Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-01-12 City Council Summary Minutes Regular Meeting January 12, 1998 1. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Presentation Regarding Regional Open Space Study...................85-398 2. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to James McFall for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Architectural Review Board............85-400 3. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to David Ross for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Architectural Review Board..............85-401 4. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Victor Ojakian for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Planning Commission................85-401 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS........................................85-402 5. Resolution 7739 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the Filing of a Claim with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Allocation of Transportation Development Act Funds for Fiscal Year 1998-99"......................................................85-403 6. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and The Davey Tree Expert for 1997/98 Tree and Stump Removal - Phase II..85-403 7. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and the Woodside Fire Protection District for Automatic Aid into Interjurisdiction Fire Protection Service Zone .........................85-403 8. Amarillo Avenue and Embarcadero Way Relief Sewer Project - Approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration, Final Project Alignment and Right-of-Way Acquisition................85-403 9. Proposed Downtown Parking Structures - Phase II.......85-403 10. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 for Funding of Increased Work in Water and Gas Customer Design and Connection Capital Improvement Projects..................................85-410 01/12/98 85-396 11. Council Members Mossar and Kniss and Vice Mayor Schneider re Revised Rules for Public Participation During ΑOral Communications≅ .......................................85-410 12. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements........85-412 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.............85-412 01/12/98 85-397 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:06 p.m. PRESENT: Eakins, Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, Mossar, Ojakian, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Wheeler SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 1. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Presentation Regarding Regional Open Space Study Nanette Hanko said 25 years had passed since the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District was formed by the voters. The Board decided that they wanted to go back to the constituents to find out if the District was going in the right direction. A number of public hearings were conducted, and the District representatives were visiting cities to receive input from City Councils. In that process, they attracted the attention of the people on the coast and were approached by Half Moon Bay and other communities to consider expanding their boundaries to the ocean. A three-member committee was in the process of studying that. A professional survey of public opinion was conducted and the results were interesting. Randy Anderson, Senior Planner, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, said the District was celebrating 25 years of progress on its mission to protect an open space green belt on the Peninsula. Over 42,000 acres, contained in 23 preserves in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties, were protected to date. The land provided for low intensity public recreation consistent with resource protection. The District=s activities were guided for many years by a Master Plan which was a general environmental evaluation that showed resource protection values and criteria within the District=s area. The Master Plan did not show what the completed greenbelt might be like. To develop a clear vision of the potential greenbelt, the District=s Board directed staff to undertake a regional open space study which consisted of two phases. During the first phase in 1996, the District=s basic policy document was reviewed and updated. It confirmed and clarified the objectives and methods for carrying out the District=s business. For the first time, a mission statement was adopted which was to acquire and preserve a regional greenbelt of open space land in perpetuity, protect and restore the integrity of the natural environment, and provide opportunities for public enjoyment and education consistent with ecological values. During 1997, the planning study phase of the project was undertaken. It began with the mapping of the current state of open space lands on the peninsula and facilities of all agencies and organizations. A series of meetings was undertaken. They met with the staff of all the stakeholder agencies and organizations including staff from the City of Palo Alto, John Walton and Virginia Warheit. Regional public workshops were 01/12/98 85-398 conducted and meetings were held with the County and Open Space Authority Boards. At each stage they explained the project, provided background about the District, and collected input on general issues and alternatives. After over 20 meetings, a draft Open Space Study Map was prepared. It showed areas within the District that were urban or potential open space. The idea was to study the areas to decide whether they should be protected in some way and whether the greenbelt could or should be achieved. The Regional Open Space Study provided material for continued planning and discussion. It showed