Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-05-23 City Council Summary MinutesITEM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ��PALOALTOCITYCOUNCILMEEI MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE VIA KZSU-FREOUENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL Regular Meeting May 23, 1988 Oral Communications Minutes of April 25, 1988 1. Condition of Palo Alto Well System - Refer to Finance and Public Works Committee - 2. Agreement with Santa Clara Valley Water 60-81 ,District for 1988 Construction Programr. Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions 60-81 4. Request of Council Legislative Committee for Council Consideration of Santa Clara County Measures Appearing on June 7, 1988 tsallot 4A. (Old Item 3), Report from Council Legis- lative Committee: AB 3318 (State Route 109 between Dumbartor Bridge and Highway 101); Propositions 68 and 73 (Campaign Funding) 5. Resolution Authorizing Signatures for Bank Accounts and Authorizing Certain Proce- dures Superceding Resolution No. 6668 6. Water Shortage Action Plan Recommenda- tions 7. Amendment to Agreement with Whitmore, Kay & Stevens tor Legal Services Adjournment to a Closed Session at 8:40 p.m. Final Adjournment at 8:50 p.m. PAGE 60-80 60-80 60-81 60-81 60-83 60-85 60-85 60-8:` 60-90 60-90 60-79 5/23/88 Regular Meeting Monday, May 23, 1988 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel (arrived at 7:33 p.m.), Cobb, Fletcher, ::1zin, Levy, Patitucci (arrived at 7:35 p.m.); Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley Mayor Sutorius announced that a Special Meeting to interview Historic Resources Board Candidates was held at 6:10 p.m., in the Council Conference Room. He further announced the need for a Closed Session re Litigation in Progress (City of Palo Alto v. Philadel hia Gear) pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to e held at some point during or after the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ben Bailey, 171 Everett, spoke regarding complaints against the Palo Alto Police Department, and the City's lack of responsiveness to his inquiries regarding disciplinary actions. Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor. He requested Council support of a clause in the agreement with Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) regarding a cut-off for the Sea Scout operation as follows: "Unless a means is found to provide sufficient depth of water for satisfactory opera- tion. Ms. Liz Kniss, President, Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD), delivered the signed Lease between the City of Palo and PAUSD. MINUTES OF APRIL 25, 1988 Council Member Woolley submitted a correction to page 466; Mayor Sutorius submitted corrections to pages 460 and 464; and Vice Mayor Klein submitted a correction to page 472. MOTION: Vice Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Levy, approval of the Minutes of April 25, 1988, as corrected. MOTION PASSED unanimously, 60-80 5/23/88 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Sutorius removed Item 3 from the Consent Calendar. MOTION: Vice Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Fletcher, approval of the Consent Calendar. Referral 1. CONDITION OF PALO ALTO WELL SYSTEM - REFER TO FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE (CMR ;267 ;8) (1440-03/1520- 01) Action 2. AGREEMENT WITH SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT FOR 1988 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (CMR:289:8) (1440-03/1520-01) Staff is further authorized to execute change orders of up to $11,000 for unforeseen construction costs. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Ite• 3, Report of Council Legislative Committee removed. AGENDA CHANGES/ ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS City Manager Bill Zaner announced that Item 3 would become Item 4-A. 4. REQUEST OF COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY MEASURES APPEARING ON JUNE 7� 1988 BALLOT (CMR:291:8) (?02-06) Council Member Levy advised that the County Ballot Measures were not considered by the Council .Legislative Committee, but the Committee believed it might be worthwhile for the Council to consider the measures and possibly provide opin- ions to County constituents. Mayor Su'..orius asked how the Advisory Measures got on the ballot and was particularly interested in Advisory Measures B, C, and D since there were no arguments in favor or oppo- sition. Assistant to the City Manager Vicci Rudin said the County Supervisors' Association of California asked all counties to place Advisory Measures B, C, and D on the ballot, and they appeared on many county ballots in November, 1987. With regard to the measure concerning the State surplus, the perspective in November was different than at present. The 60-81 5/2.3/88 County did not directly intend to sponsor legislation based on the response to the ballot measures, but the County Supervisors' Association might. MOTION: Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Klein, that Council take no position with respect.. to Measures B, C and D. Mayor Sutorius did not support influencing how people voted on measures which lacked any statement of purpose or sub- stantiation for their being on the ballot. Council Member Levy agreed with regard to Measures B and C. AMENDMENT: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Fletcher, to