Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-24 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTE3 Regular Meeting June 24, 1.985 CITY OE, ALIO ITEM PAGE Oral Communications 5 9 5 2 Consent Calendar .5 9 5 2 Referral 5 9 5 2 Action 5 9 5 3 Item #1, Final Subdivision Map - 3530 Ross Road 5 9 5 3 Item #2, Final Subdivision Map - 2850 Middlefield 5 9 5 3 Road Item #3, Final Subdivision Map - 3065 Middlefield 5 9 5 3 Road Item #4, Authorization to enter' into negotiations 5 9 5 3 with PASCO for collection services for the City's refuse Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Item #5, PUBLIC HEARING: Finance and Public Works Committee recommendations re Fiscal Year 1985-86 Budget Item #7, Project Mobility Item #8, Palo Alto Housing Corporation o Renewal of Contract for Fiscal Year 1985.86 Item #9, Health Resources Coordinator Professional Services Item #10 Mi dpeni nsul a Citizens for Fair Housing Contract for Fiscal Year 1985-86 415 Item #11, Palo Alto Community_ Child Care -- Contract for Fiscal Year 1985486 Item #12, Palo Alto Adolescent Services Corporation Contract for Fiscal Year 1985-86 Item #13, Mi dpeni nsul a Support Network Contract for Fiscal Year 1985-86, Item 114, Senior Coordinating Council of the Palo Alto Area, Inc. .- Contract for Fiscal Year 1985-86 Item 115, Telephone Information : .. and Referral Services (PAAIRS)" 5 9 5 3 5 9 5 4 5 9 6 9 5 9 7 0 5 9 7 0 5 9 7 0 5 9 7 0 5 9 7 0 5 9 7 0 5 9 7 1: ITEM t A G E Item #17, CAPA and CARA Box Office Contract Item #18, Project LOOK! - Palo Alto Cultural Center Guild Item #19, Brush Clearing in the Foothills. Item #20, Master Social Worker Contract with Santa Clara County Department of Social Services Recess Item #20-A, (Old Item #6) PUBLIC HEARING: Discontinuance of the park use of a portion of the Municipal Golf Cours and whether to submit the question to the electorate Item #21, Initiative Petition - Proposed ordinance to add a new chapter to the Palo Alto Municipal Code regarding permanent road blockages Item #21-A (Old Item 5-M), City Auditor Plan for Fiscal Year 1985-86 Item #21-8 (Old Item 5-0), Adoption of the Statement of Investment Policy with minor adjustments by staff 5 9 7 1 5 9 7 1 5 9 7 1 5 9 7 1 5 9 7 2 5 9 7 2 5 9 7 9 5 9 8 6 5 9 8 6 Adjournment: 11:55 p.m. 5 9 8 8 Regular Meeting June Z4, 1985 [fie City Council of the City of Palo Alto . met on this date in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.m. 1 PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Renzel, Sutorius, Witherspoon, Woolley. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Sally Siegel, 4290 Ponce Drive, asked Council to reconsider its zeal in protesting AB 2198, the Felando 8i11, which re- pealed some of the Naylor Act and no longer required school districts .with declining enrollments to sell their surplus properties to public entities at less than market value. Council realized the schools were instituted and maintained to serve their communities as havens of learning. She believed city government should have a sense of values, and a basic policy to respect the role of the public school. It should not desire to compete or seek material advantage over the schools. The Council was elected to represent Palo Alto and, Palo Altans supported education and expected Council to also support education. She emphasized that inadequate state school finences could not be city government's excuse to devi- ate feom its loyal support of the schools. It was truly a question of moral judgment. She asked that it be returned to the agenda for discussion. 2. Trina Lovercheck, 1070 McGregor Way, supported Ms. Siegel's comments. She was a parent of two elementary school children in Palo Alto and appreciated the fine recreational facilities that existed in Palo Alto. She knew that space for playing fields was something they all valued, but they could not lose sight of the main goal in providing for their children's future, and the best education they could give them, which took money. Proposition 13 took away the school district's ability to raise additional funds through bonds or other taxes as Palo Altans used to do. The Palo Alto Unified School District was able to maintain its high quality by selling its surplus property and carefully using those funds. Therefore, she believed it was important that. the school district be able to realize the maximum dollars out of the surplus properties. That was in keeping Sri th _the high quality educational goals they all shared and which brought and kept many of them in Palo Alto. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Councileeeber Sutorims moved, seconded by Witherspoon, approval of the Consent Calendar, Councilmenber Renzel asked to be recorded as voting "no, on Items #2, Final Subdivision Map for 2850 Middlefield Road, and #3, Final Subdivision Map for 3065 Middlefield Road. Vice Mayor Cobb asked to be recorded as voting "no," on Item #2, Final Subdivision Map for 2850 Middlefield Road.. Counc i i member Fletcher asked to be recorded as voting Item #2, Final Subdi vi son Map for 2850 Middlefield Road. Referral Action i L _ t l oiii ITEM #1, FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP - 3530 ROSS ROAD (PLA 3- ) (CMR:405:5) Staff recommends the City Council approve the final map and the street name TALISMAN COURT. ITEM #2 FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP .: _2850 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD (PLA 3-1) ( 4R : 4O 5 ) Staff recommends the City Council approve the final map. ITEM #3, FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP - 3065 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD (PLA 3-1) (C0:406:5) Staff recommends the City Council approve the final map. ITEM #4, AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH PASCO FOR COLLECTION SERVICES FOR THE CITY'S REVUE (lin 5-2) (CMS: T6U:5 ) Staff recommends the Council authorize City staff to begin exclu- sive negotiations with the Palo Alto Sanitation Company (PASCO) to provide for refuse collection and recycling services for the City of Palo Alto, and to return to Council with an evaluaton and pro- posed contract. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Renzel, Cobb, Fletcher voting "no," on Item #2, Final Subdivision Map, 2850 Middlefield Road; and Renzel voting "no," on Item #3, Final Subdivision Map, 3065 Middlefield Road. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Mayor Levy wanted to bring forward Item 21 so that it was con- sidered after Item #6, and to make it Item #6A, because both Item #f and Item #21 dealt with initiatives and the November election. Councilmember Bechtel believed Items #7 through #20 would be handled quickly. They were contracts she was sure would go through without protest. Mayor Levy said two items were included in the budget considera- tion which were not properly part of the budget: Item M, which called for approval of the City Auditor's Plan; and Item 0 which related to the investment policy statement. MOTION: Mayor Levy moved, seconded by Bechtel, that Items #5-t4. and #5-0. be considered separately. MOTION PASSED unanimously City Manager Bill Zaner said ,Item #5-M would become Item #21-A, and Item #5-0 would become Item #21-8. Councilmember Klein said Councilmember Bechtel's comments on the other proposed change impressed him sufficiently that it seemed to him the Council ought to get . all those contracts out of the way first and then get to the Winter Club issue MOTION: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Bechtel, that Item #6, Public Nearing: re Di scoati nuance of the Paris Use of a Portion of the Golf Course, be moved back to become Item 20-A. MOTION PASSED unanimously: Mayor Levy said Council would consider all of _ the budget ,i teens in one motion with Item #5 to be followed by the items beginning with #7. 5 9 5 3 6/24/85 ITEM u5, PUBLIC.. HLARINp; FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS CUMMI.i i E RECQfii4EUDATIONS RE P1SCAL YEAR 1985$b BUDGET (FIN 16) (CMR:402 5J Mayor Levy said this was the time and place for the public hearing on the 1985-86 annual. budget including the 1985-86 Capital -Improvement Program._ He declared the public hearing open and,: if the public had any comments relating to the budget or changes to be suggested, it was the proper time to be heard. 1 Councilmember Bechtel, Chairperson of the Finance and Public Works (F&PW) Committee said the F&PW Committee started the budget preparation in November, 1984 when it adopted the policy guide- lines for 1985-86. Essentially the document before the Council was consistent with those policy guidelines, i.e., that Council maintain the service levels of previous years, which was the recommendation of the F&PW Committee. The F&PW Committee met six times from May 23. through June 13, totaling approximately 18 hours in consideration of the 1985-86 annual budget. She thanked Coun- cilmembers Witherspoon, Sutorius, and Cobb for their contributions and participation, Mayor Levy for opening a meeting when she was delayed, Councilmember Woolley who attended many of the meetings, and City staff for their time and effort. She pointed out the various recommended changes before the Council as the first part of Exhibit "B." It looked as if the F&PW Committee made many changes, but the vast majority of the dollars were in the Planning and Community Environment Department and were for studies Council. previously authorized. There was also the Midtown Study which Council authorized. There was a fairly sizable amount for the Fire Department for Phase 1 of the Neighborhood Self -Help Plan for Disaster Preparedness, which was also previously discussed by the Council. Essentially those were the major changes the F&PW Com- mittee made to the recommended budget. MOTION: Councilaaember. Bechtel for the Finance and Public Works Committee moved Council approval of Items 5A - 5Y with Items 5-M and 5-0 being removed to become Items 21A and 218 as amended. A. By unanimous vote, the deletion of $10,000 for an inventory of the City telephone system; B. By unanimous vote, an increase of $50,000 for street mainte- nance; \ C. By unanimous vote, an increase of $1,000 for handicap curb ramps; By unanimous vote, an increase of 1108,000 for a City-wide study of land use and traffic to be allocated $43,000 in the consultant services and $65,000 in the Transportation Division for traffic consultant services; City Council recommends on a vote of 5-4, an increase of 533,000 for a Midtown Neighborhood Traffic Study; By unanimous vote, as increase of $2,400 for the Wildlife Rescue contract for a total of 18,500; O. Oa a vote of. 2-1 (Cobb voting *no," Sutorius absent), on increase of,149,400,for Phase I of the Neighborhood Self -Help Plan for Disaster Preparedness; H. By eaa.a1sows vote, ae: increase . :in. the .Senior Coordinating Cowacil contract of $7,500 for: senior employment services; By a vote of 3-1, 4n increase in the Senior Coordinating. Council contract of $3,453 for seniorday health care; MOTION CONTINUED J. By unanimous vote, an increase in the Senior Coordinating Council contract of $4,000 for parking district assessment fees; K. By unanimous vote, a water rate increase of 10 percent instead of 15.6 percent with a corresponding. decrease in the transfer to the General Fund; L. Staff recommends an increase of $25,850 for Project Mobility. offset by. revenues from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission;. M. Removed - Not part of budget; N. By unanimous vote, .approval of the staff recommendations as follows: 1. Current rates of $61 per month for single -party plus dependents not be increased at this time, but reviewed in January, 1986, in conjunction with implementation of a new Medicare supplement plan for retirees who qualify for primary coverage under Medicare; 2 Council adopt cost containment mods f #cations for the Retired City Employees' Health Plan including pre -admission certification, continued City review, second surgical opinion, hospital bill audit, and psychiatric coverage up to $50,000; and 3. Staff be authorized to develop and recommend a cost structure for a Retired Employees' Health Plan supplement to be used by those retirees who qualify for primary care coverage under 4edicare, with such a plan to go into effect January 1, 1986. 0. Removed - Not part of budget P. By unanimous vote, that fee increases and changes to the Municipal Fee Schedule be approved as noted in Exhibit "C"; Q. RSOLUTION 6399 entitled 'RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF TN£—r:ITY OF 'ALO ALTO APPROVING FEES FOR THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE" R. RESOLUTION 6400 entitled *RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE ci1T or JALO ALTO AMENDING THE COMPENSATION PLAN FOR MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL AND COUNCIL -APPOINTED OFFICERS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 6303 AND AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NOS. 6317, 6344, AND 6349 TO ADD TWO MEW CLASSIFICA- TIONS AND REFLECT CHANGES IM THE TITLES OF EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATIONS" S. • RESOLUTION 6401. entitled 'RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THr- CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE COMPENSATION PLAN FOR CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL (SEIU) ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 6389 TO ADD THREE NEW CLASSIFICATIONS. AND REFLECT CHANGES IN TITLES OF EMPLOYEE CLASSIFICATIONS' RESOLUTION 6402 - entitled °RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF Tat C1TT 0r PALO ALTO AMENDING: SCHEDULES > 5-1 : AND 5,-2 OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO : UTILITIES ° RATES AND CHARGES PERTAINING TO WASTEWATER RATE SCHEDULES' RESOLUTION 6403 "entitled °RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CTT_( OF FALA ALTO AMENDING SCHEDULES W-1 AND W-1.0 OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES RATES AND. CHARGES PERTAINING TO .ENERAL WATER SERVICE° MOTION CONTINUED Y. ORDINANCE 3622 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86° City Auditor Michael Northrup said at last Friday's pre -Council meeting, it was suggested he make a statement on the budget before the Council that evening. He reviewed the entire budget document; and, as part of that review, any questions he had regarding spe- cific items were addressed either to the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, or the responsible department director before the budget hearing. He was satisfied with all but one of the responses he received. Most of the items he questioned were also questions resolved by the F&PW Committee. He was concerned about the $10,000 telecommunications consultant agreemept. Council - member Sutorius also questioned the proposed expenditure and the F&PW Committee recommended the Council delete the item from the budget. It was important for him to understand the Council's intent in approving a program, contract, or function, and it was often as important as auditing the contract, or was necessary to audit the contract, functi on, or program. The discussion during the budget process would enable him to fulfill his job more ef- fectively. Counci l member Woolley said regarding the criteria for the budget and the newly added Item #11 the budget should accommodate accel- erated infrastructure renewal, she asked if a review of the budget process was being planned. Councilmember Bechtel said a meeting on that subject was scheduled for July 9. Counci1member Sutorius said Item #5-G indicated a unanimous vote for the increase of $49,400 for Phase I of the Neighborhood Self - Help Plan for Disaster Preparedness. He was unable to attend the meeting, but by reading the record, Vice Mayor Cobb did not sup- port the recornmendati on. The record should reflect a 2-1 vote at the F&PH Committee level. Vice Mayor Cobb said Councilmember Sutorius' observation was cor- rect. Counci1member Klein said as one who chaired the F&PW Committee in the past and was also a member, he knew the extraordinary amount of time that needed to spent on the budget. He congratulated the members of the F&PW Committee and its Chair, Counci1member Bechtel, for a fine job. All the information Council needed was contained in the minutes, and the documents prepared by staff. He was concerned about the lack of money which was needed to repair sidewalks_ and roads. He -did not get a clear picture from the min- utes as to why the Council was not appropriating more money to repair the sidewalks and roads, given what seemed to be a horren- dous backlog of necessary work. Councllmember Bechtel