all off-the-shelf and could
be changed. The biggest change in technology was in the individual monitors and projectors. While the projectors were expensive, the technology was fairly stable. The monitors themselves were becoming less expensive, evolved constantly, and might get changed out periodically. The key was how the design process was
structured so that when Council went to that technology would not become obsolete in the near future. The intent was not to attach
the most gadgets to the system as possible because the system needed to be operable by a variety of people and useful for many purposes. The control portion of the system was software
controlled so it could be consistently changed, not only with technology but with the perceived needs.
Council Member Fazzino was more interested in the information Council could access than the actual technology. He understood
that each Council Member would have a monitor, and queried whether Council would have access to the Internet and to the Palo Alto web
page. Mr. Dreiling said yes. There would be a central point where things
would feed into the main processor. There were various control possibilities but Council would be able to bring Internet items
05/05/97 83-165
onto the screen. He could bring in a digital display or a digital
program on disk. Council Member Fazzino asked whether he could search for a planning
document while Council Member Schneider was searching for something in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC).
Mr. Dreiling said that level of detail would be included in the next phase. It was important to make sure such flexibility was the
right choice because in addition to the costs involved there was the issue of how many possibilities Council wanted to have at the
dais and the potential for distraction. There was a logic to ensuring that what Council saw on its screen was what the public saw.
Mr. Roberts pointed out that the past couple of questions addressed
items contemplated in the full scope project but not for inclusion in the reduced scope project of $320,000 which was before Council as the staff recommendation. If there was interest in the items being discussed, staff would need further direction from Council in that regard.
Council Member Fazzino said while the technological capabilities of the monitors were not part of the current phase of the project, he was interested in whether one Council Member could access a planning document while another accessed a PAMC section without
Brown Act problems. City Attorney Ariel Calonne said accessing library information was fine. The restriction would occur if there were communications going on. The Council would not want to have a Messaging system
available between Council Members. From there, it became more of a practical concern. For example, having live Messaging coming in
from outside would be a significant concern. Council Member Fazzino clarified that if it would be a problem if a
member of the public wanted to communicate individually.
Mr. Calonne could not say it would be unlawful, but it would be an issue to be addressed.
Council Member Fazzino clarified the issue would have to be addressed by the City Attorney, and the information would have to
be made available to the rest of the Council and the public. Mr. Calonne could not even go that far. He could clearly say that
Messaging among the Council Members would be a problem. Receiving messages from the public, while not yet a Brown Act issue, would
raise concerns about how one conducted a meeting in public when
05/05/97 83-166
receiving unknown input from somewhere else at the same time. It
was more of a practical problem than a legal one, although he could imagine specific situations when a legal issue could arise. He urged the policymakers to give close consideration to any sort of
active communication system other than people being in the Chambers and talking to the Council at least with the law in its present
state. Council Member Fazzino clarified that a passive communication
system was fine.
Mr. Calonne said it was fine if Council accessed library information.
Council Member Fazzino asked whether any thought was given to doing something for the public with respect to monitors possibly in the
back of the Chambers. Mr. Dreiling said while discussed, monitors for the public were not in the specific proposal. The system would have the flexibility to place a monitor anywhere. One of the components was the
flexibility for the staff facilities, where monitors would live, and who might need a level of control. There was another component to the system when a speaker would sign up on the system on an information table at the back of the room. The information would be entered on a keyboard on a very simple screen form that would
then feed into the main system which could, with the City Clerk's okay, feed up to the Council's monitors. Council Member Fazzino asked whether any thought was given to approaching local computer companies for a possible grant of
equipment.
Mr. Dreiling said there was always that possibility. Council Member Kniss was interested in the slope that was
envisioned and the fixed seats. As she recalled, there was discussion of the Chambers as a general meeting room that could be
altered in a variety of ways. She was curious about whether it was discussed.
Mr. Dreiling said the proposed slope was very close to compliance for access regulations. If the entire floor were flattened, it was
a fairly large reconstruction project which began to limit the functionality and the comfort level for what occurred in the various scenarios, e.g., Council, Planning Commission, etc. In
terms of the alternate uses of the room, it hurt the functionality for the Council so much that it did not seem like the place to do
05/05/97 83-167
it. The Council Chambers was a special place in town where things
happened that were different from almost anything else in the City. Council Member Kniss clarified the slope would not be very
different, the seats would continue to be fixed, and it was really the look and feel that would change more than the actual
interaction and configuration which currently existed. Mr. Dreiling said there were a lot of subtle changes in the
interaction. For instance, the current speaker location was an odd position because the speaker tried to look in many different
directions. The speaker position would move and the speaker would have a more controlling view of the proceedings which added a certain level of comfort for the public. Schemes had been looked
at which moved the dais around making subtle changes in order to get a better view of the screen which hurt other things without a
major redesign of the room. Council Member Kniss would not be enthusiastic about receiving E-mail while sitting at the dais. There was enough happening in terms of new material arriving at places, etc. She was also not
interested in a Teleprompter. Council Member McCown asked whether the consultant participated in some of the reduced scope ideas.
Mr. Roberts said the reduced scope was initiated from a staff's perspective, and the architect helped to develop the details. City Manager June Fleming said the reduced scope was what staff considered to be the base project, and Council could add on to that
if it so chose.