delete Item D, re State funding of State - mandated programs. Council Member Fletcher said Council lad previously taken a position that State mandated programs with fiscal implic- ,rtions should receive funding. Mayor Sutorius agreed that State -mandated programs and requirements should provide for how the requirement would be accomplished in a sound fiscal manner. Philosophically, he would not support the amer.ment because such advisory measures should not have credence when they did rot receive any kind of supporting discussion. He was disappointed that the ballot could be cluttered with unsupported requests for which the citizens should express an opinion. Vice Mayor Klein agreed with Mayor Sutorius. He believed it was "posturing" by those who put it'on the ballot, and it was absurd to think the advisory vote would result in the State Legislature's funding programs they mandated. It was an abuse of the electoral process. Council Member Renzel opposed the amendment. While it was appropriate for the State to provide "some" funding for State -mandated programs, the advisory vote requested "full" funding. She referred to important items of statewide interest which should have some local funding. en the other hand, there might be some communi*.ies less able than Palo Alto to fund the programs ,..nd she was not sure she agreed with the 'word "fully" funded. Council Member Fletcher said the ballot measure was a prin- ciple that translated into something very plain. Counties were very hard hit with couct costs and jail costs as a result of actions taken in Sacramento. Tf the advisory 60-82 5/23/88 measure were not taken seriously, she did not know whether Palo Alt.) should continue its lobbying efforts either. A one -page letter did not say much more than the particular ballot measure. She believed many arguments "for" and "against" a measure would clutter the ballot pamphlet far more. AMENDMENT FAILED by a vote of 3-6, Levy, Bechtel, Fletcher voting 'aye." MOTION PASSE by a vote of 8-1, Fletcher voting "no..' MOTION: Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded by Renzel, that Council go on record as supporting Measure A and opposing Measure F. Council Member Patitucci believed the measure to correct the jail situation was appropriate and deserved Council sup- port. Vice Mayor Klein supported the motion. The measures were very important and would save -the taxpayers a great deal of money. MOTION PASSED unanimously. MOTION: Council Meter Bechtel moved, seconded by Woolley, that Council go on record in opposition to Measure E. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 4A. (OLD ITEM 3), REPORT FROM COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE: AB 3318 (STATE ROUTE 109 BETWEEN DUMBARTON BRIDGE AND HIGHWAY 101); PROPOSITIONS 68 AND 73 (CAMPAIGN FUNDING) (CMZ:29 : 8) (702-06) John Mock, 736 Oarron Avenue, was concerned that AB 3318 did not state where State Route 109 was supposed to go. The legislation contained disclaimers but none really protected the City of Palo Alto, the Palo Alto Baylands or the users of Highway 101 and Embarcadero Road or Oregon Expressway. He did not believe the proposed route made sense geographi- cally or environmentally. He caged opposition unless amended to protect the Baylands. Geri Stewart, Levque of Women Voters (LWV), supported the recommendation of the Council Legislative Committee regarding support for Proposition 68 and opposition to Proposition 73. Regarding- Proposition 73, she was concerned 60-83 5/23/88 about the prohibition against newsletters and mass mailings. The League believed it was the most cost effective way for elected officials to communicate with their constituencies. It would be detrimental to governmental agencies. If both propositions passed, the prohibition contained in Proposition 73 could go into effect. !LOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt the staff recommendation as follows: 1. Request Assemblyman Byron Sher to seek the amendment of AB 3318 to require a) that all jurisdictions through which any proposed segment of Route 109 would pass would be involved as active participants in the study and analysis of the proposed route; and b) that no route would be include,. in any state plan for future Route 109 construction without the approval of all jurisdictions through which the route would pass. 2. Support Proposition 68, Legislative Campaign Spending and Contribution Limits Initiative; and 3. Oppose Proposition 73, Campaign Funding Contribution Limits Initiative. Council Member Fletcher said it was unrealistic toassume the City Council's opposition to AB 3318 would stop the bill. It was more realistic to seek the amendment to make sure the City had some input into what might be done. Council Member Renzel agreed with Council Member Fletcher but was concerned about whether the City would have time to oppose the bill in the event the amendment failed. Ms. Rodin said the bill was still in the Assembly. If the amendment failed in the Assembly or in the early hearings in the Senate, there would be the opportunity to work to defeat the legislation. Council Member Renzel saw no way such a connection could be accomplished without causing great damage to the City of Palo Alto. NOTION PASSED unanimously. Mayor Sutorius referred to a proposal from the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) for a