said the F&PW Committee added $50,000 to street maintenance, which was a Council direction from a previous year. Counc i 1 member Klein said he noted that, but i t got them back to the status quo. If he read the reports correctly, the status quo was putting the City deeper in the hole every year. Counci1member Bechtel agreed that was true on sidewalks, but she was not so sure it was true of streets. She deferred to Mr. Zaner. City Manager Bill Zaner said it wascorrect the City= 'was barely holding its own. In tens of sidewalks, the C►ty was moving back- wards at a rapid rate. Staff Mentioned to the ,F&PW-Committee that:. there was only one way to deal with the backlog in - sidewalks, which was to adopt some ether financing mechanism. There was no practical way to use capital funds or general funds to deal total- ly with the sidewalk issue. The suggestion was made a year ago that staff work out some arrangement whereby property owners shared in the cost of sidewalk maintenance as they did in many other cities, which was rejected. Until staff found a mechanism where property owners at least partially bore the costs, the City would continue to fall further behind on sidewalks. Councilmember Bechtel said the discussion of sidewalk maintenance was continued and held in Committee because of the need for addi- tional information. Under street maintenance, she understood .from staff in Public Works that there was sufficient money for streets. Mr. Zaner said the F&PW Committee added funds for streets, but it was difficult to say that more money could not be used. If the City had additional money to put into streets, he was sure they could make use of it. Staff believed the street program was a good one and it made the best use of the available resources both at the field level and at the management level. They used all available moneys from the State and Federal governments, plus ad- ditional money from the City's own General Fund, It was a sizable amount of money. The City was in a position similar to a number of other cities in the state --short on -resources and funds for highways. He guessed that would continue for the foreseeable future. He did not see large amounts of money coming from the state .for that purpose. Coun`ilmember Klein still did not know whether the money allocated was sufficient. Regarding sidewalks, he saw the figures which indicated that despite a significant increase in the amount of money they spent to repair sidewalks over the past two years, they fell still further behind. He understood it would be discussed further, but it was discussed further for two years and he was concerned about when the City would get a handle on the problem. Given the problem, he was unclear why they chose the particular level of funding rather than some other level of funding. It seemed to him they were saying "the present system did not work -- something else needed to be done, but meanwhile we're doing some- thing." One implication was that maybe it ought to be at zero. Mr. Zaner said Council could choose to set the level at any point. There was a point at which the City could use the money effi- ciently and do the work efficiently. A lot of the work was done by contract and it was easy to raise the level if that was Coun- cil's desire. Staff believed the amount of work being done, given the other projects, was a fair amount of work. The problem would never be solved until another way was found to finance it. There was net enough money in the General Fund to solve the problem or even to stay even. The best they could do was to keep the backlog from getting too much larger, too much faster. Another financing mechanism was necessary. As to whether the City could handle adds tioonal funds in sidewalks, there was no question in his mind that they could. If the Council wanted staff to do additional work, it could be done. The City could add to the contract. The question was where Council wanted to set the level. Councilmember Klein said it seemed to him the level was basically the same as it was for the last two ,years. Mr. Zaner said that was correct. Councilmember Klein said another standard might be to fund side- walk repair at a level which precluded the backlog from getting worse. Mr. Zaner agreed Council could" adopt that level. He deferred to Mr. Adams for a figure as to where that level might be. Director of Public Works David Adams did not have a precise number at hand, but it would take over $500,000 every year to keep up with the backlog. Councilmember Klein asked whether it was $500,000 more than pres- ently in the budget or $500,000 less than what Council already authorized. Mr. Adams clarified it was $500,000 total. He said it was a rough figure, and the actual figure was contained in the staff report. Coinc i l member Klein asked what amount Council authorized for side- walks. Mr. Zaner said it was $150,000. The staff report referred to by Mr. Adams was CMR:349:5. Councilmember Klein asked regarding streets if the money author- ized in the budget was sufficient to prevent the backlog from get- ting worse and was the Cite holding its own. Mr. Adams said it was a tough question. It was close. Staff would have to give a complete analysis to make that determination, but he believed the program was good. The backlog in certain areas with certain types of streets would probably climb, but it was difficult to say there was a backlog in streets generally, because there were so many different kinds of streets. He real- ized the answer was not very direct, but the problem was more com- plicated than: simply counting potholes. Councilmember Klein said the answer was sufficient. Councilmember Woolley was also concerned about streets and side- walks. She had the staff report which was given to the Council exactly a year ago to answer the question raised by Councilmember Klein. A year ago, Council added an extra $50,000 to the budget, and at that point, the staff report said the backlog was approxi- mately 50 years. By adding the $50,000 last year, Council would be able to eliminate the backlog in 25 to 30 years. She believed they were making some progress with the streets. Mayor Levy also had questions about the sidewalks and street main- tenance. His questions related to the 20 added positions, and he requested a brief summary of what the 20 added positions performed in terms of service, changes in service or new service. He asked about the two positions in Fire, and four positions in Police that were authorized to accommodate persons on disability in a pay status. He asked how many positions there were actually, how they appeared in the budget, and how Council monitored those positions that were set up to accommodate persons on disability. Mr. Zaner said no position in the City services was filled without a position requisition. The requesting department filled out a requisition and sent it to the Personnel Department. If a slot *gas not available, i.e., if there was no opening in the Table of Organization, then the position could not be. filled. Staff had no authority todo so... In the case of the supernumerary positions, those were filled when it , appeared there was a longterm disability problem or "i f there was a long-term training problem especially in the Police Department. Police people were sent to an academy for several months. When they returned, and before they were on the street, it took -onths to get them active. Positions could not be filled without a requisition having been filed and a position available. Personnel kept close track of all those positions. The City knew exactly who was in what slot and how many slots were open at a given time. Mayor Levy asked whether the six supernumerary positions were i cluded in the total complement of Fire and ._Police: Mr. Zaner did not believe so. The budget table showed the Table of organization, and an asterisk indicated additional positions that were not filled on an .ongoing basis. Those positions re- mained available for people to fill under the extraordinary condi- tions he indicated. He assumed that when Mayor Levy mentioned "20 additional positions," he referred to the net gain in the General Fund of three or three-and-a-half people, a conversion of six presently temporary employees to full-time employees, and the balance were in Utilities. He believed there were 11 in Utili- ties. .The Utility people were the easiest ones to deal with in terns of ::ghat they would do. Page 121 of the Executive Summary, on the left side of the page, listed all of the positions re- quested in Utilities. The System Operator Scheduler would do the scheduling as a result of the PG&E interconnection agreement, and the position was required by the agreement. The Electrical Assistant, was self-explanatory. The City had meter testing cali- bration that needed to be done. It was, in effect, a revenue pro- ducing position because if the meters were not calibrated, the City did not get the appropriate revenue. The next two positions were electricians. Those people would do conversions on the ser- ies circuits the City had throughout town. They were not designed for streetlight conversion from incandescent to mercury vapor, but would do the series circuits which caused a great deal of diffi- culty and a lot of maintenance work. The next three people were all in waste water. They would essentially be used for the infil- tration work that already began. They would do the work in the field to correct the sewer system so that it no longer suffered, or parts of it no longer suffered, from the infi`tration problem in the City which caused an enormous expense at the sewage treat- ment plant. The last two persons on the list were designed for the water system. Since the City indicated its streets were on a 50 -year cycle, the Council might be interested to note that the water main replacement program was on a 700 -year cycle. They did not expect to make much of a dent but did have to get to it. Two persons would work on the water system. All of the persons were infrastructure related, and in the guidelines given by Council. the City was to emphasize the infrastructure. The Personnel Department did an analysis during the:. year of all temporary em- ployees in the City of Palo Alto, and it was determined that a number of the positions actually performed services that were full time and should be performed by regular full-time employees. The only difference between having the people categorized as temporary or regular was that they could draw benefits. The work they did was appropriate for full-time regular employees. They had been doing it for sometime. It was necessary, important work, and staff believed it was appropriate that persons who performed the work and had been doing it for several years should be afforded the benefits their colleagues received, especially when those people did exactly the same work at the next. desk or in the field with them. Six positions in the temporary category were converted to regular positions. They were not new people in the organiza- tion. They had been there for many years. They were, however, a new expense in that now the City had to pay for their benefits. In doing the study, staff looked at all temporary positions. There were many other temporary positions in the organization that needed the same kind of treatment. They chose only the six that year, and were looking at the others more carefully to see whether others should be converted, eliminated frem the system, or com- bined with some other job, Staff might return to the Council in future years with other conversions. He stressed it was not an increase ' in the number of people who worked there, but was an in- crease in dollars because the City would begin to pay for the ben- efits. In Police, there were two additional persons --a Community Services Officer, and a secretary. The Community Services Officer would be used #n the Downtown area, especially for parking en, forcement, and it was expected the position would . generate more than its share of revenue and would pay for itself. In the Per- sonnel Department, _ there was a request for an additional position in Risk Management which person would assist:: in riskreduction in order for the City to notbe involved in as many liability cases. In the summaries, staff recomn!mended the City's insurance posture be .changed slightly, and .the reserves be raised by $500,000. Statf also recommended the City retain an additional $500,000 of risk thereby lowering the premiums. At the same time, staff be- lieved an additional person in Risk Management --a person who could be out in the field, do investigations and follow-up work especially with the Public Works Department to try and eliminate some of the hazards on the street before they hecame cases for the City Attorney's Office -.would pay dividends in the long run. There were two people in the Fire Department staff recommended be added. Both were related to the Hazardous Materials Program.: One was ari inspector, the other a clerical person. All of the hazard- ous materials resources had been pulled into one program, was now housed in the Fire Department, and made their .responsibility. Staff recommended. the addition of two people to make the program as strong and vital as possible. There was a quarter of a person to be added in Arts and Sciences --not much of an addition but a slight one. He believed those were the only changes. The net in- crease, as •indicated previously, was three -and -a -half in the General Fund. There was a reduction in personnel in the General Fund in the form of Communications personnel who would be leaving the .City because Mountain View was no longer in the Communications Center, and it would not need as many personnel to operate. Mayor Levy clarified that the net increase in the General Fund was three -and -a -half. Mr. Zaner said yes. Mayor Levy clarified the General Fund had a relatively small in- crease and, as Mr. Zaner pointed out, th.e net change in General Fund staff over the last five years was a decrease of one-half person over that period of time. The increases that took place were for increased service in the Utilities Department. Dan Payo suggested regarding dumping fees that Council establish a commercial rate which was not presently in force at the Palo Alto Gump. He believed the additional revenue to the City would be helpful, and the large numberof people presently dumping at the Palo Alto dump, resident or nonresident, were commercial. The recently adopted policy absolutely discounted that factor and sim- ply established the charge for the first five yards was $2 a yard, and every yard above that was at $16 a yard. He was in the busi- ness for about lO years and knew from using the dump virtually every single day that the majority of vehicles going into the Palo Alto dump did, in fact, carry five yards or less. The new policy left a loophole for those people to continue to dump there. The refuse they collected was from all over the Peninsula, not just Palo Alto, and the new law effectively eliminated people like him who had a large organization, and bigger trucks. It excluded the majority of people who dumped there, namely the gardeners and landscapers, who dumped five yards, four yards, and three yards. People in the business joked that everybody with trucks bigger than five yards would paint lines down their. truck, five yards or less, and continue to get in at the old $2 per yard rate, which was ridiculous inasmuch as the only dump on the Peninsula was Stierlin Road in Mountain View, and their resident rate wes $4 a cubic yard. Raising the commercial rate would effectively: reduce the number of people, :::because he understood the objective was to slow down the filling up of the Palo Alto Dump. It was filling up prematurely as a result of other dumps closing, and, if a commer- cial rate was establ is*ed, it would certainly slow that down. It would also give addi ti onal revenue to the City, and he found it difficult to find an argument against that. Perhaps the Council could shed some light on that. Kr. Zaner said it might. be , that the five cubic yard cutoff point was'\not the most appropriate.. 