Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-08-17 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL 1 MINUTES PALOALTO CITYCOUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE VIA KZSU- FREOUENCYgo.1 ON FM DIAL Regular Meeting August 17, 1987 ITEM Oral Communications Approval of Minutes of July 20, 1987 PAGE 58-166 58-166 1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Jean 58-166 McCown for Outstanding Public Service as a Memxb . :,f the Planning Commission 2. ReE __.sing Appreciation to the 58-168 Mer Temporary Committee on Doi 3 and Amenities .for Out- star-mn.ing Public Service 3. Drawing of Ballot Order - General Munici- 58.169 pal Election November 3, 1987 58-169 Consent Calendar Referral 58-169 4. Midtown Traffic Study -- Refer to Policy. 58-169 and Procedures Committee Action S8-170 Contracs. Renewal and Amendment for Pro- 58-170 fessionay. Services for •Fiscal Years 1987-88 and 1986-87 with Laboratory Tech- nologist Milton Smith, Jr. 6. Resolution 6640 Approving the City's 58-170 Participation in the Santa Clara County Mortgage Revenue Bond Certification Pro- gram 57.164 8/17/87 ITEM 7. Report from Council Legislative Committee re SB 1297 and AB 2380 8. Report from Council Legislative Committee re Resolutions for Consideration at League of California Cities Conference 9. Lease Agreement with Brad Lozares as Golf Pro for the Palo, Alto Municipal Golf Course 10. Lease Agreement Between Palo Alto Unified School District and City of Palo Alto for 1.5 Acres of Outdoor Recreation Area at Ohlone School Site (445 E. Charleston Road) PAGE 58-170 58-174 58-175 58-176 11. Revised Deferred Compensation Plan - City 58-l78 of Palo Alto Deferred Compensation Plan as Amended August 17, 1987 12. Sand Hill Corridor Discussion 58-178 13., Request of Council Member Fletcher re 1990 58-191 Census: Impact of Directive from United States Office of Management and Budget Adjournment at 9:40 p.m. 58-192 Regular Meeting Monday, August 17, 1987 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Fletcher, Klein, Levy (arrived at 7:31 p.m.), Patitucci (arrived at 7:42 p.m.), Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley ABSENT: Bechtel, Cobb ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Dolores Furman, 1070 Cambridge Avenue, Menlo Park, spoke regarding the Open Meeting Law. She had beenaskedto leave a meeting and said the Brown Act stated the people of the state did not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which served them. The people in delegating authority did not give their public servants the rights to decide what was good or not good for the people to know. The people insis- ted on remaining informed so they might retain control over the instruments they had created. When people were inter- ested, she believed they should be encouraged. She thanked the Council for its concern before the meeting which paci- fied her somewhat. Council Member Renzel asked if it was a. City of Palo Alto meeting from which Ms. Furman was asked to leave. Mayor Woolley said it was a City of Palo Alto meeting, and the item was #12 on the agenda that evening. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JULY 20, 1987 Mayor Woolley said the City Clerk had asked that the Minutes of July 20, 1987, be withdrawn, 1. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO JEAN MC N FOR TAN ING PUBLIC S RVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE LANNING COMMISSION (701-0 ) MOTIONI Vice Mayor trios .0,0d, Pocoadad by Isi o1, to adopt ter Rassolatioa. RESOLUTION 6637 .M U.d 'RESOLUTION Or _ Tiro COUNCIL OF INS CITII P ALTO MUSSING ING AFF CZATIO$ TO JEAN Fat OUTSTANDING PUBLIC suvlci as a lizassit or UM nausING COMNIssI©i" 58-166 8/17/87 MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel, Patitscci, Cobb absent. Mayor Woolley read the resolution which said that Jean McCown had served the City of Palo Alto as a member of the Planning Commission from July 16,E 1979 to July 31, 1987 and had been an active member by serving as Chairwoman from August of 1981 through July of 1983 and as a member of vari- ous subcommittees. Jean had unselfishly contributed her knowledge and experience to Commission deliberations and assisted the Commission in articulating its positions on the many planning issues it considered, and her significant per- sonal contributions were made in the interest of guiding the development of the community while :striving to maintain important social values. The City of Palo Alto wished to acknowledge. and thank Jean for her personal pride in the community and her significant personal efforts and endless hours of devotion as a member of the Planning Commission, including hours spent in consideration of the 1980 review and update of Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan, the 77 -acre Arastra _prcpo ty study, the Terman Specific Plan, the -Stanford West Environmental Impact Report, the Downtown Study, the Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study, and many applications for zone changes, subdivisions, parcel maps, \si to and design reviews,' and environmental impact reports, and, on occasion, appeals from the actions of the Zoning Administrator. The Council gratefully recorded and extended its sincere appreciation and the appreciation of the community to Jean McCown for her faithful and excellent service rendered to the City. Mayor Woolley presented Ms. McCown with a framed copy of the resolution and a caricature of herself done by Council Member Cobb. Ms. McCown said the list read by Mayor Woolley was an:inter- esting .list in the history of the last eight years of activ- ity in Palo Alto. One of the greatest pleasures about having served in the last eight years had been the quality of the individuals with whom she had served on the Planning Commission, the Architectural Review Board (MB), members of the Council, and City staff. Palo Alto had a very articu- late, highly -motivated, and interested citizenry who were very able in their representation of their viewpoints before both the Planning Commission and the Council. She believed one of the strengths of the Planning Commission was the ability to always bring to bear in its decisions and recom- mendations the interests of the entire community, which were 58-167 8/17/87 occasionally the interests of the people who might not always be quite so well represented before the Commission. She hoped the Planning Commission would always be encouraged to do that in the future. 2. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO THE MEMBERS OF THE TEMPORARY COMMITTEE ON DOWNTOWN DESIGN AND AMENITIES. FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE (701-04) MOTIONS Vice Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by Levy, to adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION 6639 entitled °RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS APPRECIATION TO TOE MEMBERS OF THE TEMPORARY COMMITTEE ON DOWNTOWN DESIGN AND AMENITIES FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE" MOTION PASSED uaanimodsly, Bechtel, Cobb absent. Mayor Woolley read the Resolution which said that members of the Temporary Committee on Downtown Design and Amenities served the City of Palo Alto from August 5, 1986, to June 8, 1981. John Northway served throughout its duration as a most enthusiastic and diligent Chairman and unselfishly con- tributed his architectural knowledge, offered his under- standing of Downtown Palo Alto issues, shared his optimism on the opportunities for Downtown Palo Alto, and elicited significant contributions from his fellow Committee members. Ken Alaman, representing the Historic Resources Board, unselfishly contributed his planning knowledge f his value for preserving buildings of historic and interest, and his enthusiasm for promoting Downtown vitality. Jonathan King served on a subcommittee evaluating economic incentives, and unselfishly contributed his outstanding values toward improving the quality of vitality of Downtown Palo Alto. Cheryl Lathrop served diligently on a subcommittee evalu- ating economic incentives and had unselfishly contributed her time, intelligence, energy, and comprehensive knowledge of Downtown Pala Alto. Orlando Maione, . representing the Visual Arts Jury, had unselfishly contributed his architec- tural knowledge, his interest In promoting public art. throughout Downtown Palo Alto, and his understanding how urban design plans could be initiated. Phyllis Munsey unselfishly contributed her understanding of Downtown prop- erty owner concerns and . needs in the Committee's considera- tion of appropriate benefits end incentives. Shirley Wilson 58-168 81`17187 unselfishly contributed her architectural knowledge, inter- est in improving Downtown alleys for pedestrians, and her enthusiasm in promoting a year-round farmer's market. James Witt unselfishly contributed his knowledge of construction and restoration, and his enthusiasm for planning the enhancement of Downtown Palo Alto. The City of . Palo Alto acknowledged and thanked each member for his or her personal commitment to the community and interest in Downtown Palo Alto and for his or her significant personal efforts and substantial dedication as a member of the Committee. The Council gratefully recorded and extended its sincere appre- ciation and the appreciation of the community to the members of the Temporary Committee on Downtown Design and Amenities for their faithful and excellent service rendered to the City. Mayor Woolley presented each member of the Temporary Committee with a framed copy of the resolution. 