joint letter to local newspapers from the PAUSD and the City Council regarding Proposition 71 which both the Palo Alto Unified School District and the Palo Alto City Council previously acted on 60-84 5/23/88 and supported and Proposition 72 which both bodies opposed. Letters to the Editor had deadlines in advance of normal deadlines whenthey were associated with election campaign issues; therefore, there was little time available to have the communication which both bodies endorsed previously. It would be appropriate and useful for the community* to be aware of the position on the proposed Gann formula revi- sions. MOTION: Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Klein, consid- eration of Propositions 71 and 72 as an emergency item. Council Member Bechtel did not see the need for Council to act on the motion. Council already took positions on the propositions and the exact wording of letters were not approved in other instances. Council agreed. MOTION WITHDRAWN 5. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES FOR BANK ACCOUNTS AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN PROCEDURES SUPERCEDING RESOLUTION NC. 6668 (CMR:251:8) (701-04/401) MOTION: Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded by Bechtel r to adopt the staff recommendation t .at the following r.ero based accounts be converted to imprest accounts with the recommended balances: Retiree Reimburse- ment, $4,000; Employee Dental, $45,000; and Employee Health, $200,000. RESOLUTION '694 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALT() AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES FOR BANK ACCOUNTS FOR THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND AUTHORISING CERTAIN PROCEDURES, SUPERCEDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 6668" NOTION PASSED unanimously. 6. WATER SHORTAGE ACTION PLAN RECOMMENDATION:s (CMR:285:8) (I410-01) Director of Utilities Rich Young referred to the fluorida- tion question and said research reflected there were facili- ties available at a cost of about $1,000 per well that would provide fluoridation. 60-85 5/23/88 Mayor Sutorius referred to the daily changes on the issue and queried whether there was any updated information with regard to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's pending action. Mr. Young said recent information indicated the expectation of a 3b percent increase in wholesale price range for Palo Alto. The Bay Area Water Users' legal counsel advised that the contract signed in 1984 provided that any emergency rate increase needed to be spread equally between San Francisco and the wholesale users. Since a 15 percent level was pro- posed for the retail users in San Francisco, it meant only a 15 percent rate increase could be applied to the wholesale users, which would result in a considerable difference in the impacts of what retail rates might be. There was a strong likelihood that San Francisco would immediately proceed to a formal rate hearing procens and establish a long-term formal rate at a higher_ level to potentially accommodate the difference in the lost -revenue. Council Member Renzel asked about fluoridation as it related to fish ponds and whether people would be notified if there was a problem. Mr. Young said the fluoridation schedule maintained a spe- cific quantity of one part fluoride per million as required. It st Jld be no different in any part of the system. In terms of salinity, it was at such a minor level fish probably would not notice it. Council Member Woolley referred to Palo Alto's position of not having to go to mandatory rationing because of the City's having its own well: to supplement its supply. She queried how much water Palo Alto wells could supply. She believed Palo Alto citizens should receive some explanation as to why it was important to conserve anyway. Mr. Young said there was a heavy requirement in dry weather tines to reduce water consumption and a lesser requirement during wet weather. The difference between would be diffi- cult to obtain, and wells would not be totally adequate to supply the need. Consequently, there would be the need to conserve and the City needed to be concerned about any potential impacts on the ground water. Doug Pursell, Chief Water -Gas -Wastewater Engineer said the City planned to use the Hale, Rinconada, Peers Park, and Meadows wells which had acceptable quantities and quality of water and which totaled 5.5 million gallons per day 60--86 5/3/88 production. In August 1987, the peak delivery day was 29 million Gallons,', If that type of day occurred again in 1988, subtracting the 5.5 mil:.ion gallons, the City would still be taking _3 to' -26 mill:ton gallons of water per day from the Ketch Hetchy system. The City's wells were unable to meet the difference. Council Member Woolley believed the public needed to under- stand the importance of individual conservation in addition to Palo Alto's us.e of its wells.