'He was concerned about establishing a commercial rate because it required the gate attendant to de- cide and : someone had . to verify whether they were dealing with a commercial operation. While it sounded simple, it could get com- plicated at times. Many pickup trucks, for example, owned by pri- vate individuals carried commercial tags. The City would then have to decide at the gate who got a commercial rate and who did not. ;He believed it was easier to administer on a per cubic yard basis. If Mr. Payo believed the City should have a lower cut off point, he had no problem dropping down to three cubic yards and saying everybody over that ought to pay a higher fee. He would have a problem making the administration any more difficult by establishing a new category of user called a commercial rate. He deferred to Mr. Adams for his reactions. Mr. Adams said the primary problem Public Works saw with a commer- cial rate was the possibility that people would ask for separate rates for Palo Alto commercial versus a different rate for out - of -City, which would be an impossible thing to regulate. A com- mercial rate would have to b.e all the same. Regarding enforce- ment, Public Works would have some difficulty enforcing a commer- cial rate, but it could be worked out if that was Council's de- sire. If Council went to a commercial rate, it would have to be commercial for everybody --resident or nonresident. Mr. Payo said he knew every individual at the gate on a first -name basis. The attendants knew virtually every commercial hauler and gardener 1 n the business. There was no doubt i n anybody's mind as to who was commercial and who was not. Anyone at the gate could vouch for it because those people went in the dump a minimum of three or four times every day. They not only knew them by face but most of them they knew by name. If there was any doubt about it, he suggested contacting anyone atthe gate or the supervisor. He emphasized that people in the business utilized the dump every day, and in his case, he utilized it two or three times a day. There was no such thing as a commercial hauler, roofer, or gar- dener who used the dump less than two or three times a week,and the people at the gate knew them by name. There was a possibility that the first time or second time around they could fool the attendants. Commercial users might have an advertisement on the side of their truck, carry power tools, or have fixed sideboards on the truck, and it was easy to differentiate between a commer- cial and a noncommercial vehicle. If there was any doubt, he.eug- gested contacting somebody at the gate for validation of his statement. Every commercial hauler In the business was known. Councilmember Sutorius appreciated Mr. Payo's recommendations. He said Mr. Payo mentioned the $2 rate, and the fees with which the Council was dealing that night were the fees for nonresident. In that case, they were talking about $8 a cubic yard up to five cub- ic yards, which was the present rate, an increase from $8 to $14. That was up to five cubic yards. The other significant rate, the fraction of a yard was going from $4 to $►, and on oversized loads, the City was going to impose a $16 cubic yard rate. He questioned the $2 fee referenced. Mr. Payo said he was given a slip at the dump the last time he was there which indicated there was a belief that the larger vehicles were primarily responsible for the premature filling of the dumps. According to the pamphlet, for residents, the first five yards were at the existing rates, $2 a yard, which meant, for five yards or less it was going to be $10. Any yards in excess would go to $16. So six yards would he' $26 a yard and so forth. He believed the policy was ineffective because if it passed, everybody with trucks like, his would simply put a red line along the side of the. truck at the five yard point and would continue to : dump there for $10 for five yards, which ; was unheard of. There was no place where one could dump on the. Peninsula _ at that rate. The majority of trucks going into the -dump, carried five yards or less, which fact -.was overlooked. People believed that because the trucks were bigger they filled the dump . fasten If the raaiority of trucks going into the dump were the Size of his, the statement would be true. For every truck like his,, there were 10 or 15 small pick-up 1 trucks that did not carry more than five yards. The dump would continue to fill pretty close to the present rate, and he woul d continue to use it. He would just fill his truck a third of the way up. It was a loophole people would take advantage of. If a commercial rate was established the loophole would be filled. Councilmember.Sutorius understood Mr. Payo's references, but Coun- cil was presently dealing with the nonresident rates. It was im- portant to take an action on the nonresident rates because of what transpired over the past year or so was that more business came from out of town because the rates were favorable compared to some rates in adjacent communities. Mr. Payo made a record for the Council, and Council would follow through by looking at the resi- dential situation too. He hoped Mr. Payo appreciated that one of the concerns was to maintain the dump as long as possible for the Palo Alto resident, and to be sure the Palo Alto resident was not penalized by having rate structures that were too low for the non- resident. Mr. Payo said the new rule directly affected residents. He was a resident and it affected him directly. The new rate was for resi- dents, not nonresidents. The $2 and $16 for additional yards was for residents, not nonresidents. Councilmember Sutorius agreed on large ones. In addition to going from . $14 to $16 on the nonresident, the City was imposing the $16 on the resident too because they were: large. disposers. Gloria Brown, 1766 Fulton Street, supported Counci lmember kl ei n in his concern for sidewalks. Sheattended the F&PW Committee meet- ing about two weeks ago. When she went before the F&PW Committee, it was on behalf of all the potential and real falls. She fell twice on Embarcadero and believed the sidewalks were a public safety hazard. Since she read the report, she noticed there were 22 lawsuits against the City for falls amounting to $91,000. It seemed to be false economy to keep letting the sidewalks deterior- ate. She saw where 29G,000 square feet of sidewalk went into the backlog which brought it up to 744,000 feet. There were many people who walked who should not have to take the chance of break- ing their necks every time they walked down the street. Last week she went from one end of Seale Street down to the other and back on the other side and noted 21 residences with fall -off rises any- where from one to two inches. In the dark, they were dangerous. She believed that for public safety, much more coul d be done as far as sidewalks. She wanted to see a bigger increase in the bud- get. Counci lmember Sutorius said he was not a participant in the full discussion on Item 5-G, Phase I of the Neighborhood Self -Help Plan for Disaster Preparedness, at the F&PW Committee meeting, and by registering his concerns, he did notintend to disparage the pur- pose of the program or the appropriateness of the local government having a purposeful role. He was partially inspired by reading the minutes and seeing that two of his colleagues raised questions with which he was sympathetic. He also recalled correspondence Council received - from the Barron Park Neighborhood Association (which is on file in the City Clerk's Office) which encouraged Council to be creative and receptive to the opportunity of involv- ing the neighborhood .associations in efforts of that nature. He was aware of the active and enthusiastically managed, and ;partici- pated on the Neighborhood Watch Program. He spoke tothe subject as one who believed that while various', materials might _ be : neces- airy. and appropriate, he was not sure it needed an additional staff resource at that . time, and there might . be an opportunity to look within the public: safety organization : to find a staff support activity. Vice Mayor Cobb was the dissenting vote on the F6PW Committee, and was prepared to be a dissenting vote again. He believed they could deal within the existing structure and not add staff Counci member wooiley was also concerned with the staffing portion of the earthquake preparedness program. She believed it was a fine program, and all during the F&PW meetings, the question of staffing kept coming up. A week ago, the report showed half a position left on the staff under the General Fund than there was last year. Ei ght-and-a-half positions were lost that year in Com- munications and those were partially funded outside City sources, so eight of the eight -and -a -half were now replaced with totally City funded positions. Over the years the City decreased: staff because contracts were used to accomplish some of the in- house work. It was more efficient to do it by contract, but it meant those staff positions were filled with new positions. Mr. Zaner had pointed out that over the years people were transferred from the General Fund to Utilities, which also added to the staffing. She believed it was an opportunity for Council to take some action on l imi ti fig staffing... She suggested the half -tine coordinator for the Neighborhood Self -Help Di aster Preparedness Program be taken from the Crime Prevention Unit. According to the budget, there were 11 positions in that unit. She believed the half-time coor- dinator might be taken from one of the four Neighborhood Watch positions. The Neighborhood Watch Program was over three years old and doing well. The Executive Summary showed a dramatic drop in burglary rates from 1980 to 1982, and since 1982 it had leveled off. Officer DeWerk told her it was probably as low as it would go because there were certain factors in the community that would not change that much. She believed the City had a well estab- lished program that needed to stay that way. It seemed to her it was better to have the Crime Prevention Unit do the program since the system would be modeled on the Neighborhood Watch Program. She believed Councilmember Bechtel indicated concern during the F&PW Committee hearings about .the overgrowth of government, and she believed now was an opportunity for Council to question it. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Woolley moved, seconded by Sutorius, to delete Item 5-G, Phase 1 of the Neighborhood Self -Help Plan for Disaster Preparedness, and for staff to report back to Council regarding the implementation of the Neighborhood Self -Help Plan within the existing staff. Councilmember Woolley had no problem with the funding for mater- ials, which was $21,000, but believed it was probably cleaner to have the whole package go back to Council at one time in the form of a budget amendment for the materials if it was possible tocut back on the staffing. Mr. Zaner said they were talking about a half -tune person, a Disaster Preparedness Coordinator in the amount of $18,000. It. was a program Council directed staff to prepare. They did so and went over it many times to ensure they applied the resources they had as effectively as possible.. In his opinion, if personnel was removed from one of the other public safety services, in this case Crime Prevention, the program would. be damaged. The Crime Preven- tion Program worked well, the Neighborhood Watch Program worked well because it was properly staffed, the people were trained, and the program functioned effectively. The Neighborhood Self -Help Disaster Preparedness Program was an ancillary program. There were some similarities in the sense that it required organization along the same kinds of lines, but it required that someone spend time on it and devote energy to it. What the City presented to the F&PW Committee was a pilot program. He believed staff advised they would return in a year to show, some positive results for the expenditure of the $49,400, of which only $18,000 was for the,. Disaster Preparedness Coordinator and another $10,000 for an of- fice specialist to do the -clerical work. Staff planned to return in a year should Council . authorize the funds. At that time, if the Council was dissatisfied with the way the program was going or believed the progra i\,should be more productive, Council would have an opportunity to make some amendments. He urged the Council not to adopt the amendment, The - funds were badly needed. _ Since Council requested that staff prepare the program, if Council truly supported doing the program, it ought to put the resources into it and that would cost $49,400. Councilmember Witherspoon opposed the amendment. She would be sorry to see the Council take an economy move in that position. She understood it was not a new position, and ithe person who was going to _fill it was already on the staff. It was not a question of going out and recruiting a new body. One of the most success- ful things about the Neighborhood Watch Program was the out- standing personnel on the City staff working with the neighbor- hoods. She hated to see that diminished in any way. She did not believe the City was that broke that they had to take money away from the Neighborhood Watch Program, which was one of their most successful programs. It was the kind of program she believed was the nuts and the bolts of City government along with the infra- structure, and she would hate to see the Council not go ahead and get the neighborhoods organized. It would take a long time even if they just did one neighborhood that year. She was pleased to see the Barron Park Association step forward and volunteer to be involved, but they could not do it themselves. They needed a trained specialist on the staff to help. Last year, Council voted in $15,000 for materials which was not spent because there was not a program in place. She anticipated there would not be a lot spent on materials because good State materials were developed. There was also State money, and if the City could get the program going, staff could apply for it. The State was begging for them to apply, to have their money put to use, and it was exactly for that purpose --to get those programs off the ground. She would hate to have the Council save $18,000, and lose the whole program. There was not much point in doing it if they were to do it on an ad hoc, volunteer basis. She urged the Council to vote against the amendment. 0 Councilmember Fletcher said regarding taking someone from the Crime Prevention Program and moving them over, when she was on the F&PW Committee some years ago, she remembered the Police Depart- ment coming up with a table showing there was a direct correla- tion ---an inverse relationship between the number of burglaries and the number of personnel working in Crime Prevention. She believed the reason the City did so well was because they had sufficient staffing for the program. She remembered reading that the reduc- tion of burglaries in their City was far and above the State-wide average. She believed it was something like 39 percent versus 14 percent. It was impressive. If the Council was committed to Crime Prevention, she believed they should keep the personnel there. It took staffing to motivate neighborhoods --it did not happen spontaneously. Counci l member Bechtel concurred with Counci l members Witherspoon and Fletcher. There was no question that the Crime Prevention. Program did an outstanding job and reduced burglaries dramat- ically, which was largely due to the Nei ghborheod Watch Programs and the personnel ttat worked in the area of crime prevention. The crimes per 10,060 population, on page 86 of the summary, dropped dramatically since the program was added ein 1981. She believed the half-time position with a clerical person in a pilot project was something Council should try, and she urged her col- leagues to oppose themotion on the floor. Councilmember Klein` concurred with the remarks made by Council- members Bechtel and Fletcher. Councilmember Renzel basically concerred with the remArks of vice Mayor Cobb during the F&PW Committee heRri ng. She believed the intermi ttency _of earthquake -type disasters was different from the day -to -,day _threat of _ burl;aries experienced regularly within the community. She did not believe the two,programs could be compared directly. Even though they, would be patterned alike, the nature of the problem they were -attempting- to deal with was different She b l ievcd they should start out slowly with the particular pro- posal because it seemed it might be more difficult to attract interest on the part of residents with respect to earthquake hazards than it was with respect to crime. Councilmember Woolley said the chart referred to on page 86 showed a dramatic drop, but in the last two years, it showed a leveling off. She believed that was because the program was well in place. She agreed with Councilmember Fletcher that there was a tremendous drop several years ago when the City bought the Arastra property, and the whole Crime Prevention was wiped out. The burglary rate rose