HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-07-13 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
PALOALIOCITYCOUNCIL MEETINGSARE BROADCAST LIVE VIA KZSU- FREOUENCY90.1 UN FM DIAL
Regular Meeting
July 13, 1987
ITEM
Oral Communications
PAGE
58-4
Minutes of June 1 and 8, 1987 58-4
1. Appointment of Chief of Police - 58-4
Conse i 58-5
Refer:
58-5
2. 4 with Pacific Gas and Electric 58-5
Co,., . ny for Gas Transmission -- Refer to
Finance and Public Works Committee
3. Natural Gas Purchase Agreement -.Refer to 58-5
Finance and Public Works Committee
Action
4. Report from Council Legislative Committees
S.535/H.R.1087, 5.933/H.R.1278, SB 1268,
SB 1297, SB 1473, AB 318, d SB 1028
58-5
58-5
5. Contract with Coax -t Electric Company for 58-5
Garage Fan Control Systems
6. One -Year Contract with .Lawrence Tire Ser- 58-5
vices, Inc., for Tire Services
7. Sain ..Francisguito Creek Erosion Control. 58-5
Project Increase in Authorization
8. Civic Center Security System - Rejection. 58.6
of Bids
58-1,
7/13/87
I T EM
9. Contract with Council for the Arts Palo
Alto and Midpeninsula Area Community Box
Office for Ticket Handling Services
PAGE
58-6
10. Agreement with Palo Alto Unified School 58-6
District for Use of Facilities
11. Agreement with Ralph Andersen & Associates 58-6
for Director of Finance Search
12. Resolution 6626 Ordering the Summary Vaca-
tion of a Public Service Easement for a Gas.
Receiving Station and Gas Line on the
Stanford University, Golf Course
58-6
13. Resolution 6627 Ordering the Summary Vaca- 58-6
tion of a Public Service Easement for Over-
head Utilities at 650/644 Maybell Avenue
14. Ordinance 3757 Amending Title 18 (Zoning 58-6
Code) Regarding Recycling Centers
15. Ordinance 3758 Amending Chapter 4.10 of the
Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding a New
Section Thereto, Section 4.10.051, Creating
a Limited Exception to Regulations
Rega :ding Hours of Solicitation Applicable
to Solicitors and Peddlers
58-6
16. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution Authorizing the 58-6
Director of Public Works to Request an
Exemption from the Convenience_. Zone
Requirements of the California Beverage`
Container Recycling and Litter Reduction
Act because the City teas # an Established
Curbside Recycling Program with Wekly
Collection Service
17. Report from Council Legislative Committee 58-7
re SB 1297 '
18. Resolution Calling a Special Election for
Tuesday, November 3, 1987, for Submittal of
Certain ' Measures to the Electorate and
Ordering the Consolidation of Said
Election
58-10
58-2
7/13/87
ITEM
Arguments re Utility Users Tax and Increase
Appropriations Limit
Argument re Nuclear Weapons Free Palo Alto
Initiative
Recess
Arguments re Leaf Blower Control
19. Crescent Park III Underground Conversion
Project -- Agreement for Joint Participa-
tion Between City of Palo Alto and Pacific
t3ei1 Company
20. Request of City Attorney to Join in Amicus
Briefs in: Snedaker v. County of San
Bernardino and Hermansen Construction Co.
v. County of San Bernardino
21. Request of Mayor Woolley re Palo Alto's
100th Birthday
22. Request of Council Member Klein re Vaca-
tion Schedules
PAGE
58-15
58-16
58-38
58-38
58-39
58-40
58-40
58-40
Adjournment at 10:40 p.m. . 58-41
58-3
7/13/87
Regular Meeting
Monday, July 13, 1987
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this dte
in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:35 p.m,
PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein,
Levy, Patitucci, Sutorius, Woolley
ABSENT: Renzel
Mayor Woolley announced a joint meeting with the Historic
Resources Board (HRB) re a -Quick Summary of 1986487 HRB
Actions, Local Government Certification, Preservation Design
Review, Downtown Preservation Issues, and the 1988
Preservation Conference was held at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Conference Room.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Harrison Otis, 2721 Midtown Court, spoke regarding .the
Voyager Proclamation.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 1 AND 8, 1987
MOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Sutorius,
approval of the Minutes of June 1 and 8, 1987, as
submitted.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel absent.
1. APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF OF POLICE (CMR:369:7) (502)
MOTION: Council Member Cobb moved, seconded by Fletcher,
the appointment of Chris Durkin as Chief of Police of. Palo
Alto.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel absent.
Mayor Woolley said the whole Council had enjoyed working
with Chief Durkin over the years and looked forward to many
more years of working together.
Chief Durkin thanked the Council for the vote of confidence
and said it was an honor to be appointed as Police Chief of
Palo Alto. The Palo Alto Police Department was a great
department because it was staffed by outstanding people,
many of whom made major contributions to the City as well as
to the Police Department. He introduced his wife, Kathy,
and their two sons, Jeffrey and Gregory, and thanked Chief
Zurcher for his outstanding leadership and friendship._
58-4
7/13/87
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Council Member Fletcher moved, seconded by Cobb,
approval of the Consent Calendar.
Council Members Patitucci and Cobb asked to be recorded as
voting "noN on Item 15, Ordinance 3758 Amending Chapter 4.10
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code by Adding a New Section
Thereto, Section 4.10.051, Creating a Limited Exception to
Regulations Regarding Hours of Solicitation Applicable to
Solicitors and Peddlers.
Referral
2. AGREEMENT WITH PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR GAS
TRANSMISSION REFER TO FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS_
COMMITTEE (CMR:363:7) (1112)
3. NATURAL GAS PURCHASE AGREEMENT - REFER TO FINANCE AND
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE (CMR:364:7) (1112)
Action
4. REPORT FROM COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE:
S.585/H.R.1087, S.933/H.R.12781 SB 1268, SB 1297= SB•
1473 AB 318, and SB 1028 (CMR:361:7) (702-06)
Council Legislative Committee recommends that the
Council support S.585/H.R.1087, S.933/H.R.1278, SB 1268,
SB 1473, AB 318, and SB 1028; and direct the Mayor to
communicate the City's position to our legislators and
others as appropriate. The Committee recommends that
priority attention be given to S.585/H.R.1087,
S.933/H.R.1278, and AB 318.
5. CONTRACT WITH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY FOR GARAGE FAN
CONTROL SYSTEMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $89 757 (CMR:355:7)
(8X0--02-01/11,UU0- 1)
6. ONE-YEAR CONTRACT WITH LAWRENCE TIRE SERVICES,- INC.) FOR
,rRE SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000
(CMR:357:7) (603-01)
7. S4N FRANCISQUITO CREEK EROSION :CONTROL PROJECT
INCREASE IN AGREEMENT AUTHORIZATION WITH THE SANTA CLARA
(CMR:352:7)
VALLEY WATER
(1440-0S)
8. CIVIC CENTER SECURITY SYSTEM. - REJECTION OF BIDS
(CMR:356:7)
9. CONTRACT WITH COUNCIL FOR THE ARTS PALO ALTO AND
MIDPENINSULA AREA COMMUNITY BOX OFFICE FOR TICKET
HANDLING SERVICES FOR 1987-88 (CMR:353:7) (1304-01)
10. AGREEMENT WITH PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR USE
OF FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $60 800 (CMR:354:7)
(1341-01)
11. AGREEMENT WITH RALPH ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES FOR DIRECTOR
OF FINANCE SEARCH (CMR:350:7) (502)
12. RESOLUTION 6626 ENTITLED "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A
PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT FOR A GAS RECEIVING STATION AND
GAS LINE ON THE STANFORD UNIVERSITY GOLF COURSE"
(CMR:342:7) (1110/720-03)
13. RESOLUTION 6627 ENTITLED "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A
PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT FOR OVERHEAD UTILITIES AT
550/-644 MAYBELL AVENUE" (300)
14. ORDINANCE 3757 ENTITLED "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING TITLE 18 (ZONING CODE)
REGARDING RECYCLING CENTERS" (1st Reading 6/15/87,
PASSED 9-0) (CMR:358:7) (1420/701-03)
15. ORDINANCE 3758 ENTITLED "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 4.10 OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A NEW SECTION THERETO/ SECTION
4.10.051, CREATING A LIMITED EXCEPTION TO REGULATIONS
REGARDING HOURS OF SOLICITATION APPLICABLE TO SOLICITORS
AND PEDDLERS" (1st Reading 6/22/87, PASSED 7-2, Cobb,
Patitucci voting "no." (409)
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Patitucci, Cobb voting unoR on
Item 15, Renzel absent.
16. PUBLIC HEARING:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC WORKS TO REQUEST AN EXEMPTION FROM THE
CONVENIENCE ZONE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA BEVERAGE
CONTAINER RECYCLING AND LITTER REDUCTION ACT ,BECAUSE THE
CITY HAS AA ESTABLISHED CURBSIDE RECYCLING. PROGRAM
(CMR:343:7) (1420)
Mayor Woolley said it was the time and place set for the
public hearing on the City's intent to request an exemption
to the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter
58-6
7/13/87
Reduction Act. Notice to the public was published in the
Peninsula Times Tribune an June 28, 1987. The purpose of
the hearing was to allow Council to hear all persons sup-
porting or opposing the proposed request for exemption. She
asked whether the City Clerk had received any written com-
munications from such interested persons.
City Clerk Gloria Young replied no.
Mayor Woolley declared the public hearing open, Receiving
no requests from the public to speak, she declared the pub-
lic hearing closed. She said "with weekly collection
service," should be added to the end of the title of the
resolution and at the end of the first "Whereas."
MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Klein, to
adopt the resolution as amended to add the wording with
weekly collection service' to the end of the title of the
resolution and the first *WHEREAS* of the resolution.
RESOLUTION 6628 entitled '"RESOLUTION) OF THE
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO REQUEST \AN EXEMPTION FROM
THE CONVENIENCE ;ORE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING AND LITTER REDL,CTION ACT
BECAUSE THE CITY HAS AN ESTABLISHED CURBSIDE RECYCLING
PROGRAM WITH WEEKLY COLLECTION SERVICE"
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Rents]. absent.