3. DRAWING OF BALLOT ORDER - GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION NOW:ABER 3, 1987 (705-87-04) City Clerk Gloria Young introduced Lesley and Marcus Hodge who would draw the names on the ballot. The order of the ballot was drawn as follows: EMILY M. REWZEL JEAN RAMACCIOTTI BOB MOSS HARRISON OTIS CHARLES J. ALLEY, JR, EDMUND R. POWER JOHN D.(JACK) SUTORIUS GAIL WOOLLEY LELAND D. LEVY CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Council Member Lowy sowed, seconded by .lein, approval of the Coa t Calendar. Referral 4. MIDTOWN TRAFFIC STUDY REFER. TO POLICY AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE (CI4R:400:7) (1041-0)i 58-169 8/17/87 CONSENT CALENDAR (Coit'd) Action 5. CONTRACT RENEWAL AND AMENDMENT FOR PROFESSI'?NAL SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEARS 1987-88 AND 1986-87 WIT LABORATORY TECHNOLOGIST MILTON SMITH, JR. (CMR:409 : 7) (1202) 6. RESOLUTION 6640 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION NJ THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND CERtIFI-- CATION PROGRAM" (CMR:407:7) (404:01/701-04) MOTIO PASSED unanimously, Bechtel, Cobb absent 7. REPORT FROM COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE RE SB 1297 AND AB 0 CMR: :7 (762-06/702-06-01) Chairperson Frank Patitucci, on behalf of the Council Legislative Committee, said the two items before Council did not get a unanimous recommendation for approval or disap- proval from the Committee. In regard to SB 1297, the question was whether the City should go on record showing support for the item which would create or enable a quasi - independent body, called California Housing Partnership, to exist and to raise money in some fashion as yet to be deter- mined to fund and finance low- and moderate -income housing developments. There were a variety of issues raised by the legislation. The Committee voted 2-1 to recommend approval to the Council, and he was the single dissenting vote. He believed the California Housing Partnership represented con- ceptually a good idea, and possibly one that should be tried, to create a entity which could joint venture partner- ships with local nonprofit agencies in order to promote housing for low and moderate income. Unusual features in the Bill were that it created the public agency and then said it was not a public agency since it would not be staffed by civil servants. It would somehow exist as a quasi -profit area and there was no money appropriated to the agency for its functions. He understood there was an attempt to get some money out of the Housing Community Development Department to fund a year of the administration of the departments but there wes still no program money, i.e., money to encourage people to contribute or create a reason why the entity would work : better .,nan any private entity. What was recommended could be done by the private sector, and his major problem with the Bill was it held out homer for solving some of the low- and moderate- income ,housing problems created by the durrent federal administra- tion, a lack of interest of housing programs,. but there were 58-170 8/17/87 no teeth in it. The Bill passed the Senate 35-0 which sug- gested it was a harmless Bill and probably would not do anything. The Council could go on record supporting the Bill and something might come of it, but at that point he believed it was superfluous legislation which created hope and promise were there really were none. He recommended against SB 1297. Council Member Fletcher supported SB 1297. She did not believe it was a cure-all to provided needed housing, but She liked to support anything that held out a hope to increase the housing supply. She had faith in that the League of California Cities and the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) supported the Bill. The PAHC said the bill would help preserve the moderate units at Arastradero Park, Palo Alto Gardens, and the Sheridan Apartments because of the mortgage term reverting back to market rate owner- ship, and some help was needed . to keep those units as low/ moderate income housing units. MOTION: , Council Member Patitucci for the Council Legislative Committee moved, seconded by Levy, that Council support SB 1297 and direct the Mayor to communicate the City's position to our legislatorfi and others as appro- priate. Council Member Levy supported SB 1297 because it reflected a policy that the Council had long been on record as favoring.'' Council Member Paiitucci might or might not be correct as he looked at the precise detail of the Bill, but frankly he did not believe it was the purpose of the Council when looking at State legislation to go into the fine points of the detail. They had State legislators to do that. The message the Council was sending to the legislature when they sup- ported the Bill was that they supported the concept and principle, and they left it to their legislators to deter- mine the precise path they wished to take towards accom- plishing the objectives. Vice Mayor Sutorius complimented staff and the Council Legislative .Committee. He had been pleased with the current and prior committees in the judicious manner in which the various subjects were examined, and he believed the prior- itizing done by the current Committee was important. It showed they were using the review process intelligently and not just rubber-stamping on a whole series of requests and proposals. In the spirit of maintaining that judicious use of the support, or lack of support when appropriate, he would vote against SB 1297, not because he was against the 56-171 8/17/87 philosophy or the purposes behind it, but rather because in part he agreed with Council Member Patitucci's concern there was a lack of a funding identification. There was the potential that the Bill was being voted on at the State level as a kind of situation where each of the legislators could say they supported it, but they had not put any money behind it. The other reason he would vote "no" was because he believed the Council had gone on record on some important measures, including some important housing measures, one of which was very recently, and -he would rather not dilute the force of their effect by always sending on letters to their representatives in the legislature. He wanted to be sure they were saving their arguments for `.the most important situations. Sylvia Semen, 3380 Middles zld Road, PAHC, spoke with Council Member Patitucci earlier in the day and heard his concerns. She checked with Senator Petris' office that afternoon and the legislative aide said Council Member Patitucci was asking very good questions about which the Senator's office was also very concerned. SB 1297 was scheduled to go to the Ways and Means Committee on August 26 and currently they were negotiating with the Department of Housing and Community Development to see from what source they could raise approximately $400,000, and that money would .be used as a loan to get them started. The issue with respect to the civil service appointments was also a very serious and excellent question, and the response was the people who would be serving on the entity, if created, would