dramatically, but in the subject case they were only talking about one-half person out of I1, so it would be one twenty-second. of the entire staff. Since the program was so well in place at that point, she questioned whether it would be reflected in the burglary rates. Mayor Levy received a card from John Joynt of the Barron Park area who wanted to speak specifically to the item. Although it was not normal practice to go back to the public, since the Coun- cil was specifically discussing the item he called on Mr. Joynt. John Joynt, 3589 Laguna, was the current Chairman of the Barron Park Association, and said if an earthquake hit, the point was made. There was a lot of energy in the Barron Park Association and the Barron Park area. If the Council decided to authorize the funds, the Barron Park Association would be happy to be involved. If the Council_ chose not to authorize the funds, the Association would still be happy to be extremely active with the the City. Vice Mayor Cobb said he had asked the Police Chief for the past couple of years to correlate between programs and crime rates and so on, and the Chief believed there was a correlation between the existence of the program and the indicated drop in crime rates, and he suspected it was true. However, it was not the raw numbers of people involved in the program but the existence of the program itself. It seemed that a program that had not had a chance to mature coul d run with half a parson 1 ess Councilmember Klein recognized there were some similarities between the two programs, and was also taken by Vice Mayor Cobb's comments at the F&PW Committee, but believed they proved the oppo- site point. The progams were different and he believed it was misleading to talk. about the two progams together. One could just as easily reduce the Crime Prevention Unit and use the additional staff person for the Planning Department, or the City Manager's Office. He did not see where the two necessarily tied together and so it bothered him to hear it. It seemed the more persuasive way to look at it was to say the program was one that Council agreed the City needed; it was a pilot project; they were going to review it in a year; give the program a chance by doing it right and not harming an existing program. If the feeling on the Coun- cil was that the Crime Prevention Unit was overstaffed, they ought to look at that separately and not transfer people over just on a wf1 ly-nil ly basis. Mayor Levy intended to support moving ahead with the Neighborhood Self -Help Plan as it was developed by staff. He had no great desire to spend excess City funds, but believed the need was there. The Plan needed staffing at the City level hi n order to coordinate the community effort. He believed $50,000 for a well implemented. Disaster Preparedness Plan was a decent bargain. The amendment before the Council was to delete Item -G and direst staff to implement a !Neighborhood Self -Help Plan within the existing 'staff. 1 4-6, Cobb, Repael , Stitor1 its, 'Councilmember Klein was concerned about the sidewalks. It WdS a problem on which the City had to put more focus. He was concerned about the level_ of money needed to get a better handle on the problem, and was cognizant of the fact the Council did not have the funds available to stay even with the problems that arose -each year. As Mr. . Adams stated, it would take an addi ti anal $350, 000 in that year's budget, but he believed it was important that Coun- cil make some kind of statement to the people of Palo Alto, staff and themselves that they would work on the problem one way or another,. The best way he knew to do that was to start with addi- tional resources to the City. He wanted the Council to make an official . statement that they were going to attack the problem. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to add $50,000 to the budget for sidewalk repair maintenance. Vice Mayor Cobb believed Councilmember Klein's comments and those of Mrs. Brown were persuasive. He believed Council needed to move ahead on the sidewalk situation. They still had to deal with extra financing as a separate issue in the F&PW Committee and he looked forward to doing so. The $50,000 number was reasonable because he sensed it could be absorbed in terms of :Managing extra outside contract services by the Public Works Department. By set- ting it at $50,000, Council left its reserve for capital projects at $4,000,000, which was his guideline. He did not want to go below that number during the F&PW Committee hearings, As they began to add various items to the budget and came close to the $4,000,000, he began to put on the brakes because he believed . it was a reasonable minimum. The amendment would take them to almost exactly that as the projected reserve for capital projects at the end of the fiscal year, and he believed it was a reasonable level. As Councilmember Klein said, it made anappropriate commitment. Councilmember Woolley asked if staff could handle the extra con- tracts. Mr. Zaner said yes. Councilmember Woolley asked how the change would affect the staff study scheduled to return to Council in the fall. Mr. Zaner said it would not affect the study..: Mayor Levy believed Co,tncilmember Klein's comments were in order. The City was way behind in sidewalk maintenance and needed a major, attack on both sidewalks and streets, and apparently e.ater mainsas well. It was unwise to let the ._infrastructure deterior- ate too much; so he supported the amendment. Councilmember Sutorius supported -the amendment. He commented that in terms of the City's water enterprise, steps were taken In that 'they were establishing the System =Improvement Reserve which was an appropriate measure and proved -its Importance in the -City's other enterprises. With respect to chipping away further at sidewalks-, the $50,000' would work against 'something In_ th_e vicinity of 60 percent of the survey being taken in. 198.5:. The survey was 60 per- cent complete and indicated the cost for the area so: far .surveyed to bring it up to standard was $1,743-0497e so. $50,000 would not- do much more than' chip 'away at i to Through -the P&P and F&Plc pro- c esses, it was incumbent upon the Council to seriously consider the steps necessary -to- find a process, that ,c:ontributed,discrete -Moneys-Moetyse toward :sidewalk Maintenance.' .That.; might Aeane Council needed to return : to. a' statusethait existed some 12 years ago in 1973 and back from then when property, owners made a 50 percent -.contribution to sidewalk- repair. Council had to -fete- up -to and he betleyeel the communi ty would oe willing to face up to a program that .could do a better job of pring#ng the `sidewalks -up to standard at a faster rate. ,-AMENDMENT PASSED taaaimoesly. Couec i l wember Bechtel clarified regarding the refuse fees that she understood the proposal was to charge residents zero if under five cubic yards; nonresidents would be charged $14 per cubic yard up to five cubic yards, and over five cubic yards both residents and nonresidents would be charged $1& per cubic yard. After hearing from Mr. Payo who was concerned about the number of nonresidents or of commercial users who used the dump, she wondered if staff had any f"rther recommendations to make concerning the fees. Mr Zaner first made a correction. When looking at Exhibit C,; the Fee Chart, there was a blank under "resident" both for current fees arsd proposed. That was because the City was recommending no change. That sheet showed only the changes in the fees. That was all the Council adopted --any changes. The current charge for residents would remain the same at $2 per cubic yard. Councilmember Bechtel said, as she understood it,. Mr. Payo was particularly concerned about those people who were either resi- dents and commercial users of the facilities, or were nonresident but using someone else's drivers licence as an identifier to get in for less money as a resident. She believed that was a legiti- mate concern. Unless someone► came up with a better idea, Council should adopt the proposed fee, but ask staff to return concerning the resident fee for commercial or large users. Mr. Zaner replied that staff would be happy to return. He asked Mr. Miller, who had direct responsibility for the operation and hands-on experience, to make.a few comments about the problem and how it might be solved. Public Works Supervisor Mike Miller said initially staff tried to come up with a rate that had both a large: base of resident and nonresident commercial users. A resident commercial user was a person whose vehicle was registered in Palo Alto, but that commer- cial user did not necessarily do business in Palo Alto. The rate was established for both sides because it was believed that $16 was a fair cut-off. It did not unnecessarily penalize the smaller vehicles. If a commercial size or rate structure were established for both residents and nonresidents, starting at one,- two, three or four yards, staff would put it in p1 ace. They would not have a problem. They had a problem with people who would argue whether they were . a . commercial or noncommercial user. Every time the rates went up, complaints were experienced for two or three months. If a commercial rate was started at one, two, or three yards, they would experience a large number of complaints. Councilmember Bechtel asked if. the Public Works Department con- curred that it would be difficult for their staff or their gate attendants to distinguish between the commercial and the noncom- mercial Mr. Miller said it would be in some cases. It would require some study .and the department could probably return with some alter- natives for identifying commercial and noncommercial users. Councilmember Bechtel supported the fees as proposed for ~now, but she believed Council should direct staff to explore an additional fee to get to the problem of the extensive commercial use of the dump A€4EMD$EMT: Coaacilmember Bechtel moved, seconded : by Fletcher,. to direct staff to explore the possibility of an additional tee to solve the problem of the extensive commercial use at the :dump Counc i l sses bet Bechtel said the rationale was that COune i l ; was .con- cerned about how rapidly the dump was filling op ' and wanted. ,to restructure and -00 ay: i t. 1 Counci i member W i thersNuun agreed with Counc i l men ber Bechtel that Council should look into the matter. It occurred to her that if someone appeared at the gate three or four times a day, they either had an enormous garden or were doing somebody else's gar- dening too: AMENDMENT PASSED :unanimously. Mayor Levy asked about staff report (CMR:380:5) which dealt with Item 20, Master Social Worker Contract with Santa Clara County. It indicated a reduction of $20,000 in the Master Social Worker Contract, which -implied to him that Council could safely reduce the budget .by $20,000. He asked if that was appropriate at the present time, Mr. Zaner said yes. Since the budget was put together, staff had a, different arrangement for, the Master Social Service Contract and, in fact, the Council could safely reduce the Police Depart- ment's budget by $20,000 and have no effect. AMENDMENT: Mayor Levy moved, seconded by Cobb, to delete $20,000 from the Police Department budget re revised Master Social Worker Contract, AMENDPIENT PASSED unanimously. Councilmember Bechtel noted there were two other items that would be returning. One had to do with high school use and counseling. There were many social service agencies which had proposals and Council recommended that staff work with the Human Relations Com- mission and those various agencies to come up with a plan for working with youths who were in trouble. That would be returning to Council at a later date. There was no specific dollar figure given. Council envisioned something relatively modest and imagined there would be a budget amendment. Another item that would return was a contract with the Humane Society in the area of humane education. The Humane Society had been, and would continue to provide the Saturday and Sunday service as well as the late night service for the City of Palo Alto. The issue of humane education was still being negotiatedwith staff. The F&PW Commit- tee recommended that staff work with the Humane Society to come up with a proposal to provide the full spectrum of humane education. That was to come out of the existing budget in the Police Depart- ment, but a contract would go to Council later. Council did not need any additional amendments at that time, but she wanted to let the Councilmembers know those items would return to them. Councilmember Witherspoon clarified that Council would speak to some of the contracts later, Mayor Levy said that was correct. Council member Woolley said in the .Capital Improvement -Projects booklet, on page 26, there was an item concerning the Yt ht Harbor closure. Under "Project Description,* she remembered , tast year, Council discussion resulted in the wording being ., r`a`.led. It looked as if it was still not straight and she wondered whether i. t was :something staff ` could clear - up, or whether Council needed to take it up. It said the projct would close the existing. Yacht Harbor by removing piles, floating docks, and structures as well as inner -harbor launch structure. The word "structures" sounded as if they were talking about buildings, which was not true, and there was no inner -harbor launch structures unless they were talk- ing about the hoist at the Club, which did not belong to the City. She believed it "-needed to be changed . to . reflect that it really discussed the berthing.fdcilities. She suggested it might read something like, *This project will close existing Yacht Harbor by removing: the berthing facilities," and then in parentheses specif- ically ; listing the piles, the floating docks, and the adjoi nl ng access ramps. She asked staff if that needed a motion Mr, Zaner said no. He noted on his own copy of the CIP that what Council was really saying was that they would close the existing Yacht Harbor in accordance with the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) requirements. That was what was driving all of it, and they would use the BCDC permit. Vice Mayor Cobb commented for the record that among the discus- sions at the F&PW ,Committee, they also talked about the question of fees and when there should be full -cost recovery, partial -cost recovery, and when there should be no -cost recovery. In terms of a partial cost -recovery, they they discussed whether they should be a lot, a little, or somewhere in between. Hopefully, as part the F&PW Committee's agenda for the balance of the year, they would have an opportunity to set upsome standards as to what should be full -cost recovery, and when it was partial how much partial was reasonable for the particular service. He looked forward to their dealing with that question before the year was out. Councilmember Renzel said in view of the fact that Councilmember Woolley raised the item on Page 26, she asked staff when the Yacht Harbor lease reverted to the City in July of 1986, who would own the structures that were presently out there. Mayor Levy believed the question was more appropriately brought up at another time; it was not a part of the budget discussion. Councilmember Renzel did not want the record to suggest they were owned privately right now. She was not sure they were. Mayor Levy did not believe that was really a subject to be dis- cussed then. He ruled it out of order. Mayor Levy said the Council had before it Item 5, including amend- ments A through V except items M and 0. Item #5 had three amend- ments: $50,000 was added for sidewalk repair and maintenance; $20,000 was deleted from the Police budget with regard to the Master Social Worker Contract with the Santa Clara County.Depart- ment of Social Services, and Council directed staff to explore the fee structure at the landfill to discourage extensive use of the dump by commercial users. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously. ITEMS 07 - #20 - HUMAN SERVICES CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 Mayor Levy advised that', Item 016, Street Trash Receptacle Emptying and Maintenance was removed by staff to be rescheduled. Vice Mayor Cobb advised that he would not be participating on Item #12, Palo Alto Adolescent Services Corporation. MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Witherspoon, approval of Items 07 through 015 and Items 017 through 020. ITEM 07, PROJECT MOBILITY (SOS 4-4) (CMR 401:5 ) Staff recommends, that Council Authorize the Mayor to execute contracts for fiscal year 1985- 86 with Peninsula Cab Leasing Company for taxicab and van ser- vice and with Palo Alto Yellow Cab for.. taxicab service only, and Approve the "minimum" service area policy for Project Mobility trips as recommended and adopted by the County Paratransit Coordinating Council. AWARD OF CONTRACTS Peninsula Cab : Leasing Company Palo Alto Yellow Cab Company 1 5 ,9 6 9 6/24/85 ITEM #8, PALO ALTO HOUSING CORPORATION - RENEWAL OF CONTRACT FOR F lst;AL YEAR 1985-86 (PLA 2-3-1) (CMR:3861 : 5 ~' Staff recommends that Council approve the contract amendment, renewing for one year the contract with the Palo Alto Housing Corporation. AMENDMENT X10. 