17. REPORT FROM COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE RE SB 1297
i CMR: 351: 7) (f-2-00
Council Legislative Committee Chairperson Frank Patitucci
said the Council Legislative Committee chose not to act on
Se 1297, which was sponsored by Senator Petrie. The
Committee reviewed three housing related -bills, the other
two of which the Committee supported. The purpose of SB
1297 was to create the California Housing Partnership but
there were ;zany unanswered questions and it did not seem as
targeted and as potentially effective as the other bills.
The bill created a government -sponsored, though independent,
entity incorporated to enter into partnerships with non-
profit organizations to continue to provide lower -income and
very low-income housing. In his experience as the Director
of the State. Housing - Finance . Agency, thatagency was like a
state- owned bank incorporated by the state to lend
tax-exempt dollars to organizations to develop and operate
housing. It kept the state at arms length from the actual
developments and provided for a debtor/lender relationship
which proved to be fairly successful in developing housing.
57-7
7/13/87
The California Housing Partnership idea had been around for
many years, and was once proposed to be part of the
California Housing Finance Agency but was opposed by the
staff'because it put the state, as well as the agency, in an
ownership and operating role relative to housing, which he
believed was inappropriate for the state. Although the bill
purported to do something worthwhile, no appropriations were
made. It was inconceivable for an organization to be put in
place and accomplish the objectives without any money. The
third problem related directly to Palo Alto in that whatever
the organization might be able to accomplish was targeted at
lower and very low income --lower meaning 80 percent of
median for the County and very low meaning 50 percent of
median for the County. He believed the City had difficulty
even meeting the objectives of the lower income where they
tried to achieve a mix between middle income and lower
income in Palo Alto's developments.
Sylvia Semen, Executive Director of the Palo Alto Housing
Corporation, (PAHC), said PAHC requested Council support of
SB 1297 because the basic intent was to address the loss of
the existing subsidized housing stock. She understood the
purpose of the group would be to raise equity capital and to
pass the money through to nonprofit organizations, such as
the PAHC, to enable them to purchase units as they went on
the market. She urged reconsideration.
Mayor Woolley asked how the lower- and very low-income
housing related to Palo Alto and whether the bill would be
helpful to the California Park project as stated in Ms.
Seman's letter (on file in the City Clerk's office).
Ms. Ssman clarified the bill that could be helpful with
California Park project was approved by Council under the
Consent Calendar. 5B 1297 referred to the loss of projects
that might occur, such as Arastradero Park which was owned
by a limited -dividend, for-profit entity. It would be: good
if an organization such as PAHC had money to compete in the.
sale of such a project because PAUC would retain it as low/
moderate -income housing. The Sheridan and Palo Alto Gardens
were other projects. Webster Wood and Terman were not of
concernbecause of " the contract with the City for the land,
PAHC was locked in for 60 years.
Council Member Patitucci asked where the organization would
get the money to come up with sufficient funds to buy
projects.
58-8
7/13/87
Sylvia Martinez, 794 Allen Court, said there had been
changes to the bill, and a start-up cost of $349,000 was
estimated. At ,that point, there were negotiations between
the Department of Housing and Community Development and the
California Housing Finance Agency as to who would foot the
bill and where the revenue source would be for the start-up.
The loan fund would be paid after two years, and she had a
budget available. The amendments taken it . that afternoon's
hearing changed the bill somewhat and put the focus not so
much on creating a housing corporation that could have
acquisition powers, but instead on a corporation that would
act as a general partner in putting together syndications
and using the new tax credit.' The new tax credit, which was
a substitute tor the old deductions, changed the world of
syndications for low-income housing and was of greater
appeal to corporate investors than to the average indi-
vidual; therefore, there was a need for an entity to market
the credit and work closely with the state' because the state
would be allocating the tax credit. Ms. Seman's statement
that the purpose of the bill was to create an entity to
raise equity capital to enable nonprofits to purchase some
of the stock that might be lost as the mortgages were sold
off was still accurate. The exclusive function of the
partnership was for nonprofit housing corporations to pre-
serve some of the units being lost to the market. She had a
copy of the revised amendments.
Vice Mayor Sutorius asked about the progress of the bill and
the time factor with respect to registering support.
Ms. Martinez said the bill got through the Assembly Housing
Committee, made its way through the Senate and would be
going to the Senate floor. If. Council decided to support
the bill, it was critical to contact Senator Rebecca Morgan
and Governor George Deukmejian. Senate recessed between
July 17 and August 17, 1987, so Council should act quickly,
however,. she did not believe the bill would reach the floor
before July 17, 1981.
Vice Mayor Sutorius clarified if the bill stayed on course,
the Senate would not act on it until sometime after August
17, 1987 at the earliest.
Ms. Martinez said yes, and the bill went to the Governor
about mid -September.
Council. Member Fletcher asked if there would be sufficient
time to respond if Council waited for the next Legislative
Committee meeting to discuss the bill further and then
referred it back to Council.
58-9
7/13/87
Assistant to the City Manager, Vicci Rudin, believed so.
She understood the bill passed the Senate on May 28, 1987,
was presently in the Assembly, and was heard that day by the
Housing Community Development Committee. She agreed it was
doubtful the bill would go to the Assembly floor before
August 17, 1987, when the legislature reconvened. She anti-
cipated one and possibly two Legislative Committee meetings
in the interim.
Council Member Fletcher was ready to support the bill that
evening.
MOTION: Council Member Fletcher . moved, seconded by Levy,
to support SB 1297, and to forward the _nfcr t`a to the
representatives and the Governor
SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER: Council Member Patitucci
moved, seconded by Sutorius, to refer the item back to the
Council Legislative Committee.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER PASSED by a vote of 7-1,
Bechtel voting "no," Renzel absent.
18. RESOLUTION CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 3, 1987, FOR SUBMITTAL OF CERTAIN MEASURES TO
THEE ELECTORATE AND ORDERING THE CONSOLIDATION OF SAID
ELECTION (CMR:360:7/367:7) (705-87-08)
Mayor Woolley said in addition to adopting the Resolution
which called the election and contained the wording for the
four ballot measures, Council needed to decide who would do
the various arguments according to the options available.
She would not participate in the Utility Users Tax and
accompanying initiative portion of the item due to a con-
flict of interest.
Vice Mayor Sutorius said Council would first address calling
the election and the four special ballot measures.
City Attorney Diane Northway referred to changes in the
Utility Users Tax measure portion of the Resolution_. On
page 5, in the section dealing with the telephone, a provi-
sion was added dividing the video and data from the rest of
telephone communication. A phrase was added saying that
those were included in the term "telephone communication" to
the extent permitted by law. The telephone company did not
bel".eve the City could tap data, and the City wished to give
itself the. option to do that in the future should the law
change. Since. the measure was to be approved by the voters,
it could only be changed by the voters' On page. 7, Section
58-10
7/13/87
2.35.110, there was an omission to the list of taxes on
which the City Council could suspend collection related to
the:telephone tax. She understood it was Council's wish to
have included the reference to Section 2.35.090._ In Section
2.35.100, subsection Cf to be consistent with the later
section in the ordinance, the officer who would promulgate
regulations ;;;s changed to the City Manager. She noted
changes to the Resolution for the record: 1) On page one,
change the first word of the second line of the first
"WHEREAS" from "said" to "a"; 2) On page 2 under "SECTION
1.", change the word "article" to "Title"; 3) On Page 12
under the first paragraph under the wording "NUCLEAR WEAPONS
FREF: PALO ALTO INITIATIVE," change the upper case "P" in
"People" to a lower case "p," and under "SECTION 3.
FINDINGS.a." change the upper case "aP" in "People" to a
lower case "p"; 4) On page 14 under "d" change the phrase
"Nuclear Weapons mark" to "Nuclear Weapons work"; 5) On page
17 under "SECTION 9. ENFORCEMENT.b." change the word on th.e
fifth line from "this" to "his"; and 6) One page .18, change
the order of the paragraph "for the measure" and "Against
the measure" to appear above theparagraph on thepage that
began with the wording, "If a majority of qualified electors
voting..."
Council Member Cobb referred to the Resolution, the first
"WHEREAS" paragraph, and th.e language "Council has concluded
that it wishes to submit said initiatives to the elec-
torate..." He was concerned the language implied support
for those measures. He believed the decision was, given the
requisite signatures presented, Council felt compelled to do
so.
Ms. Northway believed the language was used in the past to
indicate Council had two choices, and rather than adopting
the initiatives as presentedf Council decided to present
there to the voters. The language could be changed.
Council Member Cobb said not many of the voters knew Council
had that choice, and to explain that Council concluded to
submit the initiatives to the voters rather than to adopt
them would be clearer in terms of the actual Resolution.
Ms. Northway believed a complex , change posed substantial.
drafting problems for that evening, although staff could
deal with one -word changes. She suggested considering a
simple way to accomplish the change.
5f3-11
7/13/87
Council Member Levy said on page 17, last paragraph, the
language "...requires the owner of every such leaf blower"
was unclear. He believed the language would be clearer as,
"...the owner of every gasoline powered leaf blower." He
asked if that language was in accordance with staff's under-
standing of the meaning.
Ms. Northway believed either wording was fine.
Council Member Levy said on page 1, last paragraph, in
regard to the question being presented to the voters on the
5 percent utility tax, one line could be misconstrued, i.e.,
"...and provides for a reduced tax rate for high volume
users..." Those familiar with the ordinance understood the
language meant a 5 percent tax would generally be imple-
mented, but at a certain rate there would be a tax of 3
percent or 2 percent for high -volume users. To the casual
reader, the wording could be construed that Council was sug-
gesting a tax increase for s?rne and a tax redww\tion per se
for high -volume users. He aked if acceptablealternative
wording for the paragraph could be, "Shall an ordinance be
adopted which imposes a utility users tax of a maximum of
five percent (5%) of the utility charges on users of
electricity, gas, water, and telephones in the City of Palo
Alto and provides for collection of this tax?"
Ms. Northway said no.
Council Member Levy clarified the question needed to make a
differentiation there was 5 percent for some and must
specifically say that high -volume users would pay less than
a 5 percent tax.