Council Member McCown said she was disappointed that so little was being done with the audio visual presentation system in the reduced scope. If she understood the reduced scope, it was limited to the
sound system which would not affect the quality of the presentation system. She asked whether consideration was given to some
incremental additional dollars to deal with the quality of the presentation system rather than the full $270,000 portion of the project. It was hard for Council Members to see what was going on,
and short of the monitors at each Council Members= place which she believed was of significant cost, it would be easier for Council to
get up and look at something that was not at places. However, she was also concerned about improving the visibility for the people in the Chambers, the lighting, and changing the overhead projectors to
fit the screen.
05/05/97 83-168
Mr. Dreiling said the proposed system was digital and involved
video projectors which would involve a computer processor at some point. It was a fairly large line item and probably represented 50 or 60 percent of the system. If the Council went with something
less, Council would get a typical optical presentation system which required actually loading slides, etc. The next step down was more
of a makeshift approach that could be improved but would have some functional problems. While the system discussed was not a Cadillac system, it was adequate to ultimately do all the things Council
wanted in a simple, easy to input and a controlled manner. The sound system was considered the first incremental step in that it
had an isolated character. The video projection system was a big single piece of equipment which unfortunately did not break apart very gracefully.
Council Member McCown clarified there was not a good alternative
other than a rear projected computer-based system that would provide Council with an incremental step above what it currently experienced. Mr. Dreiling said there were other alternatives which required a
fair commitment. While there could be a front projection system, there was still the issue of how to load the media. Again, the slides were easiest to see. With a digital system, a tray of slides could go in a cabinet and it found its way up. The concept attempted to respond to as many of the desires as possible. The
presentation showed an idealized solution, although it might not be right for reasons of budget or timing. Council Member McCown was surprised there was not something between $40,000 and $270,000 worth of microphone sound upgrades and
$270,000 that would not be some improvement in the short term even though the more state-of-the-art system would be on everyone's wish
list. The question was whether there was something else that could be done sooner to improve by some degree the way people saw the agendas on the board, etc. Computers had been experimented on
which had no significantly visibility improvement.
Mr. Dreiling said the rear projection was where to get the visibility and the alignment. There was no distortion in the image because it was a fixed system. The problem was how to feed the
information. If the information were sent up through a wire, then it was a serious system. A projector that was bright enough to
give the appropriate light in the Chambers was a $50,000 item. While the price might be reduced in a couple of years, it was a fairly serious undertaking at that point.
Acting Assistant Director of Public Works John Carlson said the
project sought was to maintain flexibility in the future, and staff
05/05/97 83-169
believed a digital system was the best way to do that. When
working into a digital system, the price really jumped, and to get an integrated digital system that would be flexible in the future resulted in the system proposed. A halfway system would probably
be obsolete in five or ten years, and would require a new system anyway. The digital system proposed would provide long-term
flexibility. Vice Mayor Andersen believed the long term project could really be
effective and beautiful for many years and he was not too uncomfortable with the higher figure. He was always irritated when
an audio visual game occurred because of the distraction it caused in terms of whether it was going to work. Many times, it did not work. If Council went with the Cadillac system, he queried whether
the Council would have to deal with the same level of distraction and confusion. It was worth it to him to avoid distraction and
confusion. Mr. Dreiling said much time was spent discussing some of the control scenarios for the public to the staff to the Council. The monitors for instance initially had two views. The left-hand
screen was the image which might be presented and the right-hand screen which was the agenda or text items controlled by the City Clerk. The choice for Council would be to toggle between one of the two. There would be a button on a pad not unlike the microphone pad which would go back and forth between the two
screens. That was considered a legitimate limitation of choices on the screens. Also, discussed was speaking control for microphones. Again, it was the typical array of controls. A "call" button or a "request" button, on/off, muting for the microphone, etc. A fair amount of discussion occurred regarding limiting the number of
choices Council had so the technology would not be too complicated and the temptation of being able to do too many different things
while someone was talking. Similar levels of control were considered for all the staff and the public level. If someone brought in a tray of slides, how to limit those kinds of choices to
forward and backward was discussed. In terms of operation, it was to be kept simple and it was the intent to keep the actual
technology simple enough not break more than any of the other things.
Vice Mayor Andersen did not want it to be necessary for a special staff person to monitor all the new technology for every meeting.
That really ran expenses up. The system needed to be able to be monitored by those staff people who were already at the Council meeting without it interfering with their other activities.
Mr. Dreiling agreed. It would be considered a design failure to load a bunch of gadgets into the system and time spent playing with
it because the intent of the meeting and the system would be lost.
05/05/97 83-170
Vice Mayor Andersen asked whether the technology also contained an indicator for the Council as well as the public. He had seen some systems where the Council Members had a time light as well as the
public.
Ms. Fleming said while it was not considered, it could be if the Council so desired.
Council Member Schneider queried when the construction would begin, how long it would take, and where Council would meet while
construction was underway. Mr. Roberts said the goal was for the proposal to become a CIP for
the fiscal year 1997-98, to begin design immediately upon approval of the budget, and to undertake construction in the summer of 1998.
It was clear to staff the construction duration would take longer than Council's one month vacation. Staff would closely consider the construction duration and do everything possible to minimize it. Also, alternative arrangements would be made for the Council meetings before and after some minimal period of overlap. At that
point, staff did not have specific durations at that point because it depended on the scope of the project. Staff would return to Council well in advance of the actual activity. Council Member Schneider reminded the architect that at least three
members of the Council were vertically challenged. When things were being said regarding raising and lowering, she was concerned about whose head she might have to look over to see. It was a problem she hoped was being considered. She liked the red tones in the Council Chambers and would support the same tones and vibrancy.
Mr. Dreiling said the relationship between the staff level and the
dais did not change. The change was in the first level which would be raised by four inches.