2 TO CONTRACT N0. 4327 LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING SERVICES Palo Alto Housing Corporation 1 ITEM #9, HEALTH RESOURCES COORDINATOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES '2 w 5") (tit : 3� 1: 5 Staff recommends that Council fund the stress management program for fiscal year 1985.86, and authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Sue Wa1 ima and Ellen Kirschman to prc'vi de professional services as Health Resource Coordinators. AMENDMENT N0. 1 TO AGREEMENT N0. 4422 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SUE WALIMA AN INDEPENDENT HEALTH RESOURCE COORDINATOR AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT N0. 4423 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND ELLEN KIRSCHMAN AN INDEPENDENT HEALTH RESOURCE COORDINATOR ITEM #10, MIDPENINSULA CITIZENS FOR FAIR HOUSING - CONTRACT FOR I AR .5-86.1PLA 2-:3-2) (CMS:303:5) Staff recommends that. Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract amendment between Mi dpeni nsui a Citizens for Fair Housing, Inc. and .the City of Palo Alto for Fiscal Year 1985-86. AMENDMENT N0. 3 TO CONTRACT K0. 4231 FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 Midpeninsula Citizens for Fair Housing ITEM #11, PALO ALTO COMMUNITY CHILD, CARE - CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-S6 " (SOS 1-1) (CMR:3)2:5) Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract between Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. and the City of Palo Alto for fiscal year 1985-86. AMENDMENT N0. 6 TO CONTRACT NO. 4017 FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 Palo Alto Community Child Care, Inc. ITEM #12, PALO ALTO ADOLESCENT SERVICES CORPORATION - CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 (S05-3) (CMIT:394:5) Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract amendment between the City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Adolescent Services Corporation for fiscal year 1985-86. AMENDMENT . NO. 4 TO CONTRACT NO 4164 FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 Palo Alto Adolescent Services Corporation ITEM #13, MIDPENINSULA SUPPORT NETWORK - CONTRACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 (S4S 7-61(00;396:5) Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract between Mid -Peninsula Support Network and the City of Palo Alto for fiscal year 1985-86 AMENDMENT N0. 4 TO,CONTRACT NO. 4165 FISCAL TEAR 1985-86 Kid -Peninsula Support Network 5 9 7 0. 6/24/85 MOTION CONTINUED ITEM #14, SENIOR COORDINATING COUNCIL OF THE PALO ALTO AREA, INC.- CONTRACT FrOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 (S -OS 4-1) (CMR:39775J Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract amendment, renewing the contract between the Senior Coordinating Council of the Palo Alto Area, Inc. and the City of Palo Alto for fiscal year 198586. AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO CONTRACT NO. 4019 FISCAL .YEAR 1985-86 Senior Coordinating Council of the Palo Alto Areal Inc. ITEM #15, TELEPHONE INFORMATION AND REFERRAL SERVICES (PAAIRS) (SOS 9-1) (CMR:3967ST Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract between the Palo Alto Area Information and Referral Service, Inc. and the City of Palo Alto for fiscal year 1985-86. AMENDMENT KO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. 4014 FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 Telephone Information and Referral Services ITEM . #17, CAPA AND CAPA BOX OFFICE CONTRACT (HCA 5-1) (CMR: 397 : 5 ) Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract renewal for 1985-86. ITEM #18, PROJECT LOOK! - PALO ALTO CULTURAL CENTER GUILD (HCA 5) (CMR:369:S) Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the contract for 1985-86. AGREEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1985-86 Project LOOK! - Palo Alto Cultural Center Guild ITEM #19, BRUSH CLEARING IN THE FOOTHILLS (PART 2-15) (CMR:398:5) Staff recommends that Council execute the two-year contract between the City of Palo Alto and the Santa Clara County Probation Department in the amount of $20,000 for brush clearing in the Palo Alto Foothills. AGREEMENT Santa Clara County Probation Department ITEM #20, MASTER SOCIAL WORKER CONTRACT WITH SANTA CLARA COUNTY AGREEMENT a CITY OF PALO ALTO/COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Services of Plaster Social Worker Councilmember Witherspoon commented on Item #7, Project Mobility, that one of the contractors requested their invoices be paid within 10 days. Staff advised the contractor that it was not pos- sible, but that the City would impose a late . fee on itself if it look longer than 30 days for payment. She believed 30 days was a long time to pay an invoice, but rather than instituting a late fee, it would be :easier on the City administratively to pay the base and: have the contractor bill the City above it. Associate Transporati on Planner Gayle Likens said ` the fee would vary month -to -month dependent ,upon the . number of trios taken and the share of the:, contract It was possible;_ to prepay a set amount, but staff recommended that not be done, but to rather pay the amount billed. 5 9 7 1 6/24/85._ counciimember Witherspoon made her recommendation because she believed one contractor did 80 percent of the trips. Ms. Likens said that was correct presently, but it varied over the years, and there was no guarantee it would be the same each month. Staff believed paying within 30 days was reasonable, and they planned to pay within 30 days and avoid the late charge. Staff did not believe 10 days was an appropriate amount of time in which to turn a billing around. Councilmember Witherspoon asked how many late charges staff expected to pay. Ms. Likens said there was only one applicable incident that year, and she did not anticipate any for fiscal year 1985-86. Vice Mayor Cobh said many people asked him about the high propor- tion of administrative costs to the total costs with regard to the child care operation. He clarified that staff would be returning with an analysis. Mr. Laner said an analysis was performed by an independent con- tractor, which was now under review. MOTION PASSED unanimously) Cobb "not participating" in Item #12, Palo Alto Adolescent Services Corporation. Mayor Levy thanked staff, the F&PW .Committee and members of the public who participated in the budget process, particularly those related to the human service •contracts. COUNCIL RECESSED FROM 9:20 p.m. TO 9:45 .m, ITEM #20-A (OLD ITEM #6), PUBLIC HEARING: DISCONTINUANCE OF THE PARK USE or A- pommi ?rte TiltfiTPNICIPAL GOLF cTJ SUBMIT THE QUtSUION to THE ELECTORATE (ELE 211 Mayor Levy declared the public hearing open. Edel Young, 460 Ferne, said her main concern was to preserve the ice skating rink In Palo Alto. It was a community asset and ranked with Foothills Park and the good school district. She sup- ported undedication of the Geng Road site because she did not presently see another way to achieve preservation of the ice rink. The park site at Geng Road seemed much less valuable to her than many of the other park sites. If an office building were put there, the traffic impacts . would be less because it was on the other side of Bayshore. Palo Alto needed to maintain the open area and avoid the . condominiums that might be built on the Winter Club site. She preferred the Winter Club remain at its present location and the Geng Road site be undedicated. Ralph Brown, 541 Bryson, worked in land conservation. His job was the acquisitioe of real property which was turned into park use and in many cases dedicated as natural areas in the State of Illinois. Only under the most compelling circumstances should such an action be contemplated, but .if one examined the property, at Geng and Embarcadero, one wondered how it could be used for a park. It was vacant and undeveloped as a park use, and to his knowledge was not used as a park. He believed it was an under- utilized City asset ` and should be considered for the proposed exchange. It was appropriate for the Council to vote to let the electorate decide whether the asset should,, be exchanged fOr . one which could be used by more members of the City. Joan McDonnell, 1018 Los Robles) wanted the Winter Lodge pre- served. It offered much to many in its 30 plus. years :, of exis- tence, and it was a unique and valuable community recreational resource. As a Palo.. Al tan since 1957, and as a Winter Lodge skater since the early 1960's, she saw the many contributions it rude to the people of Palo Alto. She and her daughter were grate- ful for the opportunity to skate. Saturday mornings at the Winter Lodge were always busy, with Girl Scouts learning to skate to earn their badges or young men and hockey sticks ready to score their first goal. Winter Lodge instructors worked with the blind and mentally handicapped children. Even senior citizens enjoyed a morning with friends getting some exercise. At the end of each skating year, the Winter Lodge showed the accomplishments of its members in an ice show. Young and old participated together skat- ing outside under thy:, stars. For the past 15 years as a judge for the National Figure Skating Association, sh'e saw the character growth and development of young skaters from participation in the sport. They learned to be good winners, losers, handle the frus- trations of learning a difficult sport, and experienced the satis- faction of accomplishing a goal. They learned to set priorities and endure sacrifices in order to attain a more important goal. They learned also to skate for the pure joy. Palo Alto was fortu- nate to have the Winter Lodge. She urged the Council to allow the undedication of the unused Geng Road parcel to be put on the same ballot as the Council -authored land swap and let the Palo Alto voters decide in (November if they wished to preserve the Winter Lodge. Janet Fox, 1111 Middlefield, represented Briones Orthopedic Cen- ter, a school: for handicapped children in Palo Alto. Briones School had a once -a -year trip to the Winter Lodge, and one philos- ophy in working with the children was to teach them there was nothing they could not do --they ,just did it differently. If one could see the children at the Winter Lodge, one would see that philosophy in practice. There were children in walkers, wheel- chairs and mats, but every child in the program was there and had a good time. She urged the Council to support the undedication program. She presented letters from the Jackson Hearing Center, Karen Newell, an area Girl Scout Leader, and Carol Young -Holt, Director of Bing Nursery School (which are on file in the City Clerk's office). Stephanie Grossman, 1121 Harriet, was a court reporter, and said those in her business were almost all young women, most of whom lived in Palo Alto. She- listened to their concerns about the activities of their children after school hours and where the children could go safely and -on their own because their parents worked. Each year, the City sold off its schools and with that went the playgrounds where the children could play after.. school . As the school sites were built upon, the area became more con- gested with cars,. --and it was harder for children to ---.travel on their bicycles. ShL moved to Palo.. Alto partially because of the City's reputation as a great place to raise children. Today, with more arid more work) ng mothers, more recreati Anal areas should be created for childrene The traffic .on Middlefield Road was pres- ently worse than the traffic on Geng Road. She urged the Council to place the undedication of Geng Road on the ballot and put recreational areas within the reach of those who needed it and especially the chit dren. Jan Van Per Loan, 3090 Ross Road, associated himself with the -,,com- ments of ' the previous speakers. He urged that Council -place the . undedicati on- of the Geng Road site on the ballot. Marilyn Eaton, 590 Hermosa . Ways._ Menlo . Park, was a . member° of ,the Trust _for 'Cosmunity, Skating, and was a Winter. Lodge- staff member for 14 years. She heard each aaeaber of the Clty Council vote_ . wholeheartedly to support saving the Winter Lodge, and also heard many reservati drys along : wl th those of the pubfl c She 'h -card argu- ments against increased traffic .on Geng Road -and= .Embarcader°o, where the- 1ewel Of_ ser.vlce was and worsening. She also .heard . arguments==-agalns r tht tee& iedr trotflc- a1`o,ng the- Middlefleld aided corridor, there the - Mi ddl efi el d Road/Oregon Expressway i nt=ersec-. ti on had a leve 1- of service in "1983 before an additional in= crease - of . 550 vehicle tarps : pet day as uresult of_° the recently 0 condominiums. The level of service "F" did not include the traf- fic from the new condominiums on Park Boulevard or the increased commercialization of. California Avenue. She heard arguments against more commercial buildings springing up all over Palo Alto, and there was.a tremendous demand for more housing --especially for seniors. She spoke with many people who believed too much housing was going into the Midtown area. With the addition of 196 condo- miniums in the past two years, she could not blame them for becom- ing vocally opposed. She heard Mr. Peery say he did not want to swap land for a duck pond, and she heard the City and public say there could be no guarantee of constructing a 49,000 square foot building. Upon reflection of all the arguments, everyone who spoke was right. For her it was an observation of the democratic process. Palo Alto had tremendous growth in commercialization and traffic. She was one among .many who preferred to see that growth slowed down. Mr. Peery had every right to expect that he be able to build o_ n property he obtained by swapping the land to save the ice rink. The Council reacted responsibly in saying that Mr. Peery must go through the same procedures as everyone else. Too many condominiums were recently added in the Midtown area, -and 80 more on the site in question would make matters worse. The land swap issue was complicated because it included many problems, but the issue was unique to Palo Alto. No other western city had the opportunity to save, for future generations, an outdoor ice skat- ing rink in a temporate climate, which was a highly used recrea- tional meeting place for 29 years. Though privately owned and operated, it was one of the City's most popular .recreational activities. The Trust proposed the land swap idea as a fiscally sound alternative to saving the ice rink and believed that because it was used by thousands of people of every age and walk of life from countless organizations, it should be those people who made the decision. They looked to November to see the reaction to the ballot. As the issue was one involving the undedication of Geng Road, the City Council was requested to put the undedication on the ballot in November along with the swap proposal. Only in that way would the voters have all of the available information before them with which to make a knowledgeable decision. If, in Novem- ber, the voters passed the land swap proposal, it would be because they believed that one more commercial building with the resultant traffic was far outweighed by the public benefit of maintaining Palo Alto's unique recreational ice skating rink for future gener- ations. It would be a mandate to the City Council and to Mr. Richard Peery to negotiate in good faith. As in most cases, nothing was free and everyone at the negotiating table must be willing to compromise if the voters mandate was to be realized. William Rosenberg, 820 Bruce Drive, favored putting the undedica- tion proposal on the November ballot. He and the people of Palo Alto did not take removal of property from park use lightly. There were only a few such actions since the dedication of most City parkland. The undedication was not being requested to create more commercial development east of Bayshore, but rather as the only apparent means to maintain a recreation site in the Midtown area. There were obviously proponents of the maintenance intact of the Byxbee Park baylands area, but there was an associated cot. Unless an alternate proposal appeared at the eleventh hour, the immediate cost was the loss of the Winter Lodge skating: rink as well as the facilities at Chuck :Thompsbn's. 