potential trail connections and additional public facilities that could be desirable under a finished greenbelt. The potential trails and facilities would complete the key regional trails, such as the Bay Area Ridge Trail, the Bay Trail, and the Stevens Creek Trail. The District developed a geographic information system or GIS computer map and data base, which included products such as a patrol map book to be used by rangers. They hoped the mapping system, in addition to help with more detailed study, would be shared with other agencies in the area. The next step in the project was to complete the study map and publish it. They hoped to complete it by April 1998, at which time the basic policies would be revisited to check with their consistency with the input received during the planning process. The Council was provided with a copy of the study map. Comments or questions should be sent to his attention at the District office. Council Member Kniss was interested in knowing whether the funding sources had changed throughout the years. She asked whether an endowment fund was established. Ms. Hanko said there was a formula that provided funding for them. Proposition 13 changed their source of funds. There were bail out funds that the state provided. Their original funding was cut down to about 40 percent. They were in a partnership with Peninsula Open Space Trust which used private funds and had done a good amount of acquisition. The Midpeninsula Open Space District was unable to participate in the acquisition the Trust did on the coast because the District=s boundaries did not extend that far. The District could participate in the Trust=s acquisitions within the District. The District anticipated it would return to the voters in the future. Public opinion surveys in the District looked promising. She hoped they might return for additional funding during the next year. 2. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to James McFall for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Architectural Review Board MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to adopt the Resolution. Resolution 7736 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to James McFall for 01/12/98 85-399 Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Architectural Review Board≅ Vice Mayor Schneider thanked Jim McFall for his years of service. She regretted that he was not going to apply for another term. He had been a valuable member of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and would be missed. Council Member Wheeler said some years prior, there was some tension between the ARB and Historic Resources Board (HRB). At the time, Mr. McFall served on the HRB and considered applying to the ARB. She, among others, encouraged him to apply because she knew he would bring an expertise in historic preservation to the ARB and a manner that would be persuasive to his colleagues. Council Member Fazzino said he could not recall being as disappointed about the departure of Board members as he was about hearing that Jim McFall and Dave Ross were leaving the ARB. They contributed so much to the City and made quite a difference. They were fair and offered suggestions in a constructive way. He appreciated the tremendous contribution that each made to the City, and he hoped they would find a way to return to City public service. MOTION PASSED 9-0. James McFall said it had been an honor to serve on the ARB and HRB. He was appointed to the HRB in 1988 when his son was in kindergarten, and his son was presently a sophomore at Palo Alto High School. He thanked his colleagues on the Board. They worked well together, and he was proud of the work they did and the results. He acknowledged Lisa Grote and her staff for putting together the information the Board needed. In 1994, after he completed his term on the HRB, he requested that the Council not forget about historic preservation. Based on the events of the prior 16 months, he said it was safe to say that the Council approached the issue with a vigor that no one would have expected. He appreciated the Council=s interest and action. He urged the Council to decide what was important to preserve and preserve it. Many good structures were built before 1940, as well as many bad ones. The Council needed to figure out the good ones and protect them. Not everything built over 60 years ago was a historic resource. The Council needed to be careful with residential design review. 3. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to David Ross for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Architectural Review Board MOTION: Council Member Wheeler moved, seconded by Fazzino, to adopt the Resolution. 01/12/98 85-400 Resolution 7737 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to David Ross for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Architectural Review Board≅ Council Member Kniss said Dave Ross served the ARB well and continued to play an active role in the community. His children were very young, and it had been a real commitment for him to be a member of the ARB. She thanked him on behalf of the Council and the community. Vice Mayor Schneider said Mr. Ross was a shining light on the ARB. His service to the ARB and to the Council during the Measure R debate would be missed. David Ross agreed with Jim McFall=s comments and said that all the Board members shared respect for members of the staff who processed their work on a daily basis. He thanked the applicant community that was relatively patient with the sometimes strenuous process. The relatively small number of ARB appeals received by the Council was an indication of a system that worked and of an applicant community that respected and appreciated the process. MOTION PASSED 9-0. 4. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Victor Ojakian for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Planning Commission MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to adopt the Resolution. Resolution 7738 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Victor Ojakian for Outstanding Public Service as a Member of the Planning Commission≅ MOTION PASSED 8-0, Ojakian Αabstaining.≅ Victor Ojakian said when he considered applying for the Planning Commission, he asked another Commissioner whether or not he should apply. Her comment had been that it was a good time to join the Planning Commission because there was not a lot going on and there were not a lot of meetings. He said it was interesting that from there they ended up with the Comprehensive Plan and the Sand Hill Road project. The projects he would remember most were Alma Place, the disability housing at 2700 Ash Street, and revoking the La Cumbra nightclub use permit. He thanked staff, the Council, the Commissioners, the public, and his family. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 01/12/98 85-401 Sara Whetstone, 2684 Marshall Drive, spoke regarding Youth Council update. T. J. Watt, homeless, spoke regarding bridge over creek. John McGuire, 348 Kipling Street, spoke regarding sidewalk repair. Victor Frost, P. O. Box 213, spoke regarding thank you Al Gore. Michael Wollenweber, spoke regarding toolmakers toybox. Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding fair play. Cathy S. Brandhorst, National Guard Armory, Sunnyvale, spoke regarding numerous issues, including immigration. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Huber moved, seconded by Kniss, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 5 - 8. 5. Resolution 7739 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the Filing of a Claim with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Allocation of Transportation Development Act Funds for Fiscal Year 1998-99" 6. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and The Davey Tree Expert for 1997/98 Tree and Stump Removal - Phase II 7. Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and the Woodside Fire Protection District for Automatic Aid into Interjurisdiction Fire Protection Service Zone 8. Amarillo Avenue and Embarcadero Way Relief Sewer Project - Approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration, Final Project Alignment and Right-of-Way Acquisition MOTION PASSED 9-0. ORDINANCES 9. Proposed Downtown Parking Structures - Phase II Ordinance 4474 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 to Provide an Additional Appropriation to Capital Improvement Project, 19530, Downtown Parking Structure≅ Resolution 7740 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Declaring Intention to Reimburse 01/12/98 85-402 Expenditures from the Proceeds of Obligations to be Issued by the City and Directing Certain Actions≅ Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C607145 between the City of Palo Alto and Watry Design Group for Architectural Design Services Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Turner Construction Company for Contract Engineer Services Vice Mayor Schneider said she would not be able to participate in the item because of a conflict of interest due to the location of her business. Director of Public Works Glenn Roberts said the item was before the Council as a follow-up to the Council=s direction given on July 7, 1997, when the Council approved in principle the concept of proceeding with the next steps toward future implementation of two additional parking structures in the Downtown which would be funded through an assessment district process utilizing the current parking assessment district in the Downtown. Since that time, staff proceeded to develop the scope of services and budget for design and project management activities to take the design of the structures through the 50 percent completion stage so an accurate cost estimate could be developed for the purposes of preparing a potential assessment district for approval by vote of the electorate in the district. That effort required the City to front the monies for the design efforts which was the action currently before the Council. The action was consistent with the Council=s prior policy direction and should the Council approve the recommendation, the Council would have at least three additional chances to review the design and cost of the projects before an assessment district would be undertaken. The process would be subject to all the same procedural requirements as a private development project would follow and would be required to go through reviews by all the appropriate Boards and Commissions. Susan Frank, Chief Executive Officer, Chamber of Commerce, 325 Forest Avenue, said in 1993, the Council approved a 13-point parking program for Downtown, created by the Chamber Parking Committee. Since then, color zones, attendant parking, valet parking, the creation of the first ever parking brochure for Downtown, and the advent of the Tri-Transit Campaign had been implemented. She said there was success with the multi-faceted approach to the Downtown parking problems. Other cities were interested in what Palo Alto was doing. The Chamber had received few complaint letters and was working with the neighborhoods and business community to approach the issues. The Chamber would continue to advocate strongly for creative alternative modes of transportation as well as educate the public about local and regional transportation issues. She hoped the Council would move forward with the next step in making the structures a reality. The 01/12/98 85-403 Chamber Parking Committee looked forward to working with the City staff on the project. Irvin Dawid, representing the Sierra