Council Member Eakins asked how much public input had been gathered.
Ms. Fleming said the project was not taken to the public. Staff took the proposal before the Council and it was agreed that staff
would obtain a survey from the Council. Staff recorded over the years different comments from the public but no particular effort
was made to delay the process by doing public outreach. Mr. Dreiling said the architect's voice was largely out of the
public since the public often used the rooms all over the Bay Area. The architect provided a fair amount of input in terms of the
public=s concerns and how the public reacted to the space. The
05/05/97 83-171
architect observed numerous meetings to see how people used and
felt comfortable in the space. Council Member Eakins asked whether it was possible to have
duplicate sets of slides. She was sensitive to the use of the current wall because of her extreme position but others could not
see the screen. Mr. Dreiling said much of the time was spent looking at alternate
configurations to try and find the best for the most. The Chambers was an odd room and Council was sort of in a corner with
everyone in a quarter circle observing. Between the extreme ends of the seats, there was a 90-degree angle change and people were looking at right angles to each other which presented difficultly
in how to arrange people. There were some good seats and some less than good seats which was equally true on the dais. There were a
couple of viable alternatives which showed two presentation locations with a digital system although there was a redundancy in the expensive projectors. The difficulty arose with the architecture of the room. With the windows, etc., it began to look like a make shift retrofit. There were a lot of gadgets in the
room, and it was not considered to be that useful a solution compared to a primary screen with individual monitors to view what was on the screen. Council Member Eakins queried the best and worst functional aspects
of the Council Chambers. Mr. Dreiling said the Chambers was an intimate room where dimensionally everyone was fairly close together. With the size of the City and the level of involvement from the public, the best
functional element was probably communication and the worst was probably the proximity to some of the adjacent spaces, e.g.,
entrance for the public, and how when staff entered it was kind of like coming out on a stage. There were some specific functional problems in terms of the way the furniture was cluttered and the
way people had to look at the backs of each others heads. The design concept tried to resolve those problems so there was more
face to face contact. The result was not as many people up front.
Council Member Rosenbaum said while everyone liked the appearance of the benches, the benches were acknowledged to be uncomfortable.
He asked what could be done within the reduced project scope to make the benches more comfortable.
Mr. Dreiling said the primary problem with the benches was the angle of the seat. It was flat, and the cushion was not really
structured or substantial. The seat needed to be angled up a
05/05/97 83-172
little bit, the location of the back needed to be taller with a
different curvature and cushioning in order to get the lumbar support where it was needed. The benches could conceivably be altered within the initial frame by taking the backs off and
changing them. It could mean new benches. He suspected the frames were substantially constructed, and it would be a matter of
changing the individual pieces on the benches. While there was some discussion about the possibility of individual chairs, there was a dollar amount involved and a loss in terms of the character
of the room.
Council Member Rosenbaum queried whether the reduced project included making the benches more comfortable.
Mr. Roberts said yes.
Council Member Rosenbaum referred to the microphones and asked for more detail regarding what was proposed for Council Members, staff, and the public. Mr. Dreiling said the discussion focused on low impact microphones
that tended to disappear. For the Council it was personal microphones, boom-mounted microphones, and surface-mounted microphones on the table. The boom-mounted microphone seemed to be the most sensible because it focused on the speaker and not the neighbor. While disappearing microphones were discussed for the
public area, it was not considered as critical in the staff area although the desire was for a lower impact microphone. The boom- mounted microphone still tended to be the most functional. Council Member Rosenbaum asked whether the microphones described
would be an improvement or whether the old ones would be retained.
Mr. Dreiling said there would be different, more efficient microphones. There was a variation between the output of the present microphones and the ones to be tied into the system.
Council Member Rosenbaum asked whether one would still have to lean
forward into the microphone. Mr. Dreiling said while there were microphones which picked up a
little larger area, but if the microphone picked up a speaker when the speaker leaned back in the chair, it also tended to pick up
what a neighbor said. A person wanting to speak needed to lean forward.
Council Member Rosenbaum hoped that the situation could be improved upon. In terms of the television booth, he clarified there was
some uncertainty in terms of where it would be placed.
05/05/97 83-173
Ms. Fleming said most Council Chambers which had televised Council meetings did not have booths in the same room. The specific booth was placed in the Chambers as a cost-effective way to immediately
get the cable system going. There were many options in terms of whether to leave the booth in the building or move it somewhere
else. The space could be better used, and the booth was inefficient in its present state. Staff leaned toward moving the cable booth out of the Chambers but not the radio.
Council Member Kniss believed Council's present microphones were
very awkward and unpleasant. She was surprised Council did not have the option of using the lavalieres.
Ms. Fleming said if Council preferred lapel microphones, it was their choice. At one time many Council Members did not want lapel
microphones because of not wanting to have to disconnect when getting up. It was not a big money item, and Council's preference would prevail. Council Member Wheeler said largely due to the lack of a master
plan, the Council Chambers looked like it was put together through a series of garage sales. In light of the master plan presented that evening, she had hoped Council would have been presented with a recommendation that would implement the larger plan in stages subject to whatever amended actions might be taken by the Council.
She did not have the feeling from the staff report (CMR:213:97) that staff's intent was to proceed in that direction. It seemed like the $320,000 package was "the package." Ms. Fleming said the recommendation before the Council represented
a minimum package, and she did not believe there was much in between that would work from a practical standpoint.