'Page 39 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan said that school playgrounds often served park functions, and yet many of the school playgrounds were closed without the necessity of an undedication proceeding. Inas- much as the school yard at Hoover School was already lost in the Midtown area, he urged that Council prevent any more recreation loss in the area. The Council Chambers generated much discussion about the jobs/housing imbalance in Palo Alto, and he sU9gested consideration of the parks/housing `imbalance. As' -school grounds. were closed and ` .condominiums built in , their stead, it only. ,Worsened that imbalance It was especially= severe in'the .Midtown. area. He urged Council consideration of the proposed undedication of the Geng Road site as part of a net gain of recreation land and facilities to the City of Palo Alto. He urged the Palo Alto voters decide how to balance the loss of the Geng Road site against the survival af. a_n active recreation center having more than 40,010" uses each_ year. Duncan Williams, 650 La Mesa Drive, Menlo Park, associated himself with the comments of the previous speakers. Barbara Smith, 1861 Mark Twain Street, skated at the Winter Lodge for the first time a few months ago with her granddaughter. She was struck by the wholesomeness of the atmosphere.. and the sports- manship, of the children. She hoped the Council would do whatever it could to preserve the unique place and to put the discontinu- ance of the park use of the Geng Road site on the November ballot. John Mock, 736 Barron Avenue, supported preservation of community ice skating, but was concerned about the approach. He protested the undedication of parkland for the purposes of an exchange unless the use of the rest of the parcel on Middlefield Road was defined in time for enclosure in the voters pamphlet. Clearly a portion of the parcel would be used for ice skating. He also pro- tested the exchange of dedicated parkland unless it was clear that the community ice skating facility could not be preserved by other means. . Betsy Crowder, Committee for Green foothills, 2253 Park Boulevard, said there were many reasons the Committee for Green Foothills believed undedication of 3.74 acres of land was unwise. The dedi- cation of City -owned parklands, owned really by the people of Palo Alto, was a serious matter as evidenced by the fact that removal from dedication required a vote of the entire population. It seemed to her the ballot measure proposed by the Council to ask the public to give up some parkland implied Council support of the proposal to get rid of the parkland. She was not sure that was necessarily the case. She believed Council wanted to know what the majority of its citizens felt, but it implied Council support merely by putting it on the ballot. The Committee for Green Foothills believed it would set a serious precedent and future undedication of City parklands could be proposed for �illy of the parklands now owned in . Palo Alto. She was sorry that fir. Brown, an earlier speaker, did not see the value of the small undeveloped portion next to the golf course. The golf course apparently did not need the land, but it might be difficult to have future use of a piece so close to the golf course without some protective measure. Just becausE it was presently undeveloped did not mean a future use as public parkland could not be made. Perhaps the most serious implication by Council's putting the proposal before the citizenry was that Council appeared to encourage commercial development and she did not believe that wes the .case. Everyone was aware that the jobs/housing a imbalance in Palo Alto reached crisis proportions and removing the land from park dedication and exchanging the development rights with the owner of the present Winter Lodge site i n order to build offices seemed to be a most irrational suggestion when the need for offices compared to the need for housing was not very important; The Committee for Green Foothills had no objection to special interest groups per se, and obviously : a skating club could be of great value to many segments of the Palo Alto population and it probably served many of the residents as well as residents of surrounding communities. There was no reason not to support special interest groups which were of value to the community, but if the Council determined the . group should receive ` City support, the:. Committee believed a meehani sm more in line with the 1orgeterw benefit for the public might be to buy outright the present Winter Lodge Site and lease it back on a long-term basis to the Winter Lodge. She suggested a boed issue orsome other funding proposal might,. be a ;fitting issue for the NoveMber ballot than the removal of > a piece of land from park deditata on. Mayor Levy .commented that Drew Lawrence wanted Lo 9� opposing the adoption, Stanley Blumenthal filed a Paul Larson registered a protest. Councilmember Menzel read a letter from. Nancy .Denson into the record, (which is on file in the City Clerk's office) She urged that Council reject the proposal to discontinue the use of a. 3.7..4 acre portion of public park, part of the Municipal Golf Course, for use as an office building. She and her husband heartily supported the Winter Lodge ice skating facility and requested that Council back the project, but not to the detriment of recreational lands. un record dS protest, and MOTION Vice Mayor Cobb. coved, seconded by Woolley, as follows: 1. Overrule all protests; and 2. Approve having the question of whether or not a.3.74 acre por- tion of the Municipal Golf Course shall be discontinued as pifrkl and submitted .to the _ electors at the November 5, 1985 municipal election in the language of attachment 2, the draft ballot measure. (This action should include word changes to the proposed ballot measure.) Vice Mayor Cobb said Council had discussed the issue at length, and everyone advocated saving the minter Lodge. For two and one- half years, he was concerned with the problem, and no better way to save ice skating in Palo Alto was found. Those who supported the measure in the past recognized it was an imperfect solution -to a problem, but the only alternative was to die into the civic pockets for $2.5 million and buy the land outright. With all the other demands on the City's moneys, it was not a practical or feasible solution. He knew of no other plan, and if there was another suggestion, he wanted to know because the hour was late. Those who circulated their petitions withheld submitting their petitions because they understood Council would take a series of actions, including the motion on the floor, in the interest of having before the voters a cleaner, more legally sound and defensible measure than the various collection of measures previ- ously petitioned. He believed Council would be derelict in its duties if it did not follow through on its prior commitments as a Council that lead the Trust to not submit their petitions. Councilmember Sutorius said he would never lightly overrule pro- tests having to do with preserving parkland. He understood the concerns expressed and was sure they were genuine. Any dedicated parkland was a precious resource to be cared for cautiously. The baylands and the entrance lands to that area should be regarded with great care and were important for their natural habitat as well as for the active and passive recreation. In overruling the protests, he believed Council could appropriately consider the comments made by the many spokespersons and particularly recognize that those -who spoke had a strong conservationist background and were protectors and supporters of the City's park resources over the years. Regarding Council's action that evening and whether it implied that Council - favored effecting the swap and disposing of the dedicated parkland, Council was attempting to have two impor- tant items before the voters at the same time. Council was not taking a position by its action. He looked for ways in which to preserve the Winter Lodge facility and the exchange measure on the ballot was a fair and appropriate measure . and he personally'::. planned to support . i t . He believed the voters were entitled to have both issues before the simultaneously and he was sure the arguments pro and con would be intelligently and fairly ; argued during the election .process Councilmember Witherspoon asked for clarification of the resolu- tion on attachment 1. The last sentence of the second paragraph said "Winter Lodge skating facility in order to facilitate the continuation of ice skating at its present location until at least the 1991-92 skating season..." and it seemed to her that in pre- vious Council discussions, it was also clarified in that context that Council would not do it at any cost to the City, i.e. there would be no operational costs through 1991-92. Councilmember Sutorius believed Councilmember Witherspoon referred te- a separate item, i.e., the resolution which dealt with the swap. Council was dealing with the undedication. Councilmember Witherspoon clarified the ballot measure having to do with the swap was where the language was contained in effect promising there would be no City subsidy for operating costs Councilmember Sutorius said yes. Councilmember Witherspoon said several speakers pointed out the loss of school sites and recreational lands, and she clarified that in almost every single school site, the City bought most of the associated open space and playing fields. Council did its best to keep the recreational lands in the City open as much as it could afford to. She agreed with one of the speakers who said everyone admired the Winter Lodge and would like to keep it open if possible. Her problem was that the price was too high. She was not willing to spend $2.5 million of the City's cash and was unwilling to take the equivalent land out of park dedication down in the Baylands to swap for a large commercial building in an already impacted area. She was in a dilemma in terms of putting the measure on the ballot. The City's residents were entitled to vote on the matter, but she would not support it. Vice Mayor Cobb believed Council was morally obliged to put the matter on the ballot because it promised to do so, but that was not her impres- sion. Her impression was that if Council wanted to see the measure put before the voters, Council's putting something on the ballot was the cleanest way to go. She believed that was her feeling about the measure, but that did not mean she had to vote to put the matter on the ballot. City Attorney Diane Lee clarified there were three attachments to her report. The first action by the Council related to Attachment 2, which was the motion on the floor. Attachment 3 was included as a comparison since staff was in the process of preparing the resolution calling for the election. She wanted .to run the - pre- vious resolution re_ ice skating back by Council that evening to see if it embodied all the changes Council ' made when it considered the matter a few weeks ago. Any direction for her.. in that regard would be made separately after the motion on the floor was con- cluded. Councilmember Renzel also enjoyed the Winter Lodge and believed it was a nice facility, but Council should recognize that when the City swapped lend, it used City resources to pay for it. She pre- ferred to see the City use the money directly and set it as a priority: within the budget if that be the rill of the Council and publ i s a She did not believe the City should exchange parkland for seven `years and- maybe. longer. The Council did not know whether the new parcel would be park dedicated and she : believed there were real questions raised, She could not vote to discontinue park use for purposes of putting up an office building. The Palo Alto measure did not mention how the Geng Road site would beused and she asked if it was appropriate to move that the City Attorney indicate` the desired use for : the Geng Road parcel somewhere in the measure Ms. Lee said a motion would be appropriate i f there was some spe- cific language to be included. She pointed out that it did say the exchange agreement would require that normal City development processes shall be followed with respect to private development. She did not know what the desired use would be and Council had not voted on it. It might be premature to indicate the desired, use because she was unaware of any Council consensus. Councilmember Renzel understood, but said it was clear that Mr. Peery expected to get some sort of office building and she was not speaking in terms of what Coc nci l would approve, but rather what the exchangor desired so that the public knew: what the next step would be. Ms. Lee said that was appropriate. Councilmember Renzel asked if it was sufficient for her to make a motion indicating her intent and have the City Attorney incorpor- ate it in the ballot measure. Ms. Lee understood that Councilmember Renzel wanted an indication which anticipated, on the part of the owner of the Middlefield Road site, that the ultimate development would be for offices. Councilmember Renzel said that was her intent --not to suggest that Council authorized such a change. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the City Attorney draft and include language in the Ballot Measure that Mr. Peery anticipated that ultimate development for Deng Road site will be an office building. Mayor Levy had no problem with the amendment. Councilmember Klein believed the language drafted by the City Attorney was clear. When talking about some office building, he was concerned they got into , a vague "never-never land" and they did not know what would be discussed with regard to Mr. Peery. The language drafted by Ms. Lee said "any exchange agreement shall require that normal City development processes shall be followed in prospective private development of the parcel including but .not limited to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning and subdivision regula- tions, etc." He believed the signal was loud and clear that they. were not talking about someonewhowanted to exchange the land and hold it for someone to look at. He did not want to clutter up the language with what would be the arguments, pro and con, made by particular opponents or proponents of the measure. Councilmember Bechtel believed the amendment was worthwhile. I ; was not a delay tactic because as indicated by the City Attorney, she needed to return to Council in any case on July B. She urged Council support of the amendment. AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote of -3, Klein, Woolley, Cobb voting Councilmember Klein said people who were opposed to the measure said they were "all for the Winter Lodge, but..." and wanted another way to pay for it in straight cash. Staff provided memor- anda over the years and one recently which indicated there were no good financing alternatives given the City's _ limited financial resources, the tremendous other financial demands, : and intricacies of Proposition 4, the Gann l ili t on City expenditures. It would be illegal for the City to go out and spend $2.5 million in one year because $1.5 million was the _limit under the Gann ,initiative on how much: they could - spend in a particular year. It was some- times forgottenforgotten that Proposition 13 precluded the City_ from put- ting a bond obligation :;on the ballot, which was suggested by a._ speaker. After a hard- look at how to ° accomplish keeping the Winter Lodge open, it had to be something other than laying out 1 cash the land swap had much to be said for it. For that reason among many others stated in various other reasons, he was inclined to support it. He agreed with Councilmember Witherspoon i•n terms of the City Council purchasing playing field after playing field and ryas pained by the speaker who said Palo Alto was losing parkland. He pointed out the City Council voted to acquire Terman, Ventura, Ortega, Hoover, new parklands at Greer Park and Downtown North Park, etc. To say that Palo Alto was losing parkland was not the case. He believed everyone worked hard on the Winter Lodge issue and there was much more work to be done. The Winter Lodge facility was a highly desirable public amenity and one the City needed to keep. In the imperfect world, the exchange was the best and most sensible way to achieve it. He would support putting the measure on the ballot. Councilmember Bechtel said she worked hard to control growth in the community and to decrease the jobs/housing imbalance. She could not be inconsistent by potentially adding 200 more jobs and giving up parkland to do it. She sensed, in talking to some mem- bers of the community, that it did not . matter about building another building on the other side of Bayshore because it was "over there." It did matter and impacted the whole community. Others did not believe the City could possibly afford to buy the Winter Lodge site, but the City somehow managed to come up with $7,000,000 to purchase 531 acree of the Arastra property at the same time as Proposition 13. Contrary to Councilmember Klein's comments, she believed the staff memo on ways to finance the Winter Lodge was encouraging. True, the City could not spend all of the money in one year because of the Proposition 4 limit, but staff pointed out there were other possible ways of financing --a payment over a period of time or lease payback as was being done with Terman. There were other possibilities if the will of the people in the -community was to purchase the property, but not to take the easy way out and just allow the Council to give up some parkland for an office building. Mayor Levy said Council was divided on the issue because it was thorny and matched important goods for the City and difficult bads. The issue was whether the public should be heard and how should the public be heard. Putting the item on the ballot should not be construed as being Council approval of the words, but rather as giving the public their right to be heard clearly, directly and uncomplicated. With that in mind, he supported the motion, Mayor Levy clarified that the motion was amended to request the City Attorney to indicate that it was anticipated that the site would be used for offices. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED by a vote of 5d4, Bechtel, Renzel, Fletcher, Witherspoon voting 'no.' ITEM #E21 INITIATIVE PETITION PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER TO TkE PALO 1:LTO MUAICIPAL CODE RECARDI1O PERMANENT HID tOCi A (ELT 26) Mayor Levy asked the City Attorney to comment, for members of the public, on the substance of her findings regarding the initiative petition. City Attorney Diane Lee said essentially the particul air- measure regarding "Permanent _ Route Blockages" was not the proper subject of .en initiative because it dealt with an area of traffic control which was considered to have been preempted by the legislature. The particular area of barriers was deemed preempted in the Rumford. case. In 1982, the Council_ was faced with a difficult decision regarding -the Rumford case and what to do with existing barriers About the time: the City would have had.. to make a deci- sion, the legislature amended the California Vehicle > Code 'to authorize- City Councils only to adopt regulations. regarding 5.9 7 9 6/24/85: s Corrected 9/10/85 the particular. area. When it was an area of statewide concern, it was up to the state to decide how a particular power it had was to be delegated. In the subject case, it was delegated only to City Councils, which was why it was not the proper subject of an ini- tiative. Mayor Levy clarified the Rumford casewas the one involving bar- riers in Berkeley. He asked for comment on the possibility of an advisory vote and what it implied. Ms. Lee said the Council could, at' its option, place any matter on the ballot as an advisory measure. The distinction between an advisory measure and a measure which was the proper subject of an initiative, where the Council either adopted the proposal or was compelled to place on the ballot was that an advisory measure gave the Council advice, but it was not binding. A true initiative measure adopted by the people would be binding not only on the Council but on future Councils unless amended by the people. Mayor Levy clarified that the barrier issue was appropriate for an advisory measure. Ms. Lee said the permanent route blockages could be an appropriate advisory measure. Councilmember Fletcher asked about the sentence an advisory elec- tion shall not be permitted to be consolidated with an election if the ballots capacity would be exceeded because of the addition of the advisory election." She asked if the advisory measure would exceed the ballot. City Clerk Ann Tanner replied that it would not exceed the ballot capacity. Councilmember Woolley asked If the Council decided to put the initiative on the ballot and i t passed, would the law be valid. Ms. Lee said not in her opinion. Lois Johnson, 230 Sequoia Avenue, said the Council had before them a citizens' initiative petition signed by the required number of registered voters in the manner prescribed by law. The City Charter of Palo Alto as well as the California Election Code offer two choices of action --make the initiative into 1 a\e, or put it on the ballot for the next scheduled election. Any other course of action must be considered pol it;cal--not legal, not legislative. To deny any electorate the right to petition was a dangerous act. Saving in effect "we know better than you what is best for every- one" was a dangerous concept in any society, at any level of gov- ernment. In the United States, such action .violated the guaran- teed rights of the people under the First Amendment of the Consti- tution of the United States. She urged that Council consider the serious consequences of a denial of the right of every person to be heard whether it be at the polls on the streets, or through the printed word. She requested that either of the prescribed courses of action be taken for the i ni ti eti ve presented to _. the Council. She urged that Council not violate the mandate given to each when =elected to represent all of the people. The initiative said to everyone that there were citizens who did not agree with the actions taken by those elected ,officials who were supposed to represent everyone. If . one initiative was denied on.,: any grounds others would also be denied. A dangerous precedent was set --one that could not betolerated since it could eventually ; lead to the dissolution of society itself -=a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Howard Burnside, an attorney representing the Citizens Against Barriers, 2211 park Boulevard, disagreed with the City Attorney's interpretation of the law. The opinion before the Council was based primarily on Mervrnne v. Acker and on Section 21101 of the California Vehicle eTa. Mervynne = v. Acker concerned the delega- tion of power over parking meter traffic regulation subject to state approval of ordinances respecting state highways, but did not give a general, unrestricted control of parking meters to cities. In other words, in that case, they were concerned with the reservation of a power to the state. Therefore, the city in that case, acted as an administrative arm of the state, which was not the case in Palo Alto. The Rumford case, which went to the Supreme Court, was decided on a point tliat was immaterial in Palo Alto which had to do with the approval; of traffic regulations by the transport division. Section 21101 of the California Vehicle Code said i n the . subject area "local authorities for those high- ways under their jurisdiction may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution on the following matters: (f) prohibiting entry to or exit from or both from any street by means of islands, curbs, traffic barriers, or other roadway design features to implement the circulation element of a general plan." There was no reservation of authority in that statute to the state so that the Council was dealing with a legislative matter not an administrative natter, as Council was being advised. He offered to debate the issue at any tl.me on a few hours' notice. Council had to know it was not dealing with the implementation of the circulation element of a general plan. He went back four years and pointed out what the barrier situation was represented to the Council to be: Closure of Park Boulevard was strongly advocated by the Evergreen Park Neighborhood Association. However, staff could not endorse the action and strongly believed Park Boulevard should continue to serve its function as designated in the Comprehensive Plan. He said staff did not agree with the action insofar as it might be an implementation of a circulation plan which it was not. There was every reason why the matter should be submitted to the voters to decide whether there should be barriers. If Council wanted to treat the matter as advisory, it was fine, but the people should be given a shot. Raymond Chamberlin, 3444 Greer Road, did not understand what the citizens in support of the initiative were supposed to do. He believed he spoke to deaf ears on the Council and to minds that did not wish to analyze the law. The City Charter permitted two options --to pass the ordinance into law, or . put it on the ballot for the next election. Some City Councils refused both options on the basis that; an ordinance would be legally invalid if voted into law or could not become law by a vote of the local electorate. There were cases where it was true, but usually such bodies came under the mandate of the Court in such a situation. he said in. the 1984 case of Yost v. The as in Santa Barbara, which dealt with zoning under the Coastal Act, while the matter dealt with a referendum rather than an initiative, he believed it covered the same basic principles. The judge pointed out that in matters of general statewide concern, the: state may preempt local regulation, however, the state regulation of a matter did not necessarily preempt the power of local voters to act through initiative and/or referendum. The judge. -anent on further to state it was not a City Clerk's function to determine whether a proposed referendum wool d be valid if enacted. The quests on may involve difficult legal issues that only a court could determine. The ` right to propose referendum measures _ could not properly be impeded by a decision of a ministerial officer even if supported by the advice of the City Attorney that the subject was not appropriate : for submission to the voters. ` He researched 27 cases -:Which were challenged in the courts, 22 of which were challenged before going on the ballot. His research showed a previous overemphasis on stopping thiflgs from going to the ballot where they should not have been. He did not believe the City Courrc i ` . should keep the traffic barrier ordinance off the ballot. The people should he allowed to speak and it could be judged later if someone believed it was invalid. Mayor Levy believed in the -right of the public to be heard and • believed in the .concept of initiative even though he • recogni zed the deficien-ties -which existed in the. initiative process. --He . believed the advice Council received from the City- Attorney -was satisfactory and he had a lot of --confidence in her. He agreed the initiative was not the proper subject of- a City-wide vote, but believed it -.was th.e proper.- - subject_ for an advisory -.vote. As a representative,. he - b -el i eyed. an advisory vote would have the. same effect as a -directly acted- upon ordinance. He believed the present Council, or- any succeeding Counc i 1 , hay. i n.g. heard from the public on an advisory vote would act as the public wished. MOTION: Mayor) Levy -moved, seconded by Klein, that - -the -City Council: I. Reject the initiative petition and not adopt the proposed ordinance; and 2. Place on the ballot for November 5, 1985, an Advisory Measure which incorporates the language of the initiative petition and change the first line, which shall read: We the people of the City of Palo Alto do advise our City Council to adopt the following ordinance for the following reasons:. Counc i l member Fletcher opposed the motion. She remembered the previous precedent under a previous City Attorney whereby a multi- family structure ',.planned to build a parking deck and the surround- ing neighbors were opposed and started a petition drive. The then City Attorney had a similar ruling to the one Council just received. There was similar surprise and outrage in the communi- ty, but it was the legal decision. She heard of other legal deci- sions since that time which dealt with similar subjects, so the opinion Council received was not so outrageous. She opposed the motion because, in effect, it would become binding. How could_ the City :`Council disregard a majority vote of the people, she asked. She opposed putting the matter on the ballot even as an advisory vote because it was contrary to two City policies in the Comprehensive Plan .i n that it took away the Council's option to protect neighborhoods from through traffic and it prevented the Council from establishing a network of bicycle boulevards. The City had one bicycle boulevard in effect and directed its Bicycle e Advisory Committee to expand that network and recommend where it would be appropriate. Most important to her_. was the effect of Willow Road if the City could not have a barrier , at El Camino and Alcoa Street. The City Council unanimously voted to have a barrier to protect traffic from -crossing, El Camino onto Palo Alto Avenue. Recently, the Downtown Study COrsmittee came up with a similar point that it was crucial to the preservation of the downtown area to not allow traffic to cross at Alma Street. There: was no other way to prevent it other than a barrier. She was unwilling to take a chance and have the possibility become a reality. It would have a horrendous effect, not only on the downtown area, but throughout Palo Altd The next thing would be an Alma Expressway as was proposed years ago. She was unalterably opposed to the concept of the initiative as well as to putting it on the ballot as an advisory vote Counci 1 member Witherspoon agreed with Mayor Levy that Council abided by ; the rulings provided by the City Attorney. She was reluctant to have an advisoryvote that would in effect tell the Council to change the Municipal Code. She agreed she wanted to hear from the entire City on the general, subject of traffic bar- riers because Palo Alto basically . had special interest neighbor- hood groups request barriers for their neighborhoods, and it was hard to get an overall picture of how evaryOne else .,felt when only addressed piecemeal by one neighborhood after another. Her phi = osophy would be : to use permanent route blockages : only as a last resort rather than as a first resort which was what ' neighborhoods' requested. Short ' of: ' a blinding inspiration of wording on her parts she was in .a dilemma. Councilmember Klein asked if the City Aetorney had any problem with the wording of the motion. Ms. Lee found no legal problems with the language. Councilmember Klein agreed with many of the comments of Coenc11- member Fletcher. The initiative process was not unlimited, it was ,not in the Constitution of the United States, and it had some drawbacks, but generally, he believed its use should be encouraged because it promoted citizen interest and created a government which stayed more on its toes. He asked 1f a specific motion was needed to reject the idea of putting the initiative petition on the ballot. Ms. Lee said yes. Councilmember Klein clarified it was not presently contained in the motion. Mayor Levy said he did not =realize rejecting the initiative peti- tion needed to be included, but it was his intention. MAKER AND SECOND STATED FIRST PART OF NOTION WAS TO REJECT THE INITIATIVE PETITION AND NOT ADOPT THE ORDINANCE Councilmember Klein believed the initiative petition and the ordi- nance was 'ne of the most remarkably wrong pieces of legislation he had seen since he was o.n the Council and it would be deleteri- ous to the community. He believed it went far beyond some of the things discussed in Evergreen Park. He could not be more strenu- ously opposed. He believed it was bad legislation, and intended to oppose it as strenuously as possible if it appeared on the bal- lot. The matter should be an advisory measure on the ballot to clear the air. Many expressions were heard and people always claimed they knew where the community sentiment was. It was a good idea to see what the silent majority was, and an advisory measure was the best way to do it because he would not agree to put something on the ballot which the City Attorney said was basically illegal. He believed Council should follow the City Attorney's advice_ unless it was an extraordinary situation where it would somehow appear the Council clearly did not agree. He did not believethe