- Cotpncil Member Cobb was concerned about depleting the well resource and how long it would take to recover. Mr. Pursell said the City used its wells for a long period of time up until approximately 1965. Sine then the City only occasionally used its wells and for short durations. The Citl, now had two artesian wells. The acquifer was quite full and six months' pumping at the maximum level should not touch it. The wells would be continually monitored, Council Member Cobb queried whether there should be a cap on excessive use. Mr. Young said the City could identify what was used and what might be -onsidered to be excess usage. Most rationing was nothing more than a penalty rate. Until the City was prepared to send people out to do some policing they would rc- .:.y on the goodwill of the people in recognizing the need. Staff could identify excessive users through the billing process and the individual cases could be addressed. Staff wart prepared to apply penalty rates, but the citizens responded favorably in the past. The City had an excellent record. Thy.}re was much to be said about the City's previous action and staff was trying to recognize that. Council. Member Cobb read that some communities providing conservation deices to the homeowner found it to be very cost-effective. He queried whether it should be con- sidered. Debra Katz, Energy Services, Residential/Small Commercial Program Coordinator said such a program could be very expen- sive. Promoting cheap and ineffective devices could produce short-term benefits but result in people having a hostile attitude towards water savings and conservation. On the other hand, it was expensive to have a city program which provided quality devices. Staff was more inclined to work with local hardware stores to ensure that quality devices were in stock. 60-87 5/23/88 Council Member Fletcher said the staff report (CMR:285:O) referred to the use of alternative water supplies such as the City's wezl system but she saw no Leference to what the other alternatives might be. Mr. Young said Palo Alto had an understanding from the Bay Area Water Users'to investigate any alternative supply which might be available. Council , Member Fletcher asked about current building regulations for new construction in terms of low -flow shower heads and toilets. Ms. Katz said there were regulations on residential construction for the installation of high -efficiency shower heads and low-water using toilets. She did not know how residential was defined. Council Member Woolley asked about the free water conserva- tion kit from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and how one would get it. Ms. Katz said a person just needed to call the SCVWD and the kit would be mailed out. Mayor Sutorius asked about the next steps with regard to the water rate change. Mr. Young said the meeting with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission would occur on May 24, 1988, and staff would review the information and -be prepared to discuss it to some extent on May 26. The overall _rates issue per se was scheduled for May 31, 1988, which was why Palo Alto would have a formally generated rate schedule to incorporate all items of concern including the previous rates issues which were reviewed by the Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee. Mayor Sutorius referred to education and conservation efforts and understood staff held a series of meetings with major water users reviewing the reduction requirement on an annualized basis and emphasizing how it related to a high reduction requirement in the dry weather months. Mr. Young said that Was correct. The City received an excellent response from the commercial and industrial community. 60-88 5/23/88 MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Renzel, to adopt the staff recommendation to meet San Francisco's reduction riquirement and approve: 1. Continuation of a strong water conservation public information campaign; 2. Continued reduction of water use throughout City facili- ties; and 3. Use of well water to supplement the Hetch-Hecchy supply. John Mock, 736 Barron Avenue, did not believe people under- stood the seriousness of the drcught. He provided many sug- gestions regarding possible restrictions and recycling options. He asked about the effects of depleting acquifers and possible contamination by untreated chemical plants close to the surface. If last year's conservation efforts made a difference, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission should be advised that Palo Alto already made an effort to prevent the 1988 situation from getting worse; that Palo Alto and its citizens should not be penalized for its previous conservation efforts; and that present alloca- tions should be based on the 1986 consumption. Council Member Cobb was still not convinced the measures were strong enough or early enough. He requested that staff report back in a month. The public should be well aware that if voluntary measures did not work, the City would get tougher He suggested consideration of an inducement, i.e., reduction in utility bills, for evidence that water con- servation devices were installed. Council Member Fletcher wanted to ensure that the PAUSD vas included in any outreach program. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 7. AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH WHITMORE, KAY & STEVENS FOR LEGAL SERVICES (720) MOTION: Vice Mayor Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to authorize the Mayor to execute Amendment Mo. One to AyLewwent No. SO -6205 with Whitmore, Kay 4 Stevens for Legal Services. MOTION PASSED unanimously. 60-89 5/23/88 ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned to a Closed Session re Litigation at 8:40 p.m. Final adjournment at 8:50 p.m. ATTEST. APPROVED: ayor 60-90 5/23/88