have to be so special they might need skills above and beyond those found in the civil service pool —people trained in banking and looking for sources of raising funds,, because the effort was to get private money available for equity capital to buy housing projects that were in danger of going to market rate. Council Member Patitucci said the legislation stated speci- fically the employees of the agency would not be civil servants. One of the problems was the State Constitution said that any State agency would, in fact, be staffed by civil. servants. Having gone through the problem with a State agency, having lost that fight, and having ended up with civil servants . who believed they had those kinds of qualities 2 he saw a very rocky road for the whole process, MOTION PASSBD by a vote of 4-3, SutOEivs, Klein, Patitucci voting 'sots Bechtel, Cobb absent. Council Member Patitucci said AB 2380 had to do with public buildings. Currently, the State law required every State building occupied by more than 700 people to allocate space 50-172 8/17/87 for child care facilities. AB 2380 would extend that requirement to non -State agencies, local governments; special agencies, etc., that, if they constructed a facility for more than 700 employees, they provide space for the operation of a child care facility. The Council Legislative Committee recommended against support of the legislation on a 2-1 basis, with Council Member Levy and himself opposing and Council Member Fletcher supporting AB 2380. The general feelings were that the Bill was an imposition on local government requirements that could be dealt with at the local level as well as the imposition of a requirement where there, in fact, might be a cost associated to local govern- ment which the State probably would not meet, plus there was no guarantee the 700 employee number would stay constant and, in fact, might apply to a lower number. The Bill did not affect Palo Alto immediately but would affect some of the larger cities. MO?IOM a Council Member Pletcher moved, seconded by Re#tel, that Council support AB 2380 and direct the Mayor to communicate the City's position to our legislators and others as appropriate. Council Member Fletcher said when there was an employment centerof at least 700 employees, there was an evident need for child care. The legislation required a survey be done to assess the . need and, if there was a need for 30 or more children at the facility, then it would require it. It was not hard and fast that the child care be in the building. A provision allowed the child care to be within a one -mile radius of the building if that was more cost effective. It was true no specific funds were allocated, but there was hope of an allocation in that the Bill said that reimburse- ment for tose costs should be made pursuant to the statutory procedures of State -mandated costs of up to $500,000. The situation became more crucial as more and more mothers had employment and needed facilities in which to put their children, and having the children close to the workplace was ideal for visiting and checking on children during lunchtime* She was very much in favor of AB 2380 even though it could be said the Council was being hypocrit- ical because ,the bill did not apply to Paio Alto. On the other hand, it was not such a hardship if the facility was so large. Council Member Levy said the specific; reason he opposed AB 2389 wail because he believed it was a .tatter of principle. There were separate powers of State and local government and they, on a number of occasions, objected when the State government mandated actions on the City that affected the City very specifically, and which . they themselves had the 58..173 8/17/87 power and ability on. which to take action. AB 2380 was one of those cases. The Council could act if it wished to. They could set the same limit as the State or a different limit. They should be able to analyze their own position and take action. It was improper and incorrect for the State to make an imposition and a mandate on the City in that area just as it was improper, in his judgent and in the judgment of his colleagues, that the State should take action in areas such as local rent control. Just because they endorsed the objective, did not mean they should vote for it because it would be hypocritical to say the State could mandate where they agreed with the State's ends, but invoke the principle only if they did not agree. He believed the principle of separation of powers applied whether they agreed or disagreed with the outcome. In the subject case, if the Council agreed with the outcome, they should take the action themselves. MOTION FAILED by a vote of 2-5, Renzel, Fletcher - voting 'aye,' Bechtel, Cobh absent. Council Member Klein asked the Chair of the Council Legislative Committee if he recommended the Council take a stance opposed to AB 2380. MOTION: Council Member Patitucci for the Council Legislative Committee roved, seconded •. by Levy, that Council oppose AB 2300 and direct the Mayor to communicate the City's position to our legislators and others as appro- priate MOTION PASSED by a vote of 4-3, Renzel, Sutorius, .Fletcher voting 'no,'' Bechtel, Cobb absent. 8. REPORT FROM COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE RE RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION AT LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE (CMR:412:' (702-O) NOTION: Council Member Patitucci for the Council Legislative Committee moved, second by Pletcher, to recommend the proposed Resolution relating to Tax Incentives for Ridesharing and Transit Subsidies be submitted for approval at the League of California Cities Annual Conference: Council Member Patitucci said the Resolution_ recommended that the League of California Cities (LCC) go on record sup- porting legislation which would create a : more equitable situation when it .came to the passes given to employees to wide sass transit. Whereas at present a pass up to $1S a month was considered a fringe benefit which was not taxable, 58-174 8/17/87 if the monthly subsidy was in excess of $15 then the total ,amount given to the employee was considered taxable income, but free parking provided by a corporation was not taxable income. There were two issues: 1 ), to deal with the spe- cific situation regarding the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) treatment of the transit pass subsidy made to employees, and 2) the broader issue that they move in the direction of trying to equate the tax treatment for those who used mass transit and those who used parking facilities provided by an employer. Anything that an employer did to help an employee ride mass transit rather than park should receive the same treatment, i.e., not be taxable income. Council Member Fletcher clarified that present law had a tax deduction to the employer for providing free parking to the employees. The same was true for the transit passes, but again only up to the first $15, so the employer too did not get the benefit for providing transit passes which he received for providing parking. Both the employers and employees would benefit from reduction in the congestion on the roads generally. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel, Cobb absent. 9. LEASE AGREEMENT WITH BRAD LOZARES AS GOLF PRO FOR THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE (CMR:380:7) (1323) MOTION: Council Meer Patitucci moved, seconded by Levy, to adopt stiff recommendation to authorize the Mayor to execute the lease with Brad Lozares for his continued opera- tion of the Golf Pro Shop and related services and activ- ities with the following change: Under XV. CONSTRUCTION AND/OR ALTERATION BI TENANT (RL 15.1) 8, A. Capital Improvements., the, sentence beginning "Once the project is completed, the City will present... should follow the word flea-sta." Council Member Menzel said Brad Lozares did a good job run- ning the golf course. Since the construction began on Geng Road, she was concerned about the deteriorated condition of the driving range. She asked whether there anything the Council could do to improve the appearance. Assistant City Manager June Fleming said the condition was the responsibility of the City. The problem resulted from an attempt to have a 10 percent water reduction, which had not worked. The area had to be dried out anyway for con- struction purposes, so the City would recover- it once the construction was over. 58.175 8/17/87 Council Member Levy was delighted with how the golf course had been run and the significant increases in remuneration to the City. Net revenues for the first year were estimated to be $3,700, one and one-half years ago the net revenues were $71,000, and the subjectcontract would result in'addi- tional net revenues to the City. Palo AltoGolf Course was now the most played of any public golf course in the area and he commended Brad Lozares, the Recreation Department, and all connected with the effort. Mayor Woolley believed all Council Members concurred in those remarks. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel o Cobb absent. 10. LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CITY OF PALO ALTO FOR 1.5 ACRES OF OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA AT liLONE SCHOOL SITE (445 E. CHARLESTON ROAD) (CMR: ii z ) 3:710) Mayor Woolley did not participate due to a conflict of interest. Council Member Fletcher asked about the rent credit trans- fer. Manager, Real Property Bill Feliman said the Palo Alto Unified School District's. (PAUSD) position was the rent credit transfer would be ruled out of the lease at the time but would consider it at the time of sale. *OTIO i Council dauber Klein soVed seconded by Patitucci, to adopt the staff recommendation that tbe' Mayor bsieuthoriasd to sign the lease for the Obiome fields. Vice Mayor Sutorius asked about the normal contract process and reaching an understanding at the outset if an element existed which was subject to a different outcome. City Attorney Diane Northway said a contractual relationship should be completed at the time an agreement was executed by both parties. While the parties could mutually agree at a later time to change the contractual agreement, one party would not have the power to bind another party to do so. SUBSTITUTE NOTION* Vice Mayer Sutorius ,sewed, seconded by Fletcher, t4 refer the Olsloee fields leas. to the City/ School . Liaillem Committee for discussion. 58-176 8/17/87 Council Member Klein opposed the substitute motion. He was a member of the City/School Liaison Committee and believed nothing would be. accomplished. The City historically. requested rent credits and the PAUSD reluctantly wentalong with it in the interest of promoting harmony. With regard to Ohlone, the PAUSD was, willing to accept the idea of the rent credit, but the City went beyond its previous requests and wanted the credit to be transferable. It seemed to him the City was being somewhat pushy. The City's negotiating position was not very good and it made little sense to go to the City/School Liaison Committee on the subject particu- larly since the positions were clear. Council Member Fletcher clarified the City first, wanted to have a 100 percent credit in perpetuity towards purchase of sites. The PAUSD rejected the idea and the present formula was a compromise. She believed the City had a right to require some kind of a credit for its investment. Vice Mayor Sutorius suggested the referral to .:he Committee in the spirit of cooperation and mutual respect for the two entities. If the issue of transferability was understood in the context of sound planning, it might be re-evaluated. The citizens regularly expressed sound land use planning as a high priority as well as effective dialogue and coordina- tion with the school system. He was confident in the cali- ber of the representatives on both sides of the Committee. Council Member Patitucci raid not believe the City would get very far trying to promote the transferability of what was already a significant benefit. He did not understand the rationale for having such a credit toward purchase in the agreements but nevertheless it did not seem to send the right message to the PAUSD to try and negotiate such a small item which was obviously an irritation to both parties. He did not believe the referral . made aense. City Manager Bill Zaner said the rent credit situation► in the subject instance was somewhat different in that the Ohlone site was not one the City ,really wanted. The prop- erty was acquired at eat point because of its usefulness for children and soccer. games. If and when Jane Lathrup School (JLS) was sold, the Ohlone property would end up in the wrsng place and the City wanted to trade for a different piece of property of the saw size. The PAUSD had been aware of the City's desires since 1982 and had no problem with it. The City wanted to apply the value it paid for the property in the next few years towards the ultimate piece of property it wanted so the City would end up with an equiva- lent piece : of property in another location which better fit with. the JLS site and provided ,a combined JLS/ohlone/ Mitchell Park configuration. Council Member Patitucci said the property was being used under the City's control and the City was paying for a use. He understood the City waned to pay for the use and wanted to get a credit towards purchase. The City should pay for its use. If it was going to pay towards future purchase, then it should pay toward future purchase. He did not see how both could be mixed unless the City paid a premium for the rents and that was not the case. He suggested the City just take. its credit and move on. Counil Member Klein did not believe it would be appropriate to break the spirit of good feeling with the School Board by trying to be "piggy." He also agreed with Council Member Fletcher that a compromise was reached but it was the City who was now trying to go beyond the compromise. The City should honor the compromise it entered into and ,not try to bargain for more. Council Member Renzel had difficulty with the logic of being able to transfer a crfrdit to a parcel the City was not leasing. She believed it went further than was fair in dealing with the PAUSD. She opposed the substitute motion. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED by a vote of 2-"4, Sutorius, Fletcher visiting "aye," Woolley 'not participating,' Bechtel, Cobb absent, NOTION PASSED unanimously, Woolly "not participating," Bechtel, Cobb absent. 11. REVISED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN - CITY OF PALO ALTO DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AS MENDED AUGUST 17, 1987_ 501) NOTION* , Council Member Kleinmoved, ascended by Fletcher, to approve the staff recommendation andadept the revised Deferred Compensatioa Flan containing the changes required by the Tax Reform act of 19,6. NOTION PASSIM maaniaoou*ly, Bechtel,. Cobb absent, 12. SAND H.LL CORRIDOR DISCUSSION (CMR:395 st 7) (1017-01) Mayor Woolley said the meeting held about a month ago was not a noticed public meeting and she communicatedthatfact to the two members ot the public who attended. One ember of the public did not want to remain when she learned .it was not a noticed public meeting and the other member of: the public stayed. She believed it was correct not to notice: the meeting since it was an informal meeting of a group from various jurisdictions. City Attorney Diane Northway said the formality or informal- ity was not as much the issue as whether the committee was an advisory one which could in cases becomprised of multi - jurisdictional members or whether. it was a meeting of two subcommittees of two governing bodies, i.e., two City Councils or members appointed to meet together on a non - periodic basis, which was not subject to the Brown Act because the Brown Act contained what was known as "a less than a quorum" exception for governing bodies only, i.e. only City Councils. Meetings could occur with other subcom- mittees of other governing bodies and not be subject to the Brown Act. The difficulty was deciding when the two subcom- mittees became one Committee and, therefore, subject to some of the provisionsof the Brown Act as advisory committees. As . she understood the facts, the particular meeting did not constitute the formation of an advisory committee. Mayor Woolley said that was correct, but since the action before the Council would constitute the formation of a spe- cific committee, there was a provision at the end of the first long paragraph which said the formation of this Committee by the Council will automatically make its delib- erations subject to applicable open meeting statutes." Ms. Northway