Mr. Roberts said while there were some small possibilities for incrementalizing the recommendation, staff believed the project
would be disruptive to the Council's business, and it would be best to make a decision on the level of improvement desired, do it, and
move on rather than return incrementally with a series of packages over the next few years. Staff strongly recommended the architectural improvements not be incrementalized. Whatever was to
occur with the architectural layout of the Chambers should occur initially. Some of the audio/visual and technological improvements
could be deferred and equipment installed later as long as the decision was made up front in order to provide the proper electrical and wiring systems.
Council Member Wheeler clarified if Council desired to implement
the $960,000 package, staff preferred that Council make that
05/05/97 83-174
decision immediately. Then in the budget discussions, Council
would take some actions that were reflective of the entire package and not string it out over a series of CIPs. There were not that many logical breaks that would allow for phasing things in as money
became available.
Mr. Roberts said essentially that was correct. Council Member Wheeler said in terms of the difference between the
master plan and the staff's recommendation regarding the presentation system, she understood Council would essentially
receive a new audio system but none of the visual system enhancements.
Mr. Roberts said that was correct.
Council Member Wheeler asked in terms of the staff area and public podium, what $20,000 would buy that was different from what presently existed. Mr. Carlson said there would be a different arrangement of the
staff area. The tables would be placed in a different position plus the podium would be moved, as Mr. Dreiling indicated, to a more optimum location. The area would be remodeled to conform to Americans with Disabilities (ADA) standards and also the wall would be redesigned to open up the area.
Ms. Fleming said one of her objectives was to reduce clutter and remove much of the distraction which presently existed with staff moving around, trying to talk to people across the table, looking for support staff, etc. The proposal eliminated that distraction
and placed staff in an area where someone leaving would not disrupt the Council or people at the podium, and support staff was easily
available. It allowed staff to be more organized and efficient than the present setup. The objective was also to provide the City Clerk with the kind of technical support she and the rest of the
staff needed while also reducing the number of people in the pit but having them in an area in which staff could come if immediately
needed. The clutter and disruption would be eliminated. Council Member Wheeler asked whether Council would end up with
something which looked like the staff area in the master plan or whether the chairs were rearranged.
Ms. Fleming said the staff area seemed to be an extension of the podium rather than just furniture scattered around as it presently
existed.
05/05/97 83-175
Mr. Dreiling believed it to be a limited level of custom furniture
design in order to fit things in more gracefully. There would not be the kind of integrated woodwork package as contained in the master plan.
Council Member Wheeler was concerned about the dimness of the
lighting where she sat at the dais. She did not know whether it was a matter of changing the direction of the lighting or whether there was something wrong.
Mr. Dreiling said the lighting clearly had to be rectified although
it was not set forth in the detail of the report (CMR:213:97). The pattern of the rectangular lighting and a round dais was a problem. With the backdrop and some of the other components, there would be
ambient lighting involved which also gave a general quality of light to the area so it would not look as if Council were on the
outside looking in. MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Wheeler, to 1) approve the conceptual design as presented in the report titled
ΑCouncil Chamber Modernization Project, Conceptual Design Study,≅
and 2) approve the improvements listed in Attachment A of CMR:213:97 for consideration in the FY 1997-98 budgetary process.
Council Member Kniss said although the total project was close to $1,000,000, not much had been done to the Council Chambers since it
was constructed in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The Council Chambers was where the public received a sense of what the City was all about, and where the City's legislation occurred. She believed it was time to spend money on the Chambers. It was not about the Council but about the citizens and how the City represented itself.
While there was a lot more to do with the plan, she was assured the process was at the beginning stages and Council would have a lot more input. She encouraged support for the full amount of the project.
Council Member Wheeler applauded the proposed changes in the conceptual plan because of the enhanced feeling of community the rounded room was intended to create. She wanted the Council Chambers to grow beyond the present cast off furnishings to be a place where citizens of the community felt comfortable. She
encouraged support for the project.
Council Member Eakins associated with the comments of Council Members Kniss and Wheeler. She wanted the public to have a chance to get involved early in the definitive stages but not necessarily
the details because Council was who put in all the seat time. In terms of the benches, she recommended no buttons be on the backs. Her goal was that the visual presentations be greatly enhanced.
05/05/97 83-176
Vice Mayor Andersen supported the motion. He believed if the improvements were amortized over the next 30 years, the money would be well spent. Palo Altans were well aware of how rapidly
technology changed, and he believed the described digital system would be effective for some time. He was a little concerned about
the reverse screen but was willing to listen to the experts. He believed the improvements would enhance the Council's desires to bring the public into the City's process and for that reason it was
worth the higher expense.
Council Member Rosenbaum was more appreciative of the reduced scope project recommended by staff. He was a guy who drove an old car and as long as the major function was satisfied, he tended not to
worry too much about the details. He believed the reduced project took care of the major public concerns about the Council Chambers.
The City had a huge backlog of capital improvement projects, and to spend $960,000 on the Council Chambers was unconscionable. In terms of the amortization argument, anything amortized over 30 years seemed reasonable, but usually the argument was given for buying a Mercedes as opposed to a Chevrolet. He opposed the
motion. Mayor Huber was thrilled with the proposed technological improvements. When Council undertook the conceptual design, he thought the audio/visual aspect of the Council Chambers was the
most needed area of improvement in order to make it resemble the late twentieth century. The only way to do that was to spend some money. He supported the motion. MOTION PASSED 8-1, Rosenbaum Αno.≅
RECESS: 9:28 P.M. - 9:40 P.M.