Ms. Northway said two issues were involved. First, what the
tax rate was. The tax rate was 5 percent; that was the tax
Council was levying. The second issue was not a maximum, it
was a 5 percent tax, and that was done in order to comply
with Proposition 62 which said the rate had to be specified
and had to be a fixed rate. The ordinance allowed Council
to choose not to collect a portion of the tax, and -that was
the way staff satisfied the desire of Council to be able to
reduce the rates. for everybody. One of the significant pro-
visions of the particular ordinance was it had a reduced
rate for high -volume users. How the questions were phrased
was a political judgment on Council's part, but in terms of
the first issue, Council needed to say a 5 percent rate, not.
a maximum of 5 . percent. In regard to calling out the fact
there was ii reduced rate for high -volume users, Council
could make the choice.
58-12
7/13/87
Louis Fein, 1540 Oak Creek Drive, #312, wanted the record to
reflect objections to the text of the Utility Users Tax
measure and the Gann appropriations measure. The Utility
Users 'fax measure stated that the tax was for the purpose of
raising revenues' for the general governmental purposes of
the City, and all proceeds shall be placed in the City's
General Fund. He submitted the real purpose and driving
force for the tax was to fund the so-called Palo Alto
Unified School District (PAUSD) deficit for the next 15
years which would be done through the funding of a City/
School District lease for almost $4 million annually. Two
unused PAUSD properties would be leased to the City, and
there would be a promise by the PAVSU not to develop other
unused school properties. The special --purpose tax required
two-thirds of those voting to ratify the measure. He
considered the statement disingenuous and a sham, intended
to make the measure easier to pass by calling it a general-
purpose tax requiring only a majority to ratify. The
authors of the measure seemed to think the noble ends of
aiding `,the PAUSD in its claimed financial difficulties
justified the disingenuous means of calling a special tax a
general-purpose tax: He suggested the paragraph state what
the special purposes were, or that Council at least add to
the paragraph the school lease expenditure and the antici-
pated infrastructure maintenance expenditures. If Council
deleted the general purpose statement altogether, then the
preface saying two-thirds, not a majority, of the electors
were required to ratify the measure also needed to be modi-
fied. The Gann measure was subject to similar objections.
Clearly, to fund the PAUSD deficit, the Gana limit would
have to be raised; but without the PAUSD obligation, he
believed the limit would not have to be raised. Omitted
from the measure as written was that purpose. They did not
need to subject the ratification of the measures to a prob-
able vote of a disinformed electorate, and he strongly urged
Council to change the wording of each measure to include the
purposes to which they already knew the funding would be
put.
MOTION; Council Member Cobb moved, seconded by Levy, to
adopt the resolution with the following amendments:
1:) On page one, change the first word of the second line of
the first "WHEREAS" from "said" to "a*;
2) On page 2 under SECTIONJ.", change the ward "article"
to 'Title
58-13
7/13/87
MOTION CONTINUED
3) On page 12 under the first paragraph under the wording
"NUCLEAR WEAPONS FREE PALO ALTO INITIATIVE," change the
upper case "P" in "People" to a lower case "pr" and
under "SECTION 3. FINDINGS.a." change the upper case
P inn "People lf- to a lower case "p";
4) On page 14 under "d" change the phrase "Nuclear Weapons
mark",. to "Nueleax Weapons work";
5) On page 17 under "SECTION 9. ENFORCEMENT.b." change the
word on the fifth line from "this" to "his"; and
6) One page 18, change the order of the paragraph "for the
measure" and "Against the measure" to follow the first
paragraph on the page after the wording "...leaf blower
does not exceed this noise level?"
RESOLUTION 6629 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION
FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1987, FOR SUBMITTAL OF
CERTAIN MEASURES TO THE ELECTORATE AND ORDERING THE
CONSoLIDA Ic 4 OF SAID ELECTION"
AMENDMENT: Council Member Cobb moved, seconded by Levy, to
add to page 1, the third "WHEREAS" of the resolution after
the word "electorate," the phrase, "rather than the
alternative of adopting them directly."
Council Member Cobb believed the phrase needed to be added
because it did not prejudice the Council's position one way
or the other. Council should not in any way imply they were
taking a pro position when that might not be the case.
Council Member Klein believed the appropriate grammatical
place for the phrase was after the word 'consideration."
MAKER AND SECOND OF AMENDMENT AGREED TO RELOCATION OF PHRASE
TO AFTER THE WORD "CONSIDERATION"
MAKER MW SECOND AGREED TO INCORPORATE THE AMENDMENT IN THE
MAIN MOTION
Council Member Levy said the City Clerk advised him that
Council did not have the option of amending the specific
ballot -measure questions. He was satisfied to leave the
language ds it was.
58-14
7/13/87
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously, Woolley "not
participating," Renzel absent.
Vice Mayor Sutorius said four measures were identified to be
included in the November election. Two of the measures, the
Utilities Users Tax and the Increase Appropriations Limit,
were ones for which the -Council as a body might write argu-
ments in support of to be signed by the Palo Alto City
Council. Such an action would -take a majority vote of those
present and voting on the Council that evening. On the two
initiative measures regarding the Nuclear Weapons Free Palo
Alto and the Leaf Blower Control, the circulators of the
petitions had the first right to write the arguments in favor
of their positions. Council might author and sign arguments
in opposition to one or both of the initiative measure.
Council should first consider whether it wished to author -and
sign the arguments as a body and, if not, Council should
determine if individual Council Members wished to author and
sign the arguments on their own behalf and whether the
Council would allow Council Members the use of their tities
for identification purposesr as had historically boen the
case.
ARGUMENTS RE UTILITY USERS TAX AND
INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS
LIMIT
Harrison Otis, 2721 Midtown Ceer t, attended the classroom
visitations, met with teachers, 'and knew the problems of the
PAUSO. He supported the Utility Users Tax, and was in favor
of decreasing the tax, as the quantity of use of the utility
rose. The tax was imperative to keep the schools going; and
to enable the City to make acquisitions of property for open
space, parks, and playgrounds.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, that
the City Council exercise its right of first refusal to
author and sign a ballot argument in favor of the City°
measures Utility Users Tax and Increase Appropriations
Limit.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Woolley "not participating,"
Renzel absent.
Council Member Patitucci asked if Council would have the
opportunity to vote on the wording of the argument, or if
Council would ask one of its members t� write the argument
and the vote would show there was a unanimous position on
what was written.
58-15
7/13/87
Vice Mayor Sutorius said because the period began the
following day tor the filing of the direct argument and
closed on July 24, 1987, at 5:00 p.m., time was of the
essence. Council Member Klein had agreed to act as lead
author tor the ballot arguments on those two measures, and
there would be an opportunity for Council review. He empha-
sized the matter did not need to return to Council for offi-
cial action.
ARGUMENT RE NUCLEAR WEAPONS FREE PALO ALTO INITIATIVE
Vice Mayor Sutorius said the circulators of the initiative
had priority position in regard to submitting an argument in
favor of the ballot measure. The Council Members had the
opportunity to determine whether they would make, as a
Council body, an argument in opposition., and further had the
opportunity to decide about allowing Council. Members to sign
either argument using their Council title for identification
purposes.
Mayor Wooiley said that Council had received a large quantity
of material at places (on file in the City Clerk's office),
which they would not have had sufficient time to read, and
she suggested speakers might want to clarify some of the
points,
Judith LeVine, 733C Loma Verde, said experts from other areas
were present to testify to different points of the ordinance.
The staff report (CMR:367:7) delineated some of the concerns
the City staff had about the Palo.Alto Nuclear weapons free
Zone ordiiicac . In reyard to the divestment of federal --
securities, it was not the intent of the framers of the
ordinance to include divestment of investments in the federal
government. In regard to the other investments, they saw a
screen could be developed, such as the screen used tor. South
African concerns. Many alternative - investments could be
taken. The staff report said a revenue loss could occur if
the replacements did not perform as well as the City's cur-
rent investment but, on the other hand, they could do better
and tile City could do better by a change in investments.
Many questions arose in terms of the contracts for goods and
services. .The report cited a lengthy and acrimonious process --
for determining nuclear weapons contractors. In that case,
people from Berkeley and Marin.County would.discuss the pro-
cesses they used in determining nuclear weapons- contractors.
The process did not have to be,. and in many other communities
had not been, lengthy or acrimonious, especially when the
commitment had `.been made by tile. City 'Council and the -
respec-tive municipalities, en.onomic conversion commissions, etc.,
to agree to work together to.develop a process tor dealing
58-16
7/13/87
with the issue. The report also stated that the City Charter
required that contracts be allocated to the lowest respon-
sible bidder. However, as described in the report by Mr.
Michael Shuman, there was some latitude in most cases and, if
there was not, the ordinance allowed for exceptions .if there
was no other responsible bidder. In terms of the contracts
that did not require the absolute lowest bidder, described as
contracts covered by the Kunciipal Code, many other factors
could be taken into account, and one could be the nuclear
weapons screen. For instance, many communities, including
the United States federal government, had a "buy American"
policy in many cases. People not only supported the policy
but insisted uovn it, although a City might be spending more
Money Apr not getting the best product. In terms of third -
party vendors, the intent of the ordinance was to not support
nuclear weapons contractors. Buying through a third party
did not deal with the matter at all. Other communities had
looked for alternatives very successfully and found better
buys, deals, products, and -contracts. The report also ques-
tioned the situation with the utilities. Palo Alto was the
sole provider of utilities within the City of Palo Alto-, the
issue did not represent a conflict. They would certainly
continue to provide utility services for all companies within
their jurisdiction. The same went for the fuel cell project.
It was not be the intent, of the ordinance to affect the fuel
cell project in any way, and_ it was covered because excep-
tions could be granted clearly within the ordinance. In
terms of the commission, the City had a number of commissions
which worked well with the City Council to enhance City gov-
ernment. Obviously, some clerical support would be needed
but that would not be different from other rit-*w commie ons
if the Council appointed the feonomic Conversion Commission,
much of the work could be done for free. Some investment
would be required to implement the ordinance, but they
believed it would lead to a sounder financial picture and a
healthy moral climate in the long run for the City. Thirty-
seven hundred Palo Alto citizens signed the petition in sup-
port of the ordinance and many more supported it. There were
some questions and some unknowns, but they expected- the ,City
Council, City staff, the Economic Conversion Commission,` and
the people of Palo Alto could work but the details tor suc-
cessful implementation of the ordinance. When the Council
approved the Nuclear Weapons Freeze in 1982, and when the
State of California approved it, it was a symbolic gesture
and had not done any good. They felt the ordinance would not
destroy,--the`economy in Palo Alto; indeed, there was a --great
deal of literature on the benefits of economic conversion.