said . if the cornmitee, was referred to as an advisory committee, it would be treated as such for purposes of the Brown Act. Council Member Hensel asked what would be encompassed in the Procedural framework for the corridor. City Manager Bill.Zaner said .the procedural framework was envisioned to include a document composed by the committee setting forth the tasks to be accomplished and the scope of the .project as it related to the Band Hill Corridor., Some- one would have to determine whether there was to be a proj- ect, what the project would look like, what the steps would be, what agencies would need. to be involved and how the agencies would be involved, and the public process. The framework would then be returned to the two City Councils involved and be subject to their review prior to any kind of adoption. Council Member Renzel believed the framework for such a project existed. She queried the establishment of a special framework. Mr. Zaner said while the.. project went through the process many times, it was never agreed upon. The, suOject endeavor would try to put togethera framework at a committee level which everyone could agree upon and return it to the City Councils for their ultimate review.. If the framework was agreed upon, he assumed a project would move forward and have a reasonable chance of success. Council Member Renzel said it sounded like the process was predicated on approval of the project before a project was approved. Palo Alto approved a project where the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was found to be deficient but there was no existing policy to involve the City in such a project. She did not understand why the process was dif- ferent from normal. Mr. Zaner believed many steps would have to be taken in a framework to be agreed upon by the Committee including a detailed work program to set out the tasks, a detailed description of what the project would be, schedules, esti- mates of cost, and some agreement as to who would bear the costs. There needed to be a blueprint of the project, and the governing bodies would determine whether it met with their_ approvals. Council Member Renzel said when the project previously went before the City Council, it was a Stanford University proj- ect. It was now being discussed as a 'three- jurisdictional project. She queried whether there was already a presump- tion that Palo Alto would participate in building the project. Mr. Zaner said no. In order for Stanford University to par- ticipate financially, it indicated the need for some kind of financing mechanism, i.e., an assessment district. An assessment district was already attempted on the project but could only be put together by either Menlo Park or Palo Alto or some combination of the two. Stanford University could not establish an assessment district on its own. Council Member Renzel said the process was already dealt with without having a special committee to take the process away from the full Council and essentially make it more difficult for the public to track what went on even though the meetings would be public. She queried the need for a superstructure mechanism when the assessment district mechanism was available in the normal process. Mr. Zaner said up to then the process of trying to come up with an agreed upon project had not succeeded. A lot of. work was required to lay out a framework, including the financing, scheduling, etc., and the fact that the project 58-180 8/17/87 had not gone forward in the past was an indication of the amount of coordination required. A committee was an appro- priate place to try to do the necessary negotiating and coordinating between three large agencies. Council Member Fletcher said normally the proponent of a project went before the Council with a proposal and she had a hard time understanding the reasons for the different pro- cess. Mr. Zaner believed Stanford was better equipped to answer the question but initially the intent was for the proposal to be Stanford's. As one began discussing even the sketchiest outlined program, it was clear that the permanent financing could not be done without some kind of government intervention in the form of an assessment district or some other kind of mechanism. It seemed simpler if one or both of the two governments were responsible for the financing mechanism, the design of the project, its coordination, and carried it all the way through. Bill Peterson, 228 Fulton, said connecting Sand Hill Road with El Camino would increase traffic and move the current traf€ic. jams in the Stanford parking lot into .the residen- tial: and commercial areas of Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The City Council and staff suggested traffic barriers to divert traffic from Palo Alto into Menlo Park, but Caltrans con -c trolled such barriers on El Camino. Several years ago Stanford had a problem with through traffic and its solution was to close through roads, start charging for on -campus parking and subsidize buses. The charter before the Council was flawed in that it delegated the responsibility to deter- mine what items were important; it would restrict the public debate because the forum would be new and unfamiliar to local residents; and, as he understood the financing, it would end up costing $250,000 if Palo Alto agreed not to proceed to the final completion of the project. The City of Palo Alto and its staff should be aggressively acting to limit increases in traffic and should not pay for and lead a group of people who wanted to put more traffic through the residential areas. He urged rejection of the proposal. Ellen Wyman, 546 Washington Avenue, did not believe the full Council adequately discussed the joint jurisdictional com- mittee. The issue had been around for a long time and it was necessary for the full Ca}uncil to address the issue. The full Council needed to determine the priorities and specifics. The community needed to know what Council believed to be necessary in order for the public to live happily with Willow Road. Positions were needed before negotiations commenced. 58-181 8/17/87 Dolores Furman, 1070 Cambridge Avenue, Menlo Park, said the Brown Act stated that so-called informal study, discussion, informational, fact-finding or pre -Council gatherings of a majority of the members of a board fell within the scope of the Act. As to whether the individual members intended to take or took the action at such gathering, the Brown Act also stated on page 9, "there is rarely any purpose to a nonpublic pre -meeting conference except to conduct some part of the decisional process behind closed doors." She was concerned that they were bulldozing San Francisquito Creek in order to put down tremendous drainage pipes. In the EIR under hydrology, Stanford referred to the drainage into the creek only as pipes that would lead into the two existing pipes. No reference was made to a third pipe. It was said that the third pipe would eliminate the other two, but she asked how they knew. She could not imagine why there should not be an EIR. If there was just one pipe going into the creak, she wondered Oat damage it would do on the Menlo Park side. They might lose one of the little streets that wound along the creek. Should all the drainage come in there, it would devastate the beautiful creek which was a wildlife refuge and unique. She could not understand why Stanford could not show more respect for the creek, because those who lived by it loved it, cared about it, and did not want to see it polluted by debris. David Bouguin, 181Tasso Street, #4, spoke on behalf of him- self and his housemate, and said they had two major concerns about the Sand Hill Corridor development plan. The first was a matter of procedure. The City Council was being asked to approve the existence of a committee to plan a study which would form the basis of the actual project without the City of Palo Alto actually having any policy concerning the project. It was true that recently the City had voted in favor of the push through to El Camino but, once the EIR supporting that specific project was foundto be faulty, the plan was thrown out. There was now no City -approved plan to continue, yet the joint policy committee wo+ild be moving ahead exactly as if there were. Not only was it putting the cart before the horse, but a report in the Palo Alto week on May 27 