12. Audit of Building Inspection Practices
City Auditor Bill Vinson said the objectives of the audit were to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the building inspection program. The audit reviewed the completeness of the inspection process, the supervision and oversight of inspection activities, and inspection division procedures. The audit included
interviewing inspection personnel and management, and examining inspection records for permits issued between September 1995 and
March 1996. The City Auditor's Office also surveyed other cities to gain a better perspective of building inspection programs. Finally, City Auditor staff accompanied inspectors and observed
inspections for nine projects in progress during the course of the audit. The City Auditor's Office found significant opportunities
for improving the program and provided the City Manager with
05/05/97 83-177
recommendations for accomplishing the improvements. While there
was general agreement regarding the recommendations, the City Auditor's Office requested that the City Manager open a dialogue with the City Auditor's Office in order to address those areas
which remained unresolved. It should be noted the purpose of the audit was to provide City management with an objective, independent
assessment of the program, and to provide meaningful, realistic recommendations for improving program activities. To that end, he believed the report met those objectives.
Council Member Schneider asked how long the audit took.
Mr. Vinson said the audit began roughly in January/February 1996, and most of the field work was completed by May/June 1996.
Council Member Schneider asked whether Mr. Vinson had the
opportunity to follow through with one project from beginning to end. Mr. Vinson said no. The audit tried to look at a mix of projects in progress and projects which had received final approval. The
14-month duration was given in order to receive a good flavor of what the inspection process was all about. Jon Schink, 2141 Byron Street, constructed many homes in the Bay Area including Palo Alto. He believed Palo Alto had the toughest,
most diligent Building Department in the entire Bay Area. He opined that the person who wrote the audit had no understanding of what was written and had never tracked a project from the foundation all the way through to the final inspection. The conclusions suggested could only be accomplished if one followed a
project from the beginning to the end. He believed the results of the audit were garbage. In 20 years of building in Palo Alto, he
had never experienced a construction project approved with a missing inspection, and the statement made by the auditor that projects were approved without evidence of proper inspections was
irresponsible. While maybe the auditor could not follow the paper trail the inspectors put together, the comments suggested a far
more serious situation. The Council should reject the audit's suggestions. Palo Alto's Building Department deserved recognition for its superiority and not the audit.
Roxy Rapp, 373 University Avenue, had been developing in Palo Alto
for 10 years, and his experience with the Building Department had been wonderful. He developed in Carmel and in Mountain View, and it was a privilege to develop in Palo Alto. He basically had no
background in plumbing, electrical, or framing a building, and when he went out and borrowed $4,400,000 on a project and hired a
company who handled subcontractors, he counted on the building
05/05/97 83-178
inspectors to be there checking the subcontractors out to make sure
he was getting his moneys worth and that nothing was going to happen to the building. Even though he was at a site every day and looked the building over, the building inspector was the person he
counted on. He was comfortable with all of Palo Alto's inspectors. When problems arose, the Building Department was very responsive,
and someone was always there to handle it immediately. In Carmel, there was delay after delay and people were too busy to help him. He cautioned Council not to bog down the inspector's with too much
paperwork. Their job was to get out and check out the builders and subcontractors and make sure the project was done to code and
done right. It would not be right to have inspectors= stuck in an office doing duplicate paperwork.
Lynn Chiapella, 631 Colorado Avenue, seconded the comments regarding the excellence of the counter staff in the Building Department. She did not believe projects in the Midtown area had been reviewed thoroughly. The CN zone was frequently violated in terms of the neighbors. Security lighting was almost never
shielded and light glowed directly into neighbors' homes which was against the CN zoning. No one seemed to check those aspects from
either from the planning or the inspection side. When Victoria Emmons wanted to put in a delivery door in an area in which there was not supposed to be one, Victoria Emmons was supposed to remove
the other door and that did not happen. A spot light replaced the appropriate security lighting and shined directly on the house in
back, but someone signed off on the project. She had tried to find out since June of 1996 but to no avail. At 2750 Middlefield Road, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) approval specifically included a condition to take care of the trees. No irrigation was installed, and all the trees on the property were dying for lack of
water. There was also a condition on the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC), that it could not exceed the roof level because it faced the residential side. It was to be only two feet tall but somehow became six to eight feet tall, and the building inspector signed off on it. She was told it did not match the
plans, and the inspector was not supposed to check that. The inspector should have compared the ARB plans with what was actually installed before issuing a certificate of occupancy. When 690 Middlefield Road remodeled its office, the fence was taken down to use the residential duplex next door for a coffee room. When the
fence came down, there was no need for any permits, but in the CN zone residential and office had to be separated with a fence or
something or it could not intrude both ways. She believed the audit was excellent and some of the issues could be taken care of very simply. When the landscaping at 600 Colorado Avenue met a
slight disaster, the onus could be taken off the Building Inspection Division by having the landscape architect sign off at the completion of the project that the irrigation and planting,
05/05/97 83-179
etc. were exactly what was contained in the ARB approval. Things
could be simplified by having a qualified landscape architect on the project sign off, and the landscape architect would not sign off if the project were not done correctly. The objectivity from
project to project was not there, and procedures needed to be put in place. While the paperwork should not be overburdensome, the
rules particularly with regard to the irrigation of the street needed to be consistently applied from project to project and area to area.
Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, said the audit report before the
Council was the second one Council had on its agenda the past calendar year. Each audit related to a specific program within a particular section of one division in the Department of Planning
and Community Environment in order to mark off a manageable piece of the organization in doing an audit. In both cases, Council was
looking at an audit of a piece of the Department of Planning and Community Environment which he felt was a diversion to compliment the building technicians and inspectors. Essentially what was before the Council that evening and in January was an audit of a program within the Department of Planning and Community
Environment. The previous audit related to code enforcement, and at that time, he pointed out the City Auditor had taken a sample of some work and compared it to the impact measures contained in the budget. When the next budget document was before the Council, Council might want to compare the actual numbers for those two
impact measures to see if the impact measures were realistic. The same information was important that evening because essentially the City Auditor suggested some additional paperwork be done. It was easy for the department to say it would do the paperwork, and the next question was whether Council would get numbers which reflected
reality. On pages 8 and 9 of the code enforcement audit, the City Auditor discussed the sampling for the property maintenance major
activity which appeared on page 256 of the budget, volume one, showing the sample-covered portions of two fiscal years, 1994-95 which was not in the current budget document, and 1995-96 which
were with actual data. There were three impact measures, the first dealing with whether complaints were properly investigated. The
City Auditor found in his sample spanning those two fiscal years that about 74 percent were promptly investigated. Yet for the year, the budget reflected 95 percent. Another measure was whether
enforcement action was taken on a timely basis. For the portion of a two-year period the sample was taken, the auditor found that
about 71 or 72 percent were acted on in a timely basis. For the year shown in the budget, 92 percent were acted on timely. Finally, on the issue of whether complaints were resolved in a
timely manner, the audit showed for the sample that 55 percent were resolved in a timely basis, yet the budget document showed 99
percent were resolved on a timely basis. Before the Council
05/05/97 83-180
directed staff to collect additional information on paper, it was
important to determine whether what it received actually happened. He believed the City Auditor provided a good service. The information the auditor suggested was important. He did not
believe it was as time consuming as some indicated. While staff might provide the information, he queried how the sampling could be
reconciled over those two fiscal years with the data shown in the budget for one fiscal year for the audit report Council received in January, and how that information could be used in deciding the
appropriate approach to take with the department on the current audit.
Vice Mayor Andersen said staff generally responded to almost every recommendation and he indicated there were some changes being made
which satisfied the gist of the report. He asked whether any areas would be expanded upon as a result of the audit, or whether
anything else needed to be done which was prompted as a result of the audit. City Manager June Fleming intended to focus on the areas she listed in the response which she would follow up on. As the year
progressed, as she did with all other audits, she would go back and review it. If there were changes, she would respond to those changes. She believed the audit pointed out a number of items to follow through on, and she used her discretion as the City Manager to do that. She could not commit that evening to do more than what
she indicated in her response. Vice Mayor Andersen thanked the City Auditor for carrying out his responsibilities. Recommendations were made, some were being implemented, and it was time to move on. He shared that he had
received tremendously positive comments from those who used the Building Department regularly. He asked a developer friend of his
for input and again received positive feedback. In addition to thorough inspections, his friend was quick to volunteer the customer service element had greatly improved over what he had
experienced a couple of years prior. He believed the audit needed to be put in perspective. Some areas were reviewed, and he
believed those areas would be self-correcting. It was not something he felt he needed to worry a great deal about.
Council Member McCown was interested in the question of reinspection fees. When she read the City Auditor's report and
commentary with respect to whether the reinspection fees were being charged or not and whether to charge after the first inspection, the City Auditor strongly expressed the view that more should be
done in that area. She summarized the response that the building inspectors made judgment decisions based not on collecting a fee
but rather how to use the reinspection fee to get cooperation and
05/05/97 83-181
compliance. The City Auditor's answer to that was again an
expression of the view that suspension of the fee should represent the exception rather than the rule. Setting aside the question of documentation and consistency, she asked whether the question of
suspending or not suspending reinspection fees was really a Building Inspection policy judgment or not.
Mr. Vinson believed Building Inspection had a clear policy which required the assessment of the reinspection fee.
Council Member McCown said the Building Inspection Division
disagreed and did not characterize the reinspection fee as mandatory. There was obviously a difference of view.
Mr. Vinson viewed charging of a reinspection fee as part of the procedures, with the proviso that the individual inspector had some
discretion in that area. He agreed with that as a policy. It made sense because there would be instances when a reinspection fee truly did not make sense. His concern was not with the fact that reinspection fees were waived or not charged in some instances, but that there were no charges in 71 percent of the instances with no
oversight. It might be appropriate that 71 percent was the proper figure, but there should be some oversight and management review of waiving of fees. Council Member McCown understood the response to be that from the
department's perspective, the reinspection fee itself was not needed from a cost recovery point of view. She understood the purpose of the reinspection fee was not to get revenue per se from a fee but to use it as a device in the appropriate situation when the additional tool would achieve compliance which was their
ultimate goal. It seemed to be a policy judgment based on what was trying to be achieved. She clarified the City Auditor believed the
policy was fine but should be documented differently or there should be oversight in terms of how it was applied.
Mr. Vinson said while Council Member McCown was correct, there were really two issues. When the audit was done, staff was unable to
establish that fees actually covered inspection costs. If that were the case, his office did not see the evidence. While an analysis was requested, it could not be obtained. Even if an
analysis was received, he still believed there should be some oversight and review.
Council Member McCown referred to judgment calls in terms of the application of a reinspection fee, and asked whether there was some
risk in the manner in which it was applied. For example, if particular inspectors knew builders were trying to do a good job, a
reinspection fee was not charged whereas someone causing trouble
05/05/97 83-182
was charged a fee. She asked whether there was some risk that
building inspectors might favor certain people and disfavor others, and how that was guarded against.