The Ordinance was positive and .would improve their City in
the long run and definitely improve the moral climate of the
community.
S8-17
7/13/87
Mayor Woolley asked for,c1arific:tion that under the proposed
ordinance, it would not be possible to contract with third -
party contractors.
Ms. LeVine said the intent of the ordinance was not to buy
from third -party contractors, and the argument used in the
ballot argument was that if they had to go through third -
party sellers, they would be paying 20 - 30 percent more.
If, indeed, the nuclear weapons contractor was the only
person who could provide a contract or service, it would be
better to grant an exemption through the ordinance and go
directly through the nuclear weapons contractor. If some-
thing was only sold through brokers of some sort, it might be
necessary. The area was unclear and would need to be worked
out.
Council Member. Levy asked if the reason the City's fuel cell
project would not be damaged was because an exception would
be made to allow for a nuclear -producing provider.
Ms. LeVine believed so. Their goal was to be reasonable.
They realized certain products and services were necessary to
the economic viability of the City.
Hal Mickelson, 167 Greeumeadow Way, an attorney on the staff
of Hewlett-Packard Company, had studied the measure carpfii7_1 y
on behalf of Hewlett Packard and concluded that the measure
would not prohibit anything their company did either in Palo
Alto or elsewhere. Their products were not nuclear weapons
nor their components, so their company could stand to the
side. He was compelled to speak to the measure as a citizen
and from the standpoint of good government because he
believed, despite good intentions, the measure would present
serious unintended problems tor city government. He hated to
speak against the interests of his profession but the measure
was a lawyer's bonanza. It was a lawyer's full employment
act. Virtually every. business of any size in the City would
have to retain an attorney to explain exactly what the E rdi-
nance meant to that business. Hewlett-Packard had him on
salary, but not every business in the City had a staff to do
such things. First, as to preemption, there was a scholarly
presentation in Mr. Shuman's memorandum (on file in the City
Clerk's office) with 10 footnotes and citations to 15 cases
and articles asserting that the measure would not in any way
be preempted by federal law. He suggested that was the
opening volley in the lawyers' war of what the measure meant
and how it should be interpreted-. The lawyers on the other
side would .have twice as many footnotes and cases for the
proposition that such measures were preempted both by the
supremacy cause and the commerce clause of the Constitution.
58-18
7/13/87
Second, the measure would present a great many unintended
problems for city government, particularly in the purchasing
area, on everything from utility trucks to police radios to
light bulbs. Numerous specific examples were cited in. the
City's staff report. Mr. Shuman's response to the report
indicated on page 8 that affected City departments could
simply go to the Council for an exception everytime they want
to buy a product from Ford, General Motors, General Electric,
Honeywell, RCA, International Business Machines, AT&T and a
number of other companies that were deemed nuclear weapons
contractors. If that happened, the entire City procurement
process would operate by exception requiring continual trips
to the Council for case -by -case decision making on specific
procurement issues. The previous speaker's citation to the
Buy American Act was a little ironic because the City's only
vendors for many products would be companies like Volvo and
Erickson. No American company 'would qualify. Third, the
measure called for an Economic Conversion Commission to
interpret. and enforce the measure and assist the City
Council The measure had no provision for the term of office
of the members of the commission or which portion of City
government was to provide staff for them. The staff report
estimated.that one-half of the time of one attorney would be
taken up in assisting the City in compling with the rcasure,
which he believed was conservative The report's suggestion
that the Economic Conversion Commission's work should be left
to volunteers seemed highly dangerous because on the other
side of the table there would be people whose businesses and
livelihoods were at stake and both they and City government
would want the Economic Conversion Commission to do meticu-
lous and painstaking Work that could stand up in court.
Fourth, the measure created a private right of action for any
citizen who was unhappy with the City's enforcement, and
local businesses and the City government could be _required to
_pay those people's attorney fees. He believed the over-
whelming majority of people in Palo Alto had a .sincerely -
felt, deeply -held concern about nuclear weapons and nuclear
arfare. The proponents of the measure were acting from the
highest motives and deserved thanks for forcing them to think
about a very difficult issue, but the measure they had chosen
would not be judged by its good intentions. They said, and
probably would say over and over again, they did not intend
this or that bad consequence, but the consequences would be
those within the four corners of the document. The wording
would not be the -wording of their intentions but the wording
the proponents had put before them, and the measure before
them created too many problems for city government, too many
costa, and was too vague. He believed the City Council
should take a_ leadership role ,in ballot opposition to the
measure.
58-19
7/13/87
Council Member Fletcher asked Mr. Mikelson why the preemption
of state and federal law would cause such a problem. She
aid it seemed prevalent in almost everything they did and
was quite a simple process to analyze and determine.
Mr. Mickelson said the question was a pervasive one. The
wording of the measure on that point was somewhat clumsy and
said.the measure would not extend to the activities of the
federal and state government that were preempted by local
law. He believed the proponents meant to say the measure
would not extend to the areas of activity where the authority
of federal and state government was preemptive. That meant
not only federal and state government activities but other
areas where those governments had authority that preempted
local government Nuclear weapons presented a different pre-
emption issue trom many other activities because legally the
federal government was the only owner and manufacturer of
warheads. The materials the proponents generated said that
only the federal government made the nuclear weapon that was
the heart of the warhead, and if the federal government pro-
posed to manufacture those warheads right in Palo Alto,
nothing theycould do would have any effect on that activity.
That was the subtle preemption question, but if he was an
attorney for a company that made a component of a nuclear
weapon, he believed he would take the case to court and argue
the other side: that the measure should not extend to the
prohibition of a component manufacturer activity in. Palo
Alto, and that the power of the federal government should
enable him to conduct the lawful business of making nuclear
weapons' components wherever he was as a matter of federal
authority. It was difficult to say how the arguments would
come out. The area was just one of many where lawyers would
make money by making arguments on both sides.
Tom Van Dyke, a Marin Peace Commissioner and a stock broker
at Dean Witter specializing in social economic investments,
saiai a nuclear free zone planned to achieve two economic con-
clusions: Virst, to stop the *brain" and economic drain on
the society; and second, to divert capital from nuclear
weapons contractors when a reasonable alternative existed.
Weapons production was a highly capital -intensive business,
partly due to the highly technical nature of the weapons
themselves'.. The "brain drain," diverting the talents of the
best and brightest of America's scientists to work on
weaponry, was a real concern to the future competitiveness of
America's industry. An, acclaimed high-tech marketing
consultant spoke to the problem at a meeting -of Business
Executives for -National Security (HENS), liAmerica .is bank-
rupting its commercial industries, hence its ability to
compete, by spending disproportionate amounts of capital and
58-20
7/13/87
human resources on the development and production of military
weapon systems." The trickle -down theory of what was good
for the Pentagon was good for the country was further dis-
proved when one looked at the economy'in Silicon Valley in
the. past two years. The only companies doing well were those
in the military "Old Boys' Club," doing business directly
with the Pentagon on a cost-plus basis with no incentive to
innovate at low cost. Internal economic strength was key to
the external political -strength of the country. He queried
whether the nation could remain strong •economically while
diverting so much of its resources to the military. Second,
to divert capital from a nuclear weapons contractor was a way
to affect their spending habits. In a capitalistic system,
capital was a powerful motivator and tool to effect change
and behavior. The recent case of South Africa symbolized the
effects of large dollars putting pressure on companies to
change their behavior. A nuclear free zone supported and
helped to stop the flow of capital to nuclear weapons con-
tractors if a reasonable alternative exist d. He did not
believe a nuclear tree ordinance worked to bankrupt the City.
People were looking for a --reasonable alternative and, when
that existed, made an economic statement: to take money away
from that contractor and force him to look at another way to
do business.
Mayor Woolley said it would be most helpful if speakers'
remarks could help Council deal with the operational problems
of the ordinance. The larger issue was not one on which
Council needed to be convinced, but they would like to hear
about the day-to-day problems. She asked what Mr. Van Dyke's
experience had been in Marin with third -party contractors,
and whether they used them.
Mr. Van Dyke said a policy had been drafted which he expected
would be accepted the next day, that Marin would not be using
third -party contractors. It was the intent of the ordinance
not to use them. One could always buy an IBM, etc., from an
office supply store down the street but that was not really
diverting capital which was the purpose of the ordinance.
Mayor Woolley asked in the cases where third -party
contractors had not been used if the exceptions had to go to
the County Board of Supervisors,.
Mr. Van Dyke said Motorola, a nuclear weapons contractor,
produced products that clearly abided by the definition of a
-nuclear weapon, but there were no reasonable alternatives to
replace or substitute in the circumstances of Marin County
for their radio equipment. Therefore, the issue went to the
Peace Commission first; the Peace Commission reviewed the
58-21
7/13/87
alternatives with the head of that department and came to the
determination that there was no reasonable alternative. In
that situation, they were forced to say "yes," they had no
other choice but to go with Motorola. The second example was
AT&T. There was a system embedded in the Marin Civic Center
that was one point of contention, and the other point was
phones. They took apart the $175,000 contract, could not
find an alternative for $130,000 and needed to go with AT&T
equipment; but for the other $40,000 could use another
company. The suggestion was presented to the County Board of
Supervisors who ruled on the matter. Clearly, the County
Board of Supervisors was the bottom line as far as who made
the decision and who implemented any sort of policy in Marin.
The Peace Commission helped in its decisions by giving recom-
mendations.
Mayor Woolley asked for an estimate of the staff time to do
it that way instead of the normal route where the Purchasing
Department would make the decision. The matter must go first
to staff --who would have 10 do a fairly thorough search -then
to the Peace Commission, and then to the Board of
Supervisors.
Mr. Van :dyke said in the case of Marin staff time had been
minimal He preferred a little more support. The research
was actually done by the Commissioners, and he and Mr. Bevis
worked for free. Their only support helped to disseminate
the information they found among the County heads. When a
contract .was available, the County heads presented the Peace
Commission with the alternatives, but that was something they
did normally when searching for something to buy. They
looked at whatever alternatives existed to a particular pro-
duct, and the Peace Commission had a series of six questions
the County heads answered. He believed the additional time
to staff would be fairly minimal.