on a memo circulated by the City Manager indi- cated, The needed planning work could cost as much as $400,000-$450,000 and wouldn't be recoverable if the project weren't finished. The The memo indicates that Palo Alto would be willing to split these costa with Stanford should the project fail." It seemed to be an attempt to lock the proj- ect in place even before the City Council could vote on any recommendations the Council might make. If, indeed, Palo Alto was to be liable for up to a quarter of a million dol- lars i f: the project failed, any reasonable observer might conclude that, no matter what reasonable opposition existed, 58-182 8/17/87 the project would never fail for who could claim complete impartiality in the face of a $250,000 liability, and all without any policy being formulated in clear view of the citizens of Palo Alto. The Palo Alto Weekly article went on to quote City Manager Zaner as saying, The planning process will be smoother, more likely to succeed if it's led by a City rather than Stanford." He asked why the City of Palo Alto was carrying water, for Stanford. The University had shown itself quite able to take care of itself. Why was the City of Palo Alto working in support of the interests of another municipal entity while there were still so many unanswered questions concerning the benefits Palo Alto would receive from the project. They knew that Stanford wished to develop 50 acres along the corridor into housing; that, in fact, they wished to develop that entire portion of campus and to build a convention center and hotel at the other end of Sand Hill Road near 280. That corridor would be swamped with traffic almost before it was finished. The last EIR, faulty though it s, had already indicated there would be 3,000 more cars on University Avenue, and the corner of Ernbarcadero and El. Camino -•-the very corner the City Manager claimed thug project would . improve --would, in fact, descend from an E traffic rating to an F traffic rating. Everywhere they saw benefits for Stanford, but where were the Palo Alto interests in it all. If all Palo Altans had at stake was a bit quicker route to the shopping center, then they were indeed paying a. high price for it. Why was Palo Alto so willing to lock itself into a $250,000 liability, to an out- fit with an annual budget larger than many small countries, should the project fail. He asked if there would not be an enormous increase in traffic through north Palo Alto and, maybe more importantly, would there not also develop an enormous pressure to push the Sand Hill extension through to Alma once the heavily -increased traffic flow turned that tangle of intersection into a Chinese puzzle. Would not the project swamp the infrastructure. Pressure would build for larger expressways through Palo Alto, and what would happen to the quality of life in northern Palo Alto which was already under. pressure. Everywhere they saw Stanford's long --term interests being amply represented, but he -feared Palo Alto's equally -pressing long-term needs were being brushed under the carpet by that same tired, old broom, You can't stop progress." To him, progress was a City Council that protected the quality of life in the community and that resolved vital issues straightforwardly without locking itself into a huge financial loss if the project was unworthy. He also would like the Council to reconsider the committee and open the Sand Hill Corridor to public hearings before any joint policy committee was formed. 58-183 8/17/87 Harrison Otis, 2721 Midtown Court, believed Stanford University should be given a chance to work with Palo Alto. If people kept ignoring the cooperative effort between Stanford and Palo Alto, the State might take over and declare eminent domain. The traffic was unbelievable, and he did not believe Stanford wanted to disrupt all the environmental situations. What they had done to the indus- trial park was commendable. Peter Taskovich, 751 Gallen Avenue, said his main concern was to make sure the committee's meetings were open to the public. A lot of inter -City committees tended to be hard to ge-t at, e.g., the agenda were riot publicized, or they met at restaurants. They should. ensure the meetings were in an accessible place with enough public notification because the subject was very controversial. The Sand Hill Corridor was a problem and it needed a solution. NOTION: Council Member Patitucci roved, seconded by Levy, to approve the Charter for the. formation and operation of the Sand Hill Corridor Joint Policy Committee. Council Member Patitucci heard a lot of opposition to the Sand Hill Corridor solution being reflected in an attack on procedures. He would like to try to . separate process from content because they needed to set something in motion to solve a long-standing problem, and the point was not to debate the issue of what the outcome would be. He also had concern about the implications from some of the speakers that the City Council or any of its members at any time con- ducted itself behind closed doorsr had meetings at lunches, etc., to make any decisions of the City. The process, most especially in California, was as open as possible and, in fact, most of the people who observed the Council were amazed at how out of the way they went to involve the public and how open and accessible every member of the Council was to any public member wishing to discuss any issue. They had seen at meeting after meeting how issues that carne directly from the public would be considered by the body, weighed carefully, and often affected their .decisions. He could not accept the kind of guilt trip being thrown at the Council to not go ahead with the project because a meeting might have been conducted in not the most obvious of public ways. They now had a process in motion, and he believed the process was a legitimate one. As a Council they were used to operating in committees. They just saw the effects of that a few minutes ago when they had recommendations from the Council Legislative Committee; a committee of three of their~ mem- bers. They also were very successful ` and very pleased with the results of their particApation in yet another committee, 58-184 8/17/87 which might be a better parallels The Golden Triangle Task Force.- Unfortunately, that was the way they had to work as a public body. They were not a caterpillar, nine of them tied together, walking around, attending every meeting, and participating in every action. They had to delegate, to allow their members to reflect the needs of the total body and bring back the recommendations which they then could examine and vote on in the public eye. The procedure was long overdue, and he would like to see the Council proceed as soon as possible. Council Member Fletcher op deed: the motion. In regard to the City Manager's explanation for its necessity that it had not worked in the past so they needed a different process, she said the reason did not work in the past was because they had citizen opposition, and they filed suit and brought a halt to things. The mechanisms were in place. The Assessment District process was all detailed and spelled our., the scheduling, the scope of the project, the physical layout of it, the design; she remembered all those coming to the Council and they did not have a committee of three jurisdictions to work things out ahead of time. The only purpose she saw that things might be a little different,was because Stanford was asking Palo Alto to join in the financing. At least that was the assumption; she had not h.ad any communication in writing or personally about what had been going on because the process had not been public up until the present. She realized it would be a public pro- cess from now on, but they had committees in the past that came to the Council for approval of the recommendations that had been worked out, and they had been told it was a pack- age, all parties had agreed, and they could not change any component because the agreement would fall apart if: they tried -to tamper with it. That was not a process she appre-- cieted. She had been frustrated on a number of occasions when that had happened. She was very much opposed to the process. The issues were clear. It was not something insurmountable that could not be brought first to one Council then to the other, and they could make reeormenda- tions