Chief Building Official Fred Herman said while there was discretion, he believed it was exercised consistently. If a
builder wasted the time of the Building Inspection Division because the builder was not ready, the first time the builder might get off with a warning. If it was the second time an inspector was called
out, and again the builder was not ready, the reinspection fee would be charged. The cost was not the penalty, but rather that
the builder could not get his inspection until he paid the fee, which meant he had to go Downtown, get through the process, and get back on the list. Thus, the building lost another day's time in
getting the inspection. The discretion in charging the reinspection fee was no different than being pulled over by a
police officer who issued a warning not to speed on Alma Street and did not issue a citation. It did not make sense for the police officer to call a supervisor to okay that discretion. Sometimes a homeowner was caught on Highway 101 and missed an inspection. Staff understood and would let it go which was not favoritism. He
would issue a reinspection fee to Jon Schink or Roxy Rapp
immediately if staff=s time was wasted.
Council Member McCown asked how Mr. Herman assured himself that those discretionary judgments in the field were being applied
consistently. Mr. Herman said obviously the audit brought a much greater focus on some of those issues. Every item was brought before the entire division staff, and many written policies were developed to clarify
and respond to the audit. He acknowledged there was room for improvement and things could be done more consistently. Staff was attempting to do so when possible. Council Member McCown said, given the importance of the
relationship between a builder and the Building Inspection Department to a building project, her concern was if Mr. Herman and the Council heard about areas where people were not happy with what occurred and that person complained about a particular person or process generally, that the persons life might be made more
difficult.
Mr. Herman had heard that statement before, and he encouraged the use of unsolicited comment sheets at the counter. As part of the permit streamlining project Council had approved a few months
prior, staff requested funding to do follow up surveys after projects were completed. The follow up would not occur while a project was under construction, and it would not be with the
05/05/97 83-183
builder but rather the building owner or one who might have gone
through a single family home process. He encouraged unsolicited, honest comments. He did receive a fair number of complaints, and each one was seriously investigated.
Ms. Fleming said the audit made staff much more sensitive to the
issue raised by Council Member McCown, and staff was committed to working with the City Attorney's Office to do more toward working up documented standards.
Council Member McCown referred to the issue of cost recovery. It
had been presented to Council in the past budget process that based on the levels of fees being charged, the department operated on a cost recovery basis. She asked whether on the budget side of
things someone outside the department had looked at the issue for them. The City Auditor raised the question about asking for some
information and not getting it. She asked if the cost recovery had been scrutinized in the budget processes in the past to determine whether it was accurate that the level of fees covered the cost of the program.
Mr. Herman said yes. The Building Inspection Division had been cost recovered every year since 1978. Council Member McCown clarified cost recovery was defined as the level of fees being charged covered the costs of personnel,
overhead, vehicles, utilities, and other administrative costs and allocated charges. Assistant City Manager Emily Harrison clarified each fee did not necessarily cover the service, but the program was 100 percent cost
recovered. Staff did not attempt to do fee by fee, service by service calculation, but rather for the program.
Council Member McCown understood. The overall level of fees for all services attributable to the function were sufficient to cover
the cost to the City to provide it with related overhead.
Ms. Harrison said the building inspection program usually exceeded 100 percent cost recovery, but the program itself in total did not exceed 100 percent cost recovery.
Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said
the fee increases Council approved several months prior were the first increases in 10 or 12 years. While staff looked at raising fees with each new Uniform Building Code, the fees had not been
raised partially because the division generated the revenue necessary to offset the expenses. Essentially, a number of
05/05/97 83-184
potential fee increase opportunities were bypassed based on the
budget analysis. Mr. Vinson said the audit sought to obtain information regarding
the actual costs incurred for the inspection program. What was found was that the information was not available and the analysis
had not been performed. Cursorily, and not reported because the audit was not as comprehensive as it probably could have been, in the auditor's analysis of costs, staff found that reinspection fees
should be closer to the range of $36 per reinspection if the costs were to be recovered.
Council Member McCown asked whether that fee was based on what cost related specifically to reinspection.
Mr. Vinson said it related to the cost of the inspection service
program. Council Member McCown did not know how to square that with what the budget document said in the past.
Mr. Vinson believed the department looked at the costs more globally and included other areas of permit costs. The audit looked specifically at the costs of inspection, and the cost to run the building inspection program. The department looked at all the other costs which related to the whole permitting process.
Council Member McCown asked whether there was a right or wrong way to look at it. Mr. Vinson said the audit recommended that staff analyze the costs
and to see how the comparison.
Council Member Eakins said in reading the audit, it seemed to her the most serious problems were missing fees and documentation. Building Inspection had to do with safety, and she queried the
biggest risks related to missing documentation.
Mr. Vinson said as indicated in the first finding regarding inspection practices, the audit found no evidence that many of the subinspections being performed were actually approved. At best,
there was not proper documentation. At worst, it was a question of whether the inspections were in fact done. That was also seen in
other areas. Regarding expired permits, staff sampled 25 projects with expired permits and looked at 16 projects which had roofing or second floor additions which staff could observe from the street.
In fact, construction had been completed on those projects which meant the construction was completed without the benefit of
inspection. Those were several issues which were raised which
05/05/97 83-185
could present, if not properly monitored, a public and health and
safety issue. Council Member Eakins clarified there was some uncertainty. She
queried the City's liability if the "documentation" including expired permits was incomplete.
City Attorney Ariel Calonne said there were broad immunities associated with the permit process. While there was not much in
the way of direct liability, the management response did not disagree. There was a public trust issue associated with building
inspection that in his mind transcended the risk of direct financial exposure. The way he read the body of law, the City was in the business of providing some assurance that improvements were
constructed property, but the City was not liable for it.