Brady Bevis, Marin Peace Commissioner, believed the staff
report (CMR:367:7) was .excellent. The report was not just
a legal opinion but was very. pragmatic. She suggested the
ballot summary statement, page 12, under "City of Palo Alto
Measure," should say, "...refrain from making investments in
and contracts with nuclear weapons contractors unless no
reasonable alternative exists."
Mayor Woolley said that action had already been taken.
Vice Mayor Sutorius asked if Ms. Bevis was suggesting there
was some flaw or that an improvement could be made.
58-22
7/13/87
Ms. Bevis said not a flaw, but an improvement could be made.
Vice Mayor Sutorius clarified Ms. Bevis was reading from the
circulated initiative, signed by the citizens who chose to
sign it; and therefore was being placed on the ballot as -is.
Council could not change the initiative.
Ms. Bevis asked if the initiative conformed exactly with the
Intent to Circulate Petition.
Ms. Northway clarified the only place where staff had any
original drafting was the phrasing of the question. An
interpretation which she made, and which she believed others
would make when they read the document, was SECTION 6.c.,
"Within tour years of the effective date of this ordinance,
the City of Palo Alto shall divest itself of all existing and
ongoing investments in and contracts with nuclear weapons
contractors." The section did not say anything about excep-
tions. She assumed exceptions related to the first four
years. She believed t,er interpretation was supported by the
four corners of the document, not by what the drafters
intended, and that was what she had to go on when she wrote
the question.
Ms. Bevis said page 6 of the staff report (CMR:367:7) men-
tioned the third -party vendor issue, which issue had been
Marin County's largest single glitch,. It looked as if the
proponents of the initiative took the wording directly out of
the Marin County ordinance which failed to include third -
party vendors and cawed some clashes back and forth in
finding out the intent of the drafters and resolving ambigui-
ties in the ordinance_. Marin County was just now coming to
an understanding and a compromise on that which included
third -party vendors. They would have gotten off to a better
start with the actual business of economic conversion without
that source of animosity and confrontation. She suggested
getting that issue out of the way early on, and that any more
ambiguities should be fully disclosed in the beginning. In
Marin County, the `Board of Supervisors unfortunately con-
tinued with business as usual through third -party vendors
without informing the Commission and had 6,000 .letters writ-
ten to them from residents stating they felt that was not the
law. She suggested the proponents should sit dawn with City
Council Members, like they should. have with the ...Board of
Supervisors' in the beginning, to get some of the construction
problems out the way. They would have gotten off to -' -lot
easier start, and also they would -have understood that they
appointed the five people to the Peace Commission, that they
were volunteers who worked hard also as paxpayers and
residents in the County toward trying to do something .that
58-23
7/13/87
was not acrimonious and established a good example, and
worked with the elected officials, knowing full well the
Board of Supervisors could overrule that at any point. Page
5 of the staff report mentioned the use of the list of "The
Top 50 Nuclear Weapons Contractors." Again, the Board of
Supervisors had a disagreement with what sounded like an
arbitrary "hit list," and then started understanding from
their department heads the advantage of using a list as a
presumption. It should be understood by the Commission that
inclusion on the list was not to be used as an arbitrary sign
that the business was necessarily a nuclear weapons con-
tractor but more like a clue. American friends, the Quakers
and several other groups, were compiling lists from the
original sources, Department of Defense and Department of
Energy contracts, to help facilitate matters so the ordinary
order of business went on without disruption. For instance,
if the Commissioners saw IBM was on a list, the same list was
in the hands of department heads, and if the Data Processing
Department was purchasing a new computer system, they could
see that IBM was probably going to be a suspect company and
they should look for some other alternatives and run it by
the Commission to see w:sat they thought. All that was done
simultaneously with the noemal process of running the matter
through the Purchasing Pepartment and did not create any
additional time lag or disruption of County business. The
Commission used 38 volumes of Department of Defense contracts
and went back to the original source information. They were
not willing to let their final analysis rest on a secondary
or tertiary report, because they realized their position as
Commissioners was support to the elected officials. Marin
County had used incredibly little staff, time.
Council Member Klein was concerned the discussion was getting
off the topic both by members of the public and questions
from Council. The question before Council was solely whether
the Council should be the ones taking a position and writing
the ballot argument against or pro. For Council to discuss
the merits or domerits was inconsistent with the agenda and
not a good use of Council's time.
Mayor Woolley said insofar as the Council's questions related
to making a decision as to whether Council wished to write
the ballot argument opposing the measure, they were relevant
to the discussion that evening. Sometimes the questions
might tiet a bit afield,
58-24
7/13/87
Steve Bloom, spoke as Chair of Nuclear Free_ Northern
California which was a coalition of nuclear free zone organi-
zations throughout the northern part of the state, and also
as a consultant to the Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission
which was charged with implementing Berkeley's Nuclear Free
Zone Ordinance. In Berkeley, the measure passed by a two-
thirds margin last November and established a 15 -member
commission. In many other respects, it was similar to the
presently -proposed Palo Alto ordinance, particularly with
regard to the wording of the divestment section. The
Commission was currently engaged in implementation. It
developed with City staff procedures for divesting from
nuclear investments and for monitoring the work of nuclear
weapons agents. It also worked on maximizing public input
and awareness in that process. The notification process for
nuclear weapons agents was beginning currently in Berkeley,
since they actually had a number of nuclear weapons con-
tractors unlike Marin County. It was significant that there
had been no legal challenges so far to the ordinance in
Berkeley, nor to the ordinance in Marin, nor to his knowledge
to the divestment and ban on contracting aspects of any other
binding nuclear free zone ordinance throughout the country.
In regard to divestment, the City Attorney made a statement
about Section 6, which section was quite similar to the
Berkeley language. In his view and he believed the view of
the City staff and the Commission in Berkeleye subsections a.
and b. clearly referred to future investments and contracts
that might be entered into, and the phrase "existing and
ongoing" in subsection c. equally clearly referred to any
contracts the City currently had as opposed to in the future.
In that regard, there was no problem with any four-year
deadline for getting rid of .all investments regardless of the
language a. and b. Regarding specific interpretations made
in:Herkeley, the Commission determined that the language with
regard to Treasury Securities was ambiguous but had nonethe-
less decided to go ahead and divest those, but that Ginny
Maes, Fanny Maes, and other investments of those types were
clearly not covered .by the language. Also, third -party
vendors were covered.- He understood Palo Alto also had an
apartheid divestment ordinance, and he said that'Berkeley
passed the, first one in the country in 1979 and found a lot
of work done implementing that divestment had made rather
redundant a lot of work they would otherwise have had to do
under the nuclear Weapons divestment. The Top 50 list in
Berkeley had been almost entirely supplemental to the affi-
davit process. That affidavit had become just one more addi-
tional document in what was referred to as a "contract
boilerplate," to which he assumed Palo Alto had stmething
s imilar, and in that sense did not add any large additional
burden to either staff or -anybody seeking to sign a contract
58-25
7/13/87
with the City. In reference to the question of signs in
Berkeley, they initially put up about 25 signs and many were
now gone. The people who put up the signs in the Public
Works Department failed to realize the signs were eminently
collectible. Currently, the Commission was working with City
staff to establish a means of putting up the signs which
would keep them from being collected in the future. He
referenced possible legal challenges, and said in general
there were really no differences between divestment from
nuclear weapons makers and divestment from companies involved
in South Africa. To his knowledge, there had been no suc-
cessful legal challenges to any apartheid divestment ordi-
nance in the country.
carol Vesecky, .831 Marshall Drive, said her recent tour of
the Soviet Union was her first major private action as a
peace activist. Speaking that evening as her first public
action as a peace activist, she urged Council Members to sup-
port actively the nuclear free zone ballot measure. Her
reasons were partly personal and came from the hurt as well
as the mind. Her mind told her for years that, together with
Soviets, they had more than enough nuclear weapons to annihi-
late life as they knew it on their planet; that the building
and maintenance of those weapons, while creating well -paid
jobs tor a few, diverted energy away from more socially -
useful endeavors and, -at the same time, consumed valuable
resources that were fast becoming scarce; that it was time to
call a halt to their creation and maintenance; that if their
governments could not see .the logic of that well enough to
come to an agreement, the people must band together to influ-
ence them to do so;_ and she personally should join in and
work to that end. Her mind had also been the factor that had
prevented her from doing so by telling her she was already
involved in too many socially -useful occupations, that she
must not spread herself too thin and, perhaps most persua-
sively, that what she did probably. would not have any effect
as the war machine was unstoppable, at least in the current
political climate. Her mind also told her now that climate
was changing. There had been progress in citizen diplomacy
over the last few years: Efforts of citizens of the two
countries whose missiles were pointed at each other to learn
to understand each other as people with similarities and
differences worthy of respect, and to begin to engage in
common pro jec is of mutual benefit. There had also been some
real progress on the national governmental level with sub-
stantive offers coming from the other side at least being
considered and discussed by their own leadership before being
turned down. Secretary Gorbachev also seemed to realize that
his'country could no- longer afford the investment in a
toduct that no one in his sane mind would ever use along
with a determination to continue to work to find agreement
58-26
7/13/87
with their leaders, no matter how long the process would
take, to break the Cold War habit that had become so
entrenched on both sides. That shot down the argument that
her personal efforts for peace would likely be wasted, but it
was her heart that brought her to speak that evening. It was
the memory of a reunion three weeks ago in Moscow with two
friends made in Palo Alto 18 years ago when he, a world-
reknowned, blind mathematician, was here with his wife to
deliver a series of lectures at Stanford University. They
asked what she did to struggle for peace and entreated her to
continue. Her most touching memory was of the\ -wife asking
the question, "Now can the Americans think of us as evil?"
and begging her to bring their sincere greetings to the
American people to invite them to go to the Soviet Union to
see the Russians as she had seen them: warm-hearted and
sincerely friendly to Americans, trusting Americans wanted
peace as much as they did, the nation that lost 20 million in
the last war so that every family was affected. When she
heard there was little enthusiasm on the Council for sup-
porting the nuclear free zone ballot measure, that the
feeling was the cost was too great, she knew for the sake of
her Soviet friends as well as for the sake of Palo Alto, that
she needed to urge the Council Members to show some leader-
ship in supporting the initiative which, if passed,'would
help to reverse the nuclear habit which was already passe and
based on fears of a bogeyman who simply did not exist.