Club, 3921 E. Bayshore, said the Sierra Club hoped the Council would not move swiftly through the item. The issue needed more deliberation. If the vote failed, the City would be out $960,000. If the vote won, the City would be reimbursed the money. The Sierra Club was concerned with the two parking structures, the sole purpose of which would be to attract additional vehicles to the Downtown area at the Business Assessment District=s expense. If the Assessment District approved the money for the project, that would mean there was $20 million that could not go to other items that the Downtown needed, whether it was enhanced security, pedestrian enhancements for safety, or Downtown beautification. The net gain of parking spaces was a little over 700, which came out to $30,000 per parking space. He drew an analogy between the parking structure and deregulation. Diablo Canyon became the stranded cost that all ratepayers and residents of the state would have to repay. It was not a good cost because they found that energy conservation, renewables, and other sources of energy could meet the same needs. Recent statistics regarding CalTrain pointed out that the University Avenue depot was the second most popular destination on the line after San Francisco. The number of cars accommodated by the parking structure was equal to the number of commuters arriving from both north and south between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. There were alternatives such as the shuttle and better management of the current parking supply. He urged the Council not to give it away for free and to use the money earmarked for the study to hire a consultant to propose alternative ways to meet the parking problem. Ed Holland, 1111 Parkinson, agreed with the previous speaker. One way to look at the problem in the Downtown was to say there were not enough parking places. However, the real problem was there were too many cars. Cars were the major source of transportation because no decent alternatives were offered. He urged the Council to move forward with a shuttle service and to observe Stanford=s shuttle system which he considered to be successful. T. J. Watt, homeless, said merchants had traditionally supported the railroad. She believed there were more than enough parking places in the community; however, not all of them were free. The City should not provide free parking. Other cities such as Santa Cruz, San Francisco, and Berkeley all had parking meters. Council Member Fazzino clarified there would be additional opportunities to review the design of the parking structure. Mr. Roberts said that was correct. The project would be subject to all the reviews that a private project was subjected to. The Council could request the item be brought back at a interim stage in the process for a progress report. 01/12/98 85-404 Council Member Fazzino asked why none of the items which had resulted in a $200,000 increase in cost, i.e., the teen center study, the need for a traffic study, and Proposition 218 issues, were anticipated. Mr. Roberts said since the item went before the Council last July, staff had spent time reviewing the scope of work and incorporating specific directions received from Council on issues to include in the project. As a result, three primary issues were added: 1) a comprehensive environmental review of traffic impacts, 2) consideration for the design of the corner of the building as a potential site for the relocation of the teen center, and 3) provision of enough time and resources for the consultant to conduct a thorough review process. Council Member Fazzino said the additional cost was substantial. He recognized if approval were received from 50 percent or more of the property owners in that area, the cost would be borne by the Assessment District. However, regardless of who paid for it, the cost was significant. He had concerns about an additional cost which represented one-third more than the original cost. Mr. Roberts said the cost was significant. Staff believed it was necessary to perform the work in order to provide the Council and the property owners with an accurate cost estimate so a bond sale could be done with an assurance of having an accurate amount of issue. Council Member Kniss asked for a summary of how the Assessment District was set up and operated. She asked whether any of the recent legislation, i.e., Proposition 218 or 209, affected the outcome. Mr. Roberts said the Parking Assessment District process was one that was well established in Palo Alto. All of the parking structures and most of the parking lots, both in the Downtown and the California Avenue Business District, were set up where the cost of the property and the construction were paid for by the property owners through an assessment on their property taxes. Costs were spread among the properties and took into account the benefits the properties received and how much parking demand their business required. A number of changes occurred due to Proposition 218, and staff was dealing with those through the current process. The two major points were: 1) a two-thirds vote of the majority, weighted property owners was required, and 2) the benefits spread methodology would be reviewed to ensure the basis used to spread the costs among the property owners was consistent with the new requirements of Proposition 218. City Manager June Fleming said it was known initially that there would be some nonparking space availability. Discussions were 01/12/98 85-405 continuing between staff and the Chamber of Commerce regarding how to use the space. The teen center issue was also known from the beginning and was an activity the Council had promoted and wanted to see continue. The teens believed the large success of the center was its location. The