Council Member Eakins felt the recommended improvements were a flat field. She queried the most serious problems and the least serious of the deficiencies identified. Mr. Vinson said from an auditor's perspective, all of the
deficiencies were material. There were findings and recommendations over which he had more concern than others. For example, he believed written procedures were important and essential to good management practices; however, he was not sure that was as important as the first finding when staff talked about
the potential for inspections, and that there was no evidence that all inspections were being done. He hoped there would be a point when there was a good documentation trail to support that all inspections were done properly.
Mr. Calonne did not believe the lack of documentation in any way evidenced some failure of public trust responsibility. He
clarified the body of law was also set up to provide an additional demonstration by way of the assurance.
Vice Mayor Andersen asked whether Mr. Herman was concerned there might be some buildings which were inadequately inspected, and if
not, why not. Mr. Herman said if he had the concern, he would send an inspector
out the immediately. His people were professional and responsible. If he had an inkling that a safety hazard existed at some address,
he would send someone out immediately. Vice Mayor Andersen asked what assurances Council had that the lack
of documentation did not represent a major issue.
05/05/97 83-186
Mr. Herman said the audit focused on the interoffice computer
documentation of a 1984 antiquated program. Another part was field inspection records which were not part of the audit. Inspectors kept the majority of the records at a job site. While he agreed
there might not be a listing showing the frame for a specific project was not totally signed off because there were several
partial inspections to equal the whole, the field inspector records on the job site tracked that. The documentation existed, it just did not fit on the 14-character field on his permit inspection
computer system. Staff concurred it would be nice to have all the records on the computer and hopefully would in the future.
Vice Mayor Andersen asked if an issue arose when evidencing was required, would the field records be available.
Mr. Herman said absolutely.
Mayor Huber referred to use and occupancy permits and the indication that a number of them were not requested and/or issued. The response did not really answer the question but simply said the system was being changed. He asked why so many use and
occupancy permits would have been missed. As a construction litigation lawyer, it was an important item. Mr. Herman said many of the use and occupancy permits were a lower priority than currently under construction. Many of the permits
were not known about until the annual Fire Department inspection and if company A changed its name to company B. Under the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the name change required a new certificate of occupancy. Usually construction or alteration was not involved, otherwise two building permits and the two would have to been done
concurrently. In the permit streamlining project, the use and occupancy permit was determined as an item causing backlog and as
such a low priority. Staff looked at the purposes of the permit, what it did, what it gained, and its added value. Staff decided to call it a certificate of use because it had to do with whether the
type of business was allowed in the zoning which was really the key control. He concurred the backlog should not be there and
understood Mayor Huber's point, which was why the final inspection was used.
Mayor Huber referred to the Mission Driven Budget (MDB). He had been on the Finance Committee the past few years and whenever he
saw information which did not jive with what was found or did not seem to make any sense, he was concerned because the MDB would only have value if the City had accurate records. He asked how Council
would know the goal was real and that the goal was actually met.
05/05/97 83-187
Mr. Herman said the audit started in January/February 1996, and
staff had really tightened up on counting, keeping track, and documenting all of the activities on a quarterly basis. Logs were created and maintained for code enforcement on a daily basis and
categorized quarterly.
Mayor Huber clarified when he saw the budget, staff would have the backup material available when he asked for it.
Mr. Herman said absolutely.
Council Member Rosenbaum asked Mr. Vinson for comment regarding information being available on the field inspection reports.
Mr. Vinson said there was an assumption that the permit stayed affixed to the structure. If there was a fire or someone moved
something for any reason at all, the City relied on the information reflected on that permit, and the homeowner or contractor would maintain the permit on the site. It might not be the case, but he did not see it as a justification for not having complete and accurate records on the City's system. He agreed with Mr. Herman
that the City's system was antiquated; however, it provided sufficient space to indicate that all of the different sub-inspections were properly approved. Although the system did not produce good reports, it was workable and had sufficient space to indicate the necessary information.
Mayor Huber thanked Mr. Vinson for the audit. It was a good audit, and he thanked staff for its response. He believed the auditor's job was to in fact tickle those he reviewed, and he would expect the response to do a little of the same. That was exactly what
Council wanted--dynamic tension.
Council Member Fazzino said there was nothing wrong with constructive criticism, and he believed that was the spirit in which the audit was offered. It was a tough job, and he respected
the City Auditor's work. At the same time, he did not believe the audit in any way represented a damning indictment of the City's
Building Inspection Department. It was an outstanding department. He encouraged Mr. Vinson to include some preamble in his audits because of the tendency to touch the souls of very sensitive people
the way the reports were written, and it was important to get the point across at the outset that for the most part departments like
Building Inspection continued to provide a quality service to the citizens of Palo Alto. He believed the audit was an excellent one, and based upon the staff responses, it was clear that some changes
had been and would be made, which was great. At the same time, he
did not want the auditor=s staff to lose sight of the fact that the Building Inspection was an outstanding department. It was without
05/05/97 83-188
a doubt one of the most respected in the area. The City could have
both an honest, tough audit, and quality City services provided by that department.
Council Member Eakins said she had a ride along with a building inspector, and it was fun. She watched the building inspector
coach a subcontractor and the contractor's representative through a lot of difficult things. He made their project better for all the expertise he invested. She saw the actual sign offs go on the
working drawings and where the stamps had to go, and it was an intricate paperwork system. She believed it did not translate
easily into a 1984 program, and she hoped technology would help them out. No action required.
COUNCIL MATTERS 13. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements None.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.200 (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.