Instead, to free Palo Alto to devote its considerable
talents, energies, and investments to the solution of the
problems of the future instead of their creation. She urged
Council not to write a rebuttal argument against the
measure.
Michael H. Shuman, 424E Cole Street, San Francisco, an
attorney, ran the Center for Innovative Diploracy which had
4,040 members, 1,000 of whom were local government officials.
Under a MacArthur Grant, he was writing a book on the legal-
ity of municipal foreign policy making, the kind (:)f which
they were entertaining right now., Over the past five years,
he followed the progress of literally thousands of initi-
atives across the country like the one before Council and had
read dozens of City Attorney and staff reports. Unlike Ms.
Bevis, he found the 'particular report issued the previous
Friday one of the shoddiest pieces of work he had seen. Many
of the facts were wrong, much of the analysis was incomplete
and illogical, and its legal conclusions were. superficial.and
incorrect. To the extent Council was considering an argument
that evening which he assumed would be based on the: staff
report., he urged Council not to adopt it and believed exami-
nation of the staff report was highly relevant to Council's
deliberation over whether or not to -endorse or oppose the
ballot measure. He had prepared a written report which each
58-27
7/13/87
i
Council Member received (on' file in the City Clerk's office).
He pointed out the one area where the report had been the
shoddiest was in delineating the.costs of the initiative and
also in not d lineatinq the benefits. Many of the costs that
the staff report found were, in fact, either trivial or non-
existent. Staff predicted the initiative would require half
a lawyer and a support person, but there were 134 nuclear
free zone ordinances or resolutions in the country and one
had received legal challenge and only on the zoning part.
The selective contracting, selective purchasing, and economic
conversion had all remained legally untouched. His analysis
showed there were no real legal problems with the ordinance
and _why the City would not need any legal costs whatsoever.
The staff report predicted numerous cost increases if the
City was forced to buy from non-nuclear vendors, but the fact
was whenever staff found a non-nuclear alternative was more
costly, it could get.an exemption, and the staff report never
mentioned that fact. The staff report said that the'City
might lose $4 million in utility revenues but did not say
that a kilowatt hour not sold was also a kilowatt hour that
d id not have to be produced nor purchased. In other words,
what was lost in revenue would be offset by what was not
incurred in costs, and the City would be conserving energy.
The law had many social, environmental, and ecohomic benefits
but unfortunately the staff report did not count those as
benefits. The staff report then stated the City would lose
$36.2,000 in sales tax revenues, and here staff twisted a
benefit into a cost. In Fact, the defense contractors paid
no sales tax on their defense contracts. Replacement busi-
nesses, therefore, not of the defense contracting gendre
would actually generate a lot more sales tax revenue. Mean-
while, the staff report did :not mention at least three likely
benefits of the initiatives First, selective procurement
often led to more careful purchasing. In the case of Takoma,
Md., there had been several instances where the City staff
were forced to look more carefully at products and found
something better and cheaper. Second, if the initiative
resulted in nonmilitary businesses using Palo Alto's valuable
property instead of military businesses, the Ciy would enjoy
more jobs. Every serious report on the economic impacts of
military spending showed that military dollars produced fewer
jobs than nonmilitary dollars. Finally, the initiative sent
a signal to Congress that it was time to cut the Pentagon's
budget and put money back where it was needed, in American
cities. In recent years, the Reagan administration had waged
what he believed was fairly described as an undeclared war on
America's cities. Last autumn, the administration cut $3.5
billion from:the general revenue sharing program, and that
cut came at exactly the same time as $3.5 billion was put
into 4,tarwars. Still on the cutting board were Community
Development Block Grants, support for housing, etc. All
58-28
7/13/87
were things they were losing because they were not taking a
stance. They could do nothing about the economic problems or
could begin to fight back. He did not believe the initiative
was the best way in all of the possibilities of fighting
back, but at least it was a step in the right direction. It
represented an honest, reasonable attempt by the citizens of
Palo Alto to do something: to pressure Congress and corpora-
tions to begin to reverse the nuclear arms race, and the
staff report said nothing about those potential economic
benefits. If Council really did not like the measure, he
suggested they write something separately. In order to make
the decision on the ballot argument, the Council should send
their staff back to do a new report that paid attention to
the facts, made a more reasonable argumentation, and res-
pected their intelligence.
Peter Drekmeier, 831 Sutter Avenue, read a statement prepared
by his father, Charles Drekmeier, in support of the Nuclear
Weapons,Free Palo Alto. His father was unable to be present
but lived in Palo Alto for 30 years, during which time he
taught Political Science at Stanford University. "On the
Palo Alto Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Ordinance, this reason-
able initiative seeks to translate an often -expressed concern
of Palo Alto citizens into public policy. Because the initi-
ative excludes research, there may be some persons who will
consider it too mild, but they will at least welcome the fact
that an action in the right direction is being taken. Many
of us felt the growing sense of frustration as the threat of
nuclear destruction continues. In the Executive Branch's
seeming preference for military solutions down to the popular
Ramboism rekindled by Colonel North, there are ominous indi-
cations that our precarious situation is not understood. The
need to communicate our considerable uneasiness has perhaps
never been greater. Because the threat of nuclear devasta-
tion hags forced us to change our ways of thinking about
everything from the rules of warfare: to the viability of the
nation state, it can no longer be argued that cities and
other localities do not have a direct interest in the preven--
tion; of a form of destruction that does not respect bounda-
ries. The civilian is no less vulnerable than the soldier.
And just as we shall all be on the receiving end, so with the
widespread dispersal of nuclear weapon component production,
we also share in the riving. War contracts, usually known as
defense contracts, are artfully distributed so as to commit
large. sectors of the population and their representatives in
Congress. We thus are made to feel ourselves economically
dependent on_a buildup of war materiel that we also know;',to
be irrational. Nations that have not committed themselves'to
so largea diversion of resources 'are now competing with us
in the -world economy, but .gradually we are coming to see that
the advantages defense contracts bring are questionable, even
58-29
7;/13/87
in the short run. We knew of instances where economic con-
version has increased the number of jobs. It should be
mentioned also that those employed in the defense industries
are among the more convertible of the industrially employed.
Their skill can be adapted to programs such as those con-
cerned with energy needs. But, of course, the important
point is that the insistence that nuclear weapons production
is somehow good for business carries with it a deadly logic.
The economy has no better chance for survival than any other
aspect of social lite." They urged -support of the Palo Alto
Nuclear Weapons Free Ordinance.
William W. Wade, 125 California Avenue, an economist and
partner of QED Research, a national economic consulting firm
with home offices in Palo Alto; said his firm was retained by
a group of Palo Alto employers who had a stake in the outcome
of the deliberations. They agreed with the staff report and
believed, however, it was much understated. It was a bal-
anced report. He also agreed with Lawyer Mickelson from
Hewlett-Packard that it was a lawyers dream; it was also an
economist's .nightmare. In their preliminary analysis, they
found the language of the four corners of the page was too
vague to analyze, yet they were trying. Their review showed
implementation had been difficult, and there had been pro -
c urement problems.. Implementation had proven to be costly,
confusing, and controversial in small communities with simple
economies. No major community they had yet discovered had
fully implemented such a law with any real teeth in it, and
for good reaspn: no community with a substantial industrial
base could stand the economic impacts,. of such an ordinance.
If they examined the economic numbers --which they had not yet
done, but knew what they were --of Berkeley and Marin County,
they would find substantial differences. While Palo Alto was
clearly not President Eisenhower's concept of a military/
industrial community, there was a great deal of high tech
industry there with activities which related to components of
weapons systems, to weapon systems, or weapon delivery sys-
tems. The community could not stand the dislocation of
closing out those activities-. Unlike Berkeley and Marin
County, the initiative in Palo Alto would hit the home team,
not some vague other people in another place. Picking upon
the theme of Lawyer Mickelson, he agreed the regulation would
produce a great deal of testimony from their lawyer friends,
and he suggested that perhaps some of the lay yero would be
best served to stay in their professional discipline, and
statements like Palo Alto should rejoice that energy -
intensive military contractors might be leaving made no
acknowledgement of the fact that 'those people who might be
leaving were their Palo Alto neighbors. As peace was a local
issue, so too was employment. The rules implied a great deal
more money spent on lawyers and less money spent on fruitful
58-30
7/13/87
business enterprises, less money spent to retain Silicon,
Valley --technical leadership of the world. Specifically, the
initiative prohibited contracting with nuclear weapons con-
tractors, and he asked what that .meant to Palo Alto's
utilities. Palo Alto utilities produced about $34 million in
sales, but sales of utilities to over -half of the local
industry would be affected under a' broad interpretation.
Cutting off utilities could mean closing out businesses,
sectors of business, and jobs. Moreover, reducing the number
'of buyers of utility services left fewer remaining buyers to
support the cost structure. While the previous speaker's
point about eliminating sales eliminated costs applied in
some cases, there were a great many fixed costs left for the
remaining buyers to pay for. Rates went up, services went
down. Looking at the City Manager's report raised the
specter of the loss Of the City's purchased federal power.
The City of Palo Alto purchased 175 megawatts of its 186
megawatt peak load from the Western Area Producers
Administration in short, cheap federal electricity, and the
alternative was PG&E's purchased power. The City of Palo
Alto had a long-term contract with very favorable cost terms
running to 2004. PG&E's alternative was, a two-year contract.
Comparing that two-year contract .simply meant Palo Alto's
electricity purchase cost would go up about 40 percent. On
the procurement, virtually all the major auto manufacturers,
communication tirms, and electronic firms basically manufac-
tured parts that were also parts for nuclear weapons eystems;
they were defense contactors. No ordinance such as the
nuclear weapons initiative should be undertaken without care-
ful analysis of the impacts of the ordinance on the fabric of
the community.