to have various factors adopted by the other parties without meeting in a small group ahead of time. She believed it should be an,.apen process for the whole Council. to' be a part of, and fox the public to. kno4 where they had to -go if they had comments. Council Member Klein was truly amazed to hear people speak that e-vening critical of the appointment of a committee to try to work out:a aolution. If -they did not have committees to try to work out eolutionee to problems, they and other governmental sjurisdictions would get absolutely nowhere, One would think that creating a- committee was some 58-'185 8/17/87 -revolutionary idea being proposed for the first time. They had so many different committees working on so many dif- ferent problems that he was hard put to count them all. That was the way virtually every government agency at all levels worked. One simply could not get anything done by constantly meeting with the full body; there were not enough hours in the day, week, or year to accomplish that. He did not understand it and believed there must be something else going on there. Committees were very appropriate to work things out, but that did not mean that the committee's recommendation would carry the day. The Council did turn down recommendations of committees. it was true, of course, the majority were accepted, but it was nothing unusual for a committee's recommendation to be rejected. Indeed, the Charter of the City of Palo Alto told them that the recom- mendations of all of their committees, Standing, Ad Hoc, etc., were only advisory to the full City Council. Cer- tainly, whatever recommendation the committee made would not be rubber-stamped by him. He would look at the recommenda- tion and vote his conscience,' and he felt his colleagues would do the same thing. The proposal had also been made that somehow, if they went forward with something on Sand Hill --and he emphasized the word if since he regarded nothing as a foregone conclusion --somehow it would be solely to benefit Stanford University. He pointed out the traffic that flowed through Sand Hill was not a creature of Stanford, did not merely benefit Stanford nor detract from Stanford. Sand Hill Road was a street in the City of Palo Alto. People who lived at Oak Creek were residents of the City of Palo Alto, and they paid taxes like everybody else. Stanford Shopping Center was in the City of Palo Alto. That did not mean it should be given special favor, but. nor should it be ignored and regarded as some type of pariah. The problem on Sand Hill Road was a Palo Alto problem, a Stanford problem, and a Menlo Park problem, so it made per- fect sense that the three Organizations establish a commit- tee to see what, if anythingt, could be done to solve the problem. He said of course the process would be. open to the public, and he came close to resenting the argument put forth by several speakers that the process would not be open. The history of the. City. Council was such that argu- ment need not be made, and. people should focus on the merits of whatever proposals were put forth and not focus on some- thing that really did not exist. He also pointed out that not only was Palo Alto extremely open, they went beyond the require ants of the Brown Act on any number of occasions. Many jurisdictions had a one -minute rule when -they invited the public to speak, there were many jurisdictions that, where they were not required by law to have citizens speak, did not have citizens be allowed to speak. He felt badly that people had raised an . absolutely false issue in that 58-186 8/17/87 regerd. He was quite prepared to debate the merits of what- ever proposals came forth from the committee but did not believe that was one of the issues. He did not know what the committee, if approved, would come up with, but they did have a problem which deserved to be studied. Council Member Levy asked about the risk of the potential expenditure of $200,000 if actions of the committee did not bear fruit. Mr. Zaner said the formation of the committee did not bind Palo Alto, Menlo Park, or Stanford in terms of costs either implied or direct. The figure referred to came from a memo which he prepared and distributed several months ago out- lining one alternate for the initial engineering work that needed to be done on the project. He had no authority to make such a commitment on behalf of the City of Palo Alto. There was a commitment in the amount of $50,000 which Council imposed upon Stanford University when it granted authority to do New Children's Hospital, A provision was included that Stanford would pay for the initial study on the -project if it ever got moving, a sum not to exceed $50,000. Assuming the Council put the committee together and Menlo Park did the same, and the project began to move, the initial studies that needed to be done were fully funded by Stanford up to an amount of $50,000. - Council Member Levy asked about the process by which funds from Palo Alto would be obligated. Mr. Zaner said only the City Council could obligate the funds. At that point, no funds were established in any budget so Council would be required to appropriate from some source via a budget amendment at a public meeting. The appropriation would have to be entered on the books and expenditures would be made in accordance with that appro- priation and subject to all the normal audits. Council Member Levy was well satisfied that the establish- ment of the committee would not per se obligate the City of Palo Alto to the expenditure of the kinds of moneys referred to. He shared Council Member Klein's consternation at hearing that such a committee was inappropriate. It was appropriate because first, they were entering another area of regional cooperation. One.. thing they heard over the past two -years from the Futurecast 2001 Committee was the increased importance of engaging in regional cooperation. As Council Member Patitucci mentioned, the Golden Triangle was one example, and the City/School Liaison Committee was 58-187 8/17/87 another. Regional cooperation by necessity had to be under- taken first by a smaller subcommittee. The Councils of Menlo Park and Palo Alto,' 14 strong, could not meet together each time a step was taken along the way. The second irony was that he heard from every member of the Council that when they wanted to have more public input and more detailed Council discussion, it was necessary to go to a committee format. The City Council meetings did not provide an ade- quate forum to get good public give and take. A committee did not have the formal restrictions the Council procedure involved. He was concerned about any violation of the Brown Act or even a possible tangential violation, particularly since he was at the original meeting and was unaware that anyone was turned away or encouraged not ro attend. That was absolutely wrong. He did not want that: to happen again, and there were very fine restrictions on when. the Council in any form could meet privately, and that was only to consider litigation or very specific personnel matters. If he was a member of the committee, he would certainly tell every mem- ber of the public from anywhere that every single meeting would be noticed and open. Vice Mayor Sutorius associated with comments made by Council Members Patitucci and Klein and understood the observations of Council Member Levy. Such a committee was a fiscally prudent idea. He realized the process could take an extended period of time but it would allow for the necessary factual developments, discussions and organization of recom- mendations to return to the respective governing bodies with minimal expenditures. Potentially, Stanford would need to commit all of the $50,000 which was already part of the Children's Hospital process. It was better to have a good study which allowed for public review and full consideration by the governing bodies. If there was dissatisfaction or lack of harmony which questioned the fiscal, physical, or political feasibility of proceeding, it was better to have it happen when a limited investment was made in good faith tor construction purposes. A halt at that time would save considerable time, effort, and resources of all of the bodies participating. The Palo Alto City Council was ; on record that any extension of Sand Hill Road to El Camino Real would not extend to .Alma Street. Palo Alto communi- cated its position to Caltrans who shared the position. If Palo Alto sensed a problem, it was better to deal with it early. He queried Palo Alto's irritation if .a proposal appeared before the Council six months ago for a committee corpri.sine - two Council Members from Palo .; Alto and two Council Members from East Palo Alto for joint discussions about planninrg and developing in the Whiskey Gulch area. He did not believe there would have been a problem. 