reality was staying in the Downtown would be difficult given the costs. There was not unanimity among those working on the parking structure that the teen center should stay there. The costs to remain there were becoming more real as the process unfolded. Proposition 218, how it would be used and actually applied, was a learning experience. The costs for implementing Proposition 218 were more than staff knew at the beginning of the process. The parking structure was going to address traffic; however, traffic implications in other areas were still be uncovered. Although these three areas were known, pieces had become more real as the process continued. She had held a tight rein on cost increases and believed additional costs had been held to a minimum. Council Member Kniss asked if figures were available as to what the actual cost would be to the property owner. Mr. Roberts said the numbers staff had projected in the report last July showed the year 2000 costs for both the structure on Lot R and the structure on Lots S & L combined would cost approximately $.90 per square foot of rented space per year, or $.08 per month. Council Member Kniss clarified if she were renting at $3 a square foot, that meant her costs would be increased by 25 percent. Mr. Roberts said no, the cost would be $3.08 per square foot per month. Council Member Mossar participated on the Downtown Parking Committee and knew of the concerns regarding the teen center as part of the structure. She clarified that the study provided the flexibility to look at uses other than the teen center. Ms. Fleming said yes. It was staff=s understanding that placing the teen center there was a priority of the Council. Council Member Huber said projections showed that the Assessment District would be formed in the fall of 1999. If $1 million of City monies were going to be spent, he hoped the economy would support that in 1999. He asked whether there was more than a two-thirds majority known to be voting in favor of the issue. Mr. Roberts answered yes. Results of an informal poll conducted through the Chamber and the Parking Committee indicated 70 percent. Ms. Fleming said there were no guarantees. Both the Chamber and the staff understood the step was a significant one and believed the margin for voter approval was there. 01/12/98 85-406 Council Member Eakins asked whether or not a traffic coordinator service could coexist with the teen center in the unparkable space. Ms. Fleming said no. Initial analysis indicated there was not enough space. Council Member Eakins asked whether the space could not be shared in time, e.g., teens were in school during the day. Ms. Fleming said a shared experience had existed with the present teen center and had worked with great difficulty. It would not have survived as a permanent arrangement. Council Member Eakins asked whether public restrooms were still part of the project. Ms. Fleming said yes. Council Member Ojakian asked what the total cost of the structures would be. Mr. Roberts said projections indicated $20 million in year 2000 costs. Council Member Ojakian clarified design costs in the current phase were approximately $1 million and expected design costs in Phase III were roughly another $1 million. Mr. Roberts said another $600,000 included project management services and design effort. Council Member Ojakian clarified the total design costs were going to come in under 10 percent. Mr. Roberts said that was correct. MOTION: Council Member Huber, seconded by Wheeler, to approve the staff recommendation as follows: 1. Approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $942,048 to fund the amendment with Watry Design Group, the agreement with Turner Construction Company, and for miscellaneous operating expenses during Phase II of the project. 2. Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 1 to Consultant Contract No. C6076145 with Watry Design Group, in the amount of $682,136, for Phase II design services to provide architectural and related design services for the proposed Downtown Parking Structures. 01/12/98 85-407 3. Approve and authorize the City Manager or her designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract amendment with Watry Design Group for related, additional but unforeseen work which may occur during Phase II, the total value of which change orders shall not exceed $ 34,100. 4. Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the consultant agreement with Turner Construction Company for $167,412 to provide project management services to supplement existing staff during Phase II of the proposed Downtown Parking Structures. 5. Approve and authorize the City Manager or her designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with Turner Construction Company for related, additional but unforeseen work which may occur during Phase II, the total value of which change orders shall not exceed $ 8,400. 6. Authorize Planning Department Staff to secure the services of a contract planner during Phase II, not to exceed a fee of $45,000. 7. Authorize $5,000 for miscellaneous costs (presentation materials, copying, postage, etc.) incurred by Public Works staff during Phase II preliminary design. 8. Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Palo Alto declaring its intention to reimburse the City=s General Fund for expenditures from the proceeds of obligations to be issued by the City and directing certain actions. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Schneider Αnot participating.≅ 10. Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 for Funding of Increased Work in Water and Gas Customer Design and Connection Capital Improvement Projects MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Fazzino, to adopt the Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $90,000 for the Water and Gas System Extension Capital Projects. Ordinance 4475 entitled ΑOrdinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Budget for the Fiscal Year 1997-98 for Funding of Increased Work in Water and Gas Customer Design and Connection Capital Improvement Projects≅ MOTION PASSED 9-0. 01/12/98 85-408 COUNCIL MATTERS 11. Council Members Mossar and Kniss and Vice Mayor Schneider re Revised Rules for Public Participation During ΑOral Communications≅ Vice Mayor Schneider said the item was not an attempt to limit public participation, but rather an opportunity to encourage new information to be heard at the beginning of Council meetings and issues already heard to be heard again at the end of meetings. The item had also been agendized for the upcoming Council retreat to be held on Saturday, January 17, 1998. Council Member Fazzino asked for clarification as to what the Council was being asked to do that evening. Vice Mayor Schneider said Council was being asked to refer the item to the Council retreat of January 17, 1998. T. J. Watt, homeless, said the people who would be the most affected by the change would be children, senior citizens, and people from outside the region. She occasionally traveled from Davis to speak. If she had to wait until the end of the meeting, traveling back to Davis would be difficult. Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, congratulated Mayor Rosenbaum and Vice Mayor Schneider on their recent reelection. He reminded the Council there had been a long period of time between Mayor Rosenbaum=s prior Council service and his recent service. He had been defeated as part of a slate of residentialist candidates in 1975. Since that time, three of the four members of that slate had been reelected to Council and had served as Mayor. The voters, with enough education, sometimes changed their minds. He believed that was also true of the Council. If Council heard information from the public, sometimes from the same person, week after week, it might take a decade to get the message across. That was the purpose of public participation and what occurred at the local level. Under the Brown Act, the Council was prohibited from itself prohibiting public criticism of its policies, procedures, programs, or services or the acts or omissions of the Council. He provided Council with a history of the changes to Oral Communications up to the current law. He thanked the sponsors of the motion for bringing it before the public prior to the Council=s retreat so input would be possible. Since the Council limited Oral Communications to three minutes instead of the former five minutes, ten people would need to speak before the 30-minute limit was reached. For the most part, the limit was rarely reached. He believed one person going before the Council, speaking on the same topic, week after week, served a useful purpose for the public at large to protect the right of Oral Communications. He stood second to no one in his opposition to Ed Power and his policies regarding 01/12/98 85-409 the Baylands, but he would protect his right to speak at 7:00 p.m. every week. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme Street, agreed with the previous speaker=s comments. He had been attending Council meetings for a long time, and in the past, there had been two Oral Communications periods; one at the beginning of the meeting, and one at the end. Speakers were allowed to speak for five minutes each. He questioned the necessity of the change just to avoid repetitious comments from one or two people and believed it to be inappropriate. The facts were that certain people addressed the Council repeatedly on certain topics, and he believed Council Members knew that before they ran for election. It went with the territory. He suggested that the Council keep in mind that the other people who came to speak to the Council, the rookies, would not be inhibited by the fact that two or three people spoke every night. Some people had occasion to speak to the Council more than once a month, sometimes on different topics. He had been guilty of that on occasion and had spoken repeatedly in 1994 about graffiti. The Council did something about graffiti, and the community was cleaner and better off for it. He asked whether it would have been appropriate to ask him to wait until the end of the Council meeting the second or third time he spoke. People had the right to address the Council at an appropriate time, a time certain, and not be kept dangling until the end of the meeting. Sylvia Smitham, 2514 Birch Street, was interested in the fact that Council wanted to make two Oral Communication periods, one early and one late. She was willing to stay until 11:00 p.m. if that was what it took to speak to the Council. She had spoken to the Council on occasion and always found the Council to be polite. She wished when people came forward to speak, they could also be polite and not make personal remarks. She thanked the Council for their commitment to the community. MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by Mossar, to consider the proposal or other approaches that may be developed during the Council=s upcoming retreat. MOTION PASSED 9-0. 12. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements Council Member Huber said the City=s effort to become members of the Airport Roundtable did not come to fruition. The City was referred to another committee under the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and Council Member Dena Mossar would participate in their meeting. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: 01/12/98 85-410 City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.180(a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours. 01/12/98 85-411