Harrison Otis, 2721 Midtown Court, believed the nuclear issue
was overdone. He spent a week in Arizona with the Arizona
Power, and there were three reactors operating there gener-
ating.,enough -power for 4.5 million people. The highly
effective, beautiful equipment was built by Bechtel
Corporation. Tne City Manager's report was very good and
nobody should take the report apart because Palo Alto had an
exodus of Ford, and who was next. The City needed the tax
base. He was in the, Korean war, saw what the atom bomb -did
in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and wanted peace tore than anybody
else. He supported Mr. Mickelson of HewlettePackard because
they had spent many hours, but the nuclear issue should be
dropped because it was going to hurt a lot of government
-funding. .The City Manager's report about .the _revenue of
$3.62,000 a year should stand. The loss in gross annual
utility revenue would be- in excess. of $ 4 million, and they
should Consider that. The White House should try to keep
everything in the country on. a peaceful purpose, but the
initiative would only hurt Palo Alto.
58-31
7/13/87
Lee A. Fletcher, 31 Regent Place, a 29 -year resident of Palo
Alto, said he had a degree from U.C. Davis in Economics,
specializing in economics of urban areas. He participated
before in assisting the Republic of Belau, a small island
nation, in maintaining their nuclear free zone status. They
were continuing that battle right now and were under a lot of
pressure from the U.S. government to open up their ports for
nuclear battle ships. In response to Mr. Van Dyke's state-
ment that the only Silicon Valley companies doing well were
those that -were defense contractors and part of the Old Boy
network, he said that a large number of Silicon Valley com-
panies were doing very well that were not part of the Old Boy
network and not defense contractors. Mr. Shuman used the
word "shoddy" several times, and page 9 of Mr. Shuman's
statement said that nothing in the staff report was as dup-
licitous as its presentation of the costs of the initiative.
Duplicity was a pretty strong word and before Mr. Shuman
started making wild accusations againstthe_staff of the City
of Palo Alto, he should be able to back them up more care-
fully. He believed there were falsehoods in Mr. Shuman's
report. The staff worked very hard on their end report
_ and
/ V{
deserved to be shown respect. He believed the initiative was
an attorney's full employment act. Frankly, he did not know
how he would vote on it, but this was not the Republic of
Belau but the City of Palo Alto and the issue needed to be
closely examined.
David Lee, 2120 Cowper Street, reminded the City Council of
the overwhelming support the Nuclear Free Lone Ordinance
received in Palo Alto High gh School. They collected well over
500 signatures in support of. the ordinance. If he were in
Council's position, he would be inclined to stand up for the
overwhelming support that the Nuclear Free Zone Ordinance had
received from the citizens of Palo Alto and high school stu-
dents, and not capitulate to the interests of the minority
interests of big business.
Mayor Woolley echoed Mr. Fletcher's remarks. She appreciated
the staff report and believed it was the role of City staff
to f^rovide the Council with all possible information and to
warn of. possible problems down the road, and she believed
they had done an excellent job.
MOTION: Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded by Cobb,
that the City Council author and sign an argument in opposi-
tion to the Nuclear Weapons Free Palo Alto Initiative.
58-32
.7/13/87
Council Member. Patitucci believed it was unfortunate that
they had to be characterized as either warmongers or in favor
of expanded defense contracting, or even in favor of any sup-
port for nuclear weapons. It was fundamentally bad legisla-
tion, and as a legislative body Council needed to address the
legislative and administrative impacts of bad legislation.
It was so clearly bad legislation that it would be inappro-
priate for the Council to do anything but take a strong
position against the legislation. He called it legislation
and not an issue because they all had a wide range of
feelings about the issue, but he did not believe it was the
appropriate means or form in which the issue should be
addressed.
Council Member Cobb seconded the motion because of his long-
standing position, which had been reinforced by events of the
past year and certainly those before Council that evening,
that it was absolutely inappropriate to use the structure and
fabric of local government to implement, influence, or con-
duct the foreign policy of the United States. It distracted
Council from the work they were elected to do and was
completely wrong. Every time they did it, they encouraged
more of that sort of thing and eventually would not have time
for City business. There were a number of other reasons why
the Council should not be involved and some of those were
embodying in the staff report. He had great respect for the
energies and desires of the people who put the petition
before the Council. He was one of the swing votes on the
Nuclear . Freeze movement a few years ago. That was a state-
ment of concern, while the present issue was getting into the
business of running the City of Palo Alto and had to be dealt
with on the national level. He believed Council should take
a strong position in that respect
Council Member Fletcher disagreed strongly with the comments
just made. She believed there was a role for City government
to take positions on issues which they felt very strongly
about. A comment was made earlier by a member of the public
that the Nuclear Freeze Resolution passed in 1982 had no
effect whatsoever, and she disagreed because prior to that
year when city after city after city passed Nuclear Freeze
Resolutions there was no talk from the administration about
negotiating with the Soviets on weapons reduction. The
administration got the message and starting entering into
negotiations. How genuine they were was another question.
However, she had some problems on the particular matter. If
she felt that by adopting the initiative raasure there would
be a reduction in the production of nuclear weapons, she
58-33
7/13/87
would vote for it, but what would happen was that any company
dealing with nuclear weapons would move out of the 'City and
continue their work in other parts of the County or the
State. They could easily move to Santa Clara, Mountain View,
Sunnyvale, and she didnot see any prospect of those cities
passing nuclear free zone ordinances, especially Sunnyvale
whose main industry was Lockheed. Further, some ambiguities
were pointed out which caused some problems in Marin County,
and she did not believe it was wise to adopt initiatives that
started out with ambiguities that had to be worked out with
disputes in the ;future. The matter of the signs bothered
her. She knew vandalism of signs was a problem because there
was a sign at the entrance to Palo Alto from Bayshore Freeway
at San Antonio Road, , and Lhe sign never stayed up for more
than . a few weeks. Furthermore, it , was a poor precedent to
pass an initiative which mandated setting up of signs because
any future initiative could do the same thing? and soon it
would be mandated to put up signs for almost all the measures
that passed in the City? and City Hall plaza would be
inundated with signs. Eor. those reasons, plus others, she
would not support the measure,. much as she had battled with
it in her own conscience because most there knew she was a
very strong proponent of nonmilitary activity.
Council Member Klein agred with many of the comments made by
Council Member Fletcher. He co -sponsored with Council Member
Fletcher the nuclear freeze motion in 1982 and believed it
was one of the best and most effective things hehad done as
a Council Member. He would support the motion because he
could not support the nuclear free zone for all the reasons
stated by Council Member Fletcher. Palo Altans looked to its
City Council for leadership and he believed the voters had a
right to expect Council to express its views when a major
issue was before it. The country would need to do a lot to
change its nuclear policy but the initiative was not the way
to go. He believed the initiative would have the inevitable
effect of trivializing the most serious issue before the
United States. Getting bogged down w..th decisions as to
whether to buy Motorola radios or Ford police cars was not
the way to achieve a major change in policy. He wanted to
try and exercise. a leadership position to defeat the
measure.
Council Member Bechtel also supported the nuclear freeze
motion in 1982. She understood the concern of those citizens
who carried the petitions for the initiative and admired
their ideals and goals but believed the initiative was stuck
on an issue which diverted Council from the main issue. One
speaker commented that the issue was just like Apartheid
58-34
7/13/87
As corrected
8/10/87
which worked well. Cities and universities refused to invest
in companies with businesses in South Africa. The difference
was investments and the proposed ordinance also described
purchasing. People did not -quit drinking Coca Cola, etc.
because it happened to be manufactured in South Africa. Many
of the cities which adopted nuclear free zones, simply
adopteda resolution which was much easier than setting up a
peace commission and establishing signs to decide whether to
purchase a particular item. As pointed out by Council Member
Klein, it trivialized the issue and got Council _bogged down.
Council was assured by the- proponents of the measure that
various items could be exempted. If the point was to dis-
courage the production of..nuclear arms and components, she
queried what good it did to keep exempting companies and
allowing the City to purchase from them and take the time to
do so. She believed the initiative was inappropriate and
would waste staff's time. She agreed with Council Member
Fletcher that Council must continue to take positions beyond
the City limits at times and she would not be discouraged
from doing so, but the initiative was not appropriate.
Council Member Levy associated himself with the previous com-
ments. He agreed with Council Member Cobb that Council's
primary function was to carry out the operations of the City
not to conduct those areas of government policy's for which
other individuals were elected. Council was obliged to take
a position in the ballot measure to clearly communicate to
the citizens of Palo Alto the effect of the initiative on the
running of the City government. He had no doubt there were
tremendous costs 'connected with added time for staff.
Existing workloads would be stretched and staff would have
less time'sto carry out other City' functions a There would
also be high legal and operations costs if Council had to
carefully evaluate every purchasing contract in light of the
initiative. That evening represented the work of about 50
person hours on the part of Council and staff which would be
multiplied many times as nuances of policy arose. Palo Alto
citizens would have to put in substantial time both with the
commission established and with employers in town making many
decisions they otherwise would not make, which he believed
would undoubtedly result in poor purchasing decisions and
poor quality products that the City would purchase and in
turn serve its citizens. The citizens of Palo Alto had to
weigh all of the concerns. In terms of whether Palo Alto
would be a socially responsible community if .it defeated the
ordinance, as pointed out by Council Member Klein, there were
many individual ramifications of the ordinance, and it Was
not the way for Council to show. itself as being socially res-
ponsible. He -supported the motion.