58-188 8/17/87 Council Member Renzel was aware of the proposal to have the City fund $250,000 for the EIR which would be returned if the project was approved. The only written material she saw appeared in the Palo Alto Weekly. She queried whether the Aemo referred to by Mr. Zaner was in the packet. Mr. Zaner deferred response pending his review of the file. Council Member Renzel was concerned about the process because she did not like individual Council Members receiving telephone calls as a way to make -a Council policy decision. The issue was broached with her over the tele- phone and she was told that all other Council Members had been asked the same question about whether they would like to fund the EIR with the potential of getting the money back in an assessment district mechanism or not having the money recovered if the project was denied. As she said then, she believed it severely biased the environmental impact process when the City had a vested interest of $250,000. The money was not implicit in the particular memo but the issue was raised. She was concerned that Council Members did not receive the memo but the press did. It was repeatedly said that the existing processes did not work to get the project through. It was never the City's project --it was Stanford's project. She was concerned that they were trying another tack to take the process further from the concerned public. It would be public process but she was concerned by what rules. The City of Palo Alto, as pointed out by Council Member Klein, went beyond the requirements of the Brown Act in terms of open process. The subcommittee would not have any of Palo Alto's existing rules.which were built in by Charter, initiatives, and a variety of means that were long ago put in place to protect the public. She queried whether there would be an official record of ;tae 'teeetings so that Council would know what went on on a regular basis. Council received minutes of the City/Stanford Liaison Committee six months after the fact. Timely record to the Council was important iri` terms of public process. Mr. Zaner had not contemplated expending staff time on the Sessions in view of the fact that two members of the Council would be present and were charged with the responsibility of reporting back to their colleagues during the process. Council Member Renzel was concerned because it basically required that anyone concerned about the project had to start attending a whole new series of eeetittgs at an unspe- cified location at that point. She referred to the analogy of the study in tarns of how the Council would have reacted to a joint discussion with East Palo Alto regarding land use 58-189 8/17/87 issues. It was different to be at a meeting with neigh- boring communities to share views of the world and each other's problems but it was another to establish a joint committee with a specific project in rind and with a charge to return with a financial and physical framework for a project. Such a delegation was different from sending emissaries to communicate more general concerns of respec-` tive communities. The project should be taken through the normal government processes. She would not support the motion. Mayor Woolley underscored Council Members Levy and Patitucci's comments regarding the Golden Triangle Task Force and regional cooperation. The potential subcommittee did not seem different from the Golden Triangle except for once the City was crossing the San Francisquito Creek bound- ary and working with Menlo Park which seemed to be difficult since many regional organizations were set up on a County basis. The committee only included three groups and there were more entities involved, i.e., Caltrans and the County. As pointed out by Council Member Klein, from the standpoint of efficiency, it was essential for at least three of the groups to 'start working with representatives rather than bringing entire bodies together. She referred to Council Member Renzel's concern about meetings, and if the matter was handled by the entire Council, there would be many meetings involved and council would be asking the public to attend still more meetings,. It would be an extreme bnrden on the Council to attend that many additional meetings in the form of workshops. During the Futurecast 2001 meeting, three of the four committees made a point about cooperation. She believed it was an excellent opportunity to demonstrate cooperation by working with the other communities at the beginning instead of when the positions were adversarial. If Council formulated just what it wanted to see come out of the Sand Hill corridor project, it seemed like building the walls of the fortress. A give and take process needed to start at the beginning. Council Member Fletcher referred to the fact that there was a process in place. That process did not work because it ended up with the City of Menlo Park and a citizens group from Menlo Park suing the City of Palo Alto. If Council worked with Menlo Park at the beginning, the process aright have worked. A different approach was needed. She believed 12 in the Charter, regarding committee identification of policy level decisions to be referred to t e governing bodies for acceptance was important. Anything of's controversial nature would return to the Council. 58-190 8/17/87 Council, Member Fletcher said the process did not work last time because there were citizens in Menlo Park who objected to the actions of the Palo Alto City Council. She did not believe having two members of the Menlo Park City Council present at a meeting would have made any difference. There was a previous lawsuit brought by two Palo Alto residents also having to do with the process. She did not believe a committee struc re would make a difference. Council Member Ronzel said Menlo Park made its wishes known in Palo Alto's process. The EIR process was circulated to Menlo Park and the Palo Alto City Council was not respon- sive to Menlo Park's concerns. It was nice to start talking early, but the truth of the matter was that the corridor and the particular alignment from Arboretum to El Camino - Real were so constrained there were not many technical options about wnere the road would go. Nothing factually had changed since the last time the proposal went through the process except that the Palo Alto City Council was now lamenting that it did not pay attention to Menlo Park's con- cerns when expressed. With respect to identifying policy level decisions, there was nothing which said what happened if some policy level decisions for some reason were not identified and decisions went further before they went before the Council. NOTIOM PASSED by a vote of 5-2, Renzel,, Fletcher voting 'no," Bechtel, Cobb absent. 13. REQUEST OF COUNCIL MEMBER FLETCHER RE 1990 CENSUS: IMPACT OF DIRECTIVE FROM UNITED STATES OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (1046) Council Member Fletcher referred to an article in the news- letter published by the National League of Cities about the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) deciding that many important questions would be eliminated in the upcoming census. The questions had to do with housing, transporta- tion, and utility use which data cities used to do good planning and respond to the various demographic changes which occurred and which cities might not be aware of with- out the census figures. She commended Assistant to the City Manager Vicci Rudin for her work on the matter. NOTZO$s Conseil Member Pletcher sowed, necoided by Woolley, . to direct the Mayer to sew letters to the U. S. Office of I a*aeeseot and Midget and the President, with copies to our members of Congress, reinforcing the message conveyed by City staff. 58-191 8/17/87 NOTION PASSED unanimously, Bechtel, Cobb absent. ADJOURNMENT Council adjourned at 9:40 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: 58-192 8/17/87