58-35
7/13/87
Vice Mayor Sutorius referred to the fuel cell proposal and
clarified that no nuclear installation was proposed for Palo
Alto. Further, the builder of such a plant was not involved
in nuclear weapons production; however, the builder was a
subsidiary .firm of one of the firms involved in nuclear
weapons production, The nuclear freeze resolution adopted by
Council in 1982 was a bilateral nuclear freeze proposal. As
pointed out by Council Member Bechtel, many of the other
agencies adopted resolutions --nothing binding. Those who
took ordinance action through the elected body were in a
position to modify it by their own experience, action and
will. If the proposed ordinance was enacted through the will
of the voters, it could only be changed by action of the
voters, People needed to understand that point as they
assessed the issue. He agreed Elected Council Members had a
responsibility to clearly explain the ambiguities, uncertain-
ties, associated risks, impacts on the community. and the
cost and efficiency of the governmental administration for
which Council was charged with properly managing. Proponents
sincerely tried to research other resolutions and ordinances
and create something which would hopefully avoid '.the -concerns
just mentioned, but comments like "that was not the intent"
or "for us it doesn' t pose a problem and can' be handled with
an exemption" or "Yes, it's a little fuzzy --would need to be
worked on," were situations clearly identified by staff as
not points of latitude to work out. Council would have to
implement what was deeded to be the initiative. When differ-
ences of opinion or contradictions arose, there would not be
a simple, quick: low cost way of getting all of the answers
and there was no way to preclude an appeal on the part of
someone with a -different point of view from whatever the com-
mission or the Council, and Council might find itself in
court -as many of the attorneys indicated. He referred to
recent court decisions in the area of land use and the whole
question of takings, and cited the .impact on individuals
whose businesses were taken by such processes and queried
whether there was a legitimate claim on their part. He
referred to the cities which implemented the nuclear weapons
free zone by ordinance and said they ironically ruled out a
low bid situation on a communications system by an American
firm and went to a system produced and marketed by Toshiba.
He queried how comfortable they would have been with :.he
decision a couple. of weeks°ago. The purposes of the proposed
action were supposed to be a concern for human kind, social
responsibility, About the negatives of poli.tical and civil
unrest. He was confident in the rightness of the position
expressed by ail of his col]eagues and believed Council would
be meeting its responsibilities as they pledged their alle-
giance -to uphold with full faith the Constitution of the
United States, the Constitution of the State of California,
Ind .tie Charter of the City of Palo Alto. . The Charter stated
58-36
7/13/87
that Council would exercise its powers to represent the
welfare of all of the individuals in Palo Alto. He believed
Council was properly doing so when it pointed out the atten-
dant risks of the initiative.
Mayor Woolley joined her colleagues in supporting the motion
to have Council write the argument in opposition to the
nuclear weapons free zone initiative. Three particular areas
convinced her to support the motion. One, had to do with
litigation. A couple of speakers said not to worry about,
litigation; that there was only one case so far. Palo Alto
seemed to -attract lawsuits and. could not assume there would
be none. She easily saw Palo Alto being a test case for the
preemption charges earlier discussed. She was also concerned
about litigation from the standpoint of the ambiguities. One
speaker said there were some fuzzy areas that needed to be
worked out and another speaker said that such and such an
interpretation was not the intent of the framers of the ordi-
nance. In terms of ambiguities, Council could not fall .back
on the framers of the ordinance for their interpretation. It
could only fall back on what was written in the ordinance
which might well provide meat for lawsuits. The ordinance
gave a blank check for staff support ---just that staff support
shall be provided. So it would depend on the demands of the
commission and the community. In addition, if there were
exemptions to go to Council, any time anything went to
Council there was a staff report which was a time-consuming
document to produce. All the possible exemptions being pre-
ceded by staff reports to say nothing of the involvement with
the commission and the departments, would easily be a consid-
erahle amount of staff time and thereby cost to the tax-
payers. As pointed out by Vice Mayor Sutorius, the initia-
tive could not be changed. The ambiguities were somewhat
scarey if one realized the only way to tighten up the _ordi-
nance or change it would be to go back to the voters and go
through the process again, which was not an easy process.
Section 3(e)(2) of the ordinance said "resources committed to
nuclear weapons work lessens the ability to provide other
services to Palo Alto." Examples were higher quality educa-
tion, services to the homeless and to the elderly. Going
back to the lawsuit question, Palo Alto was faced with a
cable lawsuit and the amount of money spent on the one law--
suit far exceeded what would be spent on supporting seniors
and senior activities in the community for one year. It
seemed to her that rather than increase the City's ability to
pay for services to: the homeless and elderly, it would prob-
ably -be going in the reverse direction.
MOTION PASSED unanie ouwiy, Renzel absent.
58-37
7/13/87
Mayor Woolley suggested Council\ Member Cobb write the argu-
ment against the initiative.
Council Member Cobb recognized that his views with respect to
the issue of venue were shared by some but not by all and he
took careful notes of all the comments made. He intended to
draft a ballot argument which reflected the views of the
entire Council as accurately as he could and would solicit
assistance in doing so.
Mayor Woolley clarified the draft argument would be ready for
Council review on July 20, 1987.
COUNCIL RECESSED FROM 10:15 p.m. TO 10.30 p.m.
ARGUMENTS RE LEAF BLOWER CONTROL
Mayor Woolley said the Council should decide whether to write
the argument in favor or opposing the ballot measure con-
cerning leaf. blowers.
MOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by Woolley,
that the City Council author and sign an argument in opposi-
tion to the Leaf Blower Control Initiative.
Council Member Patitucci believed the people who supported
the leaf blower initiative showed respect for the Council by
not all appearing to argue their position. In turn, he
believed the Council should respect their position by staying
neutral on the issue. He suggested voting "no" on the motion
and allowing Council Members individually to line up pro or
con on the issue.
Council Member Fletcher seconded Council Member Patitucci's
comments, plus the fact she agreed with the measure in the
ordinance. The matter of the inspection of the leaf blowers
by the Police Department bothered her some, but since it was
so evident that none of the gasoline powered blowers at the
present tine would pass the test, . she did not believe the
Police Department would be impacted at all. The manufac-
turers could come up with a leaf blower that worked at 70
de:ibel levels in no time at all if the City, plus other
cities that might follow suit, passed the measures. She
would be opposing taking a stand in favor and writing a
ballot measure in favor and asked her colleagues to do like-
wise.
Council Member Levy believed past policy when there was .a
divided Council had been that any argument on the ballot took
note the Council was not unanimous in its position. He
suggested that policy be followed.
58-38
7/13/87
Vice Mayor Sutorius agreed wholeheartedly with Council Member
Levy's suggestion. He also supported the point of view
expressed by Council Members Patitucci and Fletcher. He
would support the motion aecause they had a situation where
individual citizens were not satisfied with the outcome of
Council action and had taken the effort and time to tell
their story and to collect signatures that qualified their
initiative for the ballot. Theirs was a straightforward
initiative also. Since their action was triggered by dis-
satisfaction with Council action, at the very least Council.
had a responsibility to educate and explain why they were
opposed to the measure and what the alternative action would
be with respect to leaf blowers in light of the action
already taken.
Herb Borock, 2731 Byron Street, noted on the City Clerk's
report on rhp special Election (on file in the City Clerk's
office), page 2, on the second option of Council having the
_option of determining whether individual members of the
Council might sign written arguments against the measure, he
believe the wording should be "for or against" the measure.
Although -it -was an initiative measure that the proponents had
first right, there were` still possibilities of five signa-
tures and individual Council Members should be able to sign
that as well if they so chose. The staff report seemed to
imply the staff was either prohibited or could not use elec-
tric leaf blowers, and he understood the ordinance did not
apply to electric blowers at all. It was not clear whether
the costs were correct if that point was taken into consid-
eration.
MOTION PASSED by a vote of 6-2, Fletcher, Patitucci voting
*no,* Renzel absent.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Cobb, that
the City Council acknowledge that the City Council Members
may choose to participate in the arguments for or against the
initiative and should be allowed to use their title.
Mayor Woolley said she would write the Council argument and
would appreciate everyone's help.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel absent.
19. CRESCENT PARK III UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECT
AGREEMENT FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION BETWEEN CITY OF PALO ALTO
AND PACIFIC BELL COMPANY (CMR:362:7)' (1130)
Council Member Patitucci said he would not participate in the
item due to a conflict of interest.
58-39
7/13/87
Vice Mayor Sutorius said he would not participate in the item
due to a conflict of interest.
MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Levy, to
adopt staff recommendation to:
1. Approve the Crescent Park III Joint Participation
Agreement with Pacific Bell and authorize the Mayor to
execute this document on behalf of the City, including
payment of the City's portion of the work in the amount
of $592,5701 and
2. Authorize execution of change orders to the construction
contract of up to a total of $105,000.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Sutorius, Patitucci "not
participating," Renzel absent.
20. REQUEST OF CITY ATTORNEY TO JOIN IN AMICUS BRIEFS IN:
SNEDAKER V. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND HERMANSEN
CONSTRUCTION CO. V. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO (720)
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Fletcher,
to authorize the City Attorney to contact the San Francisco
City Attorney's Office and advise them to add the City of
Palo Alto's name to the hmicus Briefs they are filing in
Snedaker v. County of San Bernardino and Hermansen
Construction Co. v. Count of San Bernardino
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel absent.
21. REQUEST OF MAYOR WOOLLEY RE PALO ALTO'S 100TH BIRTHDAY
(1307)
Mayor Woolley said with the help of the City Manager and, the
City Clerk, she had set out for the Council the charge, com-
position, staff support, and duration for a Centennial
Advance Planning Committee (on file in the City Clerk's
office)
MOTION: Mayor Woolley moved, seconded by Bechtel, to
direct z4v- Naaor. to appoint a Centennial Advance Planning
Committee.
MOTION PISSED unanimously, Renxel absent.
22. RE VEST OF COUNCIL MEMBER KLEIN RE VACATION SCHEDULES
701)
Council Member Klein referred to his memorandum (on file in
the City Clerk's office) and said several people mentioned
11
the City Council was unique in not having a regular vacation
schedule. Congress took regular times off, the state legis-
lature was about to go into its summer recess, virtually
every neighboring City had a regular vacation schedule, and
the School Board regularly took off most of the month of
August.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Bechtel,
to cancel the Council meeting of August 22, 1988, and all
committee meetings from August 16, 1988, through September 6,
1988, and direct staff to develop whatever resolutions or
ordinances are necessary so as to make this a binding
Council action now and to get forth a regular vacation sched-
ule for the City Council.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel absent.
Vice Mayor Sutorius clarified the intent of the motion was to
set a period with respect to 1988 and was not to stipulate a
vacation period on an ongoing basis to a j.recise period, but
rather the mechanics for doing it and to set a period for
1988
Council Member Klein said that was correct. He left it to
staff's ingenuity to return with a more permanent. program.
Assistant City Manager June Fleming believed the motion was
an acceptable way :o proceed. Staff could put the plans .in
place for 1988, work with the City Attorney, and make sugges-
tions to Council for the future. If staff knew the period in
advance, they. could plan around it.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Menzel absent.
ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
58-41
7/13/87