situation was anywhere near that, and ' he was per- suaded by Ms. Lee's reasoning that she was correct, and he was not troubled by it. Council needed toe be cognizant of the fact that many citizens believed the issue should be on the ballot. He stressed that he regarded it as an advisory measure which meant it was not quite the same thing as if it were a. proper ordinance. The electorate should be allowed to speak and he was confident that when the implications of the proposal were known throughout the community, the matter would be overwhelmingly rejected, which would be beneficial to the community. Council could then move on to judge each „neighborhood's traffic problems on a case -by -case basis, and if barriers were appropriate, they would be used; and, if they were not appropriate, they would not be used. An emotion- al side issue would be created if an advisory measure . were. not on the ballots and he did not want to have the issue of barriers con- fused with supposed issues of first amendment rights and things . of that nature. He supported the motion. Vice Mayor Cobb said Councilmember Klein was eloquent and he iden- tified with everything he said. Palo Alto had one of the finest City Attorneys in the State of California, and he had an enormous regard for her professional skills and 'expertise. He was abso- lutely compelled to follow. her advice because it was consistently accurate and good advice . which served the Council well. It was his way of maki ng a oempl invent that he believed was wel 1 deserved and was why the Council Must take Ms. Lee's advice and interpret the laws as she interpreted them. With regard to the comment that it was a political act not to put the initiative on: the ballot, he believed the easiest cop out , in the world was to stick it on the i 'ballot -and have someone else worry about it. There was no circum- stance where he would ever vote to permit Willow Road to be con nected through to Alma Street. An advisory measure would tell Council- a lot about barriers, but he believed -it would lose big because there were so many neighborhoods with a major stake in having soma kind of traffic protection Council learned it must be very cautious before installing barriers, and there were better ways to solve most traffic problems with some exceptions, lie could not overlook the fact that 2,600 people signed the petition and he believed they needed to have a chance to have those views presented to the electorate, but he must do it in an advisory way. because be could not go against the advice -of the City Attorney whose advice was so consistently good and that he respected so highly. Councilmember Bechtel asked how the measure would appear on the ballot. Ms. Lee said as she drafted the measure.on the preceding matter, she would draft the measure in the form of a question. It would repeat parts of the language of the particular matter, but in addition, the whole ordinance would be in the ballot pamphlet ver- batim. The measure would be a question summarizing the ordinance, and the ordinance, for the information of the voters, would be reproduced verbatim in the ballot pamphlet. Councilmember Bechtel asked if the makers of the motion were com- fortable with all of the language. Mayor Levy believed the amendment or repeal might not apply to an advisory measure. Ms. Lee said that was correct. Mayor Levy assumed that when the City Attorney drafted the measure, she would revise the language as necessary to make it consistent with an advisory vote. Ms. Lee said she would. She would probably not have 1U.11.050 and 10.11.060. Everything else would probably stay in terms of what Council would receive back. Council would get a chance to see the matter again on July 8, but the general sense would be as it was. Mayor Levy said the desire of the motion was that Council put before the public as close as possible to the exact language evi- dent in the petitions. Councilmember Bechtel supported the first part of the motion to reject the initiative petition and not adopt the ordinance. She absolutely respected the City Attorney's opinion. When Council received petitions circulated by citizens of Palo Alto, Council listened to those people. She was willing to support putting the matter on as -an advisory measure, but she would campaign against it. She did not believe it was appropriate and she would not sup- port an out : and out ban of barriers throughout Palo Alto. They were appropriate in some special circumst`nces as was seen in some special neighborhoods; namely, all along EmbartuderoRoad, . in the Park Boulevard - neighborhood, and in the College Terrace neighbor- hood wher,, they worked hard to eliminate through traffic. It was the throuh traffic which bothered the single-family residential neighborhoods. Councilmember Woolley said based on the C l ty Attorney ` s answer to her . question, she believed that while the initiative was a basic and valued right of their system of government, the Council would commit a greater inj Usti ce to put it on the ; ballot than to not put it on the ballot. She bel ieVed it, would be uoigst to the sup- porters and. believed' they would tend to wage a hard campaign . and would put a lot of effort into it. It would be unjust„to the voters ` because Council was asking them to seriously con de . how ee they voted. It was unjust because if it passed, it wuuld appear, certain that it would be declared not to be val i d, It did not seem appropriate to ask citizens to vote on something which would then be declared invalid. She would, however, like to know what the majority of the voters felt on the issue. Therefore; she was willing to support some other method of getting the voters will known to the Council. It occurred to her that perhaps Council should put on the ballot the basis for its decisions when it con- sidered barriers; i.e., a statement in the Comprehensive Plan which said Council should protect residential neighborhoods from traffic and especially commuter traffic. She was not sure it would satisfy the citizens who took up the initiative nor would it be what the people who signed the petition wanted on the ballot. Councilmember Renzel said the barrier people said they would con- test the City Attorney's ruling with respect to whether it was an appropriate matter for an initiative. If they contested it and Council voted to put an advisory measure on the ballot which was identical, would both go on the ballot. Ms. Lee said it would be up to a court to decide. If a court believed it was confusing, they would be agreeable to take the advisory one off. With the timing element, the power of anyone to act on putting on or taking anything off was dependent upon print- ing schedules because once the ballot was printed, the power to change anything was fairly well impeded. Couneilmember Renzel joined her colleagues who supported the City Attorney for her fine work, and respected Ms. Lee's opinion, as strongly as she felt about initiative, referendum, and recall. Important rights were reserved to the public and Council must be certain of its advice if it did not accept such an initiative petition. Council was provided a sound legal analysis by the City Attorney, andshe supported the motion. In one respect she agreed with her colleagues the advisory vote would be overwhelmingly defeated because there were so many citizens in Palo Alto whe benefited from the protection from through traffic. On the other hand, she was concerned that Council would not have a lot of information at the end of an advisory vote if the public knew it had no binding effect on the Council. She supported the advisory. measure as it offered some response to the citizens who believed they had the right to initiate the subject. Councilmember Sutorius asked if Ms. Lee or any of her staff had an opportunity to speak with initiative proponents at the time the proposed initiative was framed or prior to its publication of cir- culation. M. Lee advised Lois Johnson in March that she had serious con- cerns about the validity of the measure, and provided her with some cases on the issue. She believed her staff discussed the matter with Mr. Burnside and provided him with copies of the cases. About the time of the publ i cdti ova of the notice of intent to circulate, she had a telephone conversation with'Mr. Chamberlin and gave him the cases on which she relied and advised him of her opinion. Councilmember Sutori us said potentially some members of the public formed, or were in the process of forming, an impression that the advice from the City Attorney to the City Council was "out of the blue" and took people by surprise. He pointed out that the con- tentions _ involved in the legal matter .:were not new expressions between staff and the proponents. The proponents stated their. position, but he- did not :want -an :. impression left that no communi- cation occurred at an early :stage in. the .process..: He supported the motion He shared the concerns expressed_ by Councilmember Renzel that the CIO probably would : not :_learn enough out of the advisory measure because of its nature. .It would have some Strong; opposition including members of the Council And as. a - result, he believed Council would get confused signals, regardless of whether it passed or failed, the public was interested in the subject, and expressed that interest by signing the petitions, but he did not believe the outcome would be clear because whatever the.. result, the next situation would cite the outcome of the election as a justification for someone's proposal to put in, pull out or change. Councilmember Renze1 said each time the present Council or past Councils considered barriers, there were long public processes and everyone was heard many times. It was not a decision Council made without tremendous public input. The systems included a lot of public participation and she did not believe Council could be faulted for not listening to people with respect to the issues. Mayor Levy thanked his colleagues for the discussion and said it reflected his views. He concurred with his colleagues who ob- jected and disagreed with the substance of the advisory initiative to go on the ballot, and believed Councilmember Fletcher eloquent- ly outlined many reasons why the initiative was poor public policy. He had a high regard for the voters of Palo Alto and believed the Council would get a reasonably clear reading of what the voters of Palo Alto felt about the use of barriers as a broad public policy. He did not believe the voters would say barriers were wrong in all cases, so it would not tell the Council whether a barrier should be placed at the corner of "Newell and Walnut." It would determine whether the citizens of Palo Alto believed bar- riers were an acceptable public policy, While he believed the public should be heard, he personally would not support it on the ballot, FIRST PART OF MOTION TO REJECT THE INITIATIVE PASSED unanimous- ly. SECOND PART OF MOTION REGARDING ADVISORY MEASURE PASSED by a vote of 8-1, Fletcher voting "no." ITEM #21-A ` (OLD ITEM 5-M), CITY AUDITOR PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 10'85-86 BUDGET City Auditor Mike Northrup pointed out that the Schedule of Audits listed on Attachment -A accounted for approximately 85 percent of the work performed by the City Auditor's office. The remaining 15 percent of all work represented either Council or management requested audits which might occur during the year or unannounced audits not as yet scheduled. Councilmember Bechtel said the F&PW Committee reviewed the 1985-86 audit plan with Mr. Northrup and applauded him for his plan and excellent work so far. MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel for the ,Finance and Public Works Committee moved approval of the City. Auditor Plan for Fiscal Year 1985-86 Budget. MOTION MISSED unanimously, ITEM f21-8 (OLD ITEM 5-0)1 ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT PoticY IT MIwoR� City Manager Sill loner said Council instructed staff to return with an annual investment, policy for review during the' budget process. CouncilMember Bechtel said the statement provided for a safe and conservative investment policy, *MOW: COancilmember Bechtel for the Finance, and public works Committee moved adoption of the statement of 1 nrestment policy with minor adjoitments by Staff. Mayor Leay had difficulty with the goal that the val ue of the portfolio exceed y% percent of the cost basis of the portfolio. The City automatically valued that portion of the portfolio which was one year at the cost or maturity basis regardless of the defacto market value because it was so short-term and would mature without any intention of selling it. Therefore, the standard that the portfolio always be 95 percent of the cost basis or whatever was a standard that should only apply to that portion of the port- folio to which a market value was given and which was over one year. He believed it would be more clear to have a. standard which related to that portion of the portfolio which was over one year and that standard could be 90, 92, or 95 percent. Director of Finance Mark Harris said the standard was proposed to give Council some sense of what the City could essentially. cash out on any given day and have in hand if the City needed, or desired, to liquidate the portfolio for whatever reasons. A $70 million portfolio meant something in terms of liquidating and how much cash could . be retrieved. It was important to look at the entire portfolio not just one portion of it. 1i was true that staff said anything maturing within a year would just be valued at its cost basis, but the amount of the portfolio which matured in a year could fluctuate because the City's current standard was 50 percent under two years' maturity, and the rest longer. He believed the standard protected the City from fluctuations without segmenting the portfolio into long-term versus short-term. Staff accomplished the same thing but provided Council with an overall target rather than just looking at one element of the portfolio that could change from month to month for whatever reasons Mayor Levy said he had a problem with it because there was an inconsistency since the City did not know the market value of that portion of the portfolio which was under a year. The proposed standard. did not real ly get. at what staff was trying to accom- plish. He requested that staff review the standard the next time it returned to Council because he believed it mislead Council to include the under one year part of the portfolio with an arbitrary valuation connected to it. On page 3, the investment strategy. dealt with yield .and there were three items connected to yield two of which were appropriate and one which was not. < The second and third items were appropriate, "earn more than the yield provided by LAIF," because - the City could always put its money into LAIF., which was the local governments portfolio. Regarding "_Long term basis to exceed the CPI by two percent or by some figure," if the City could accomplish it: it was 1auditory. "To maintain a yield in excess of 10 percent" was arbitrary and related to what prevailing outside interest rates -►here. Up to that time, interest rates were in excess of 10 percent and the City, had no trouble securing a 10 percent return without taking arty risks, but if interest rates dropped to a point where it would lee an inappropriate risk for the City to achieve over 10 percentle then the City was in trouble. Since it was a strategy for 1985-86 and the appropriate outside market influences were unknown, , to maintain that yield as a goal was dangerous. Staff would not take inappropriate risks and would simply look at the other . two items which would relate to the outside market factors and would focus more on theta. Since that was the case, he preferred abolishing item 1 and let _items 2 and 3 under yield stand as the City's goals for 198.5-8b e AMENDMENT: 'layerLevy moved, seconded by Klein, ,, to delete-item #11 wader Yield. Councdlmeraber Bechtel asked staff to comment. Mr. Harris believed it was important for hit; and Gordon Ford, when discussing a . strategy, to see- what a + uld be achieved. Staff believed, given current market conditions' -and= the fact that over two-thirds of the City's portfolio was locked up ,,more than a year, that the type of return to be earned should, be specified. 'It was also a planning tool. They were discussing a roughly $7O million portfolio which earned 10 percent. If staff found the policy to be inappropriate and unachievable, Council would see in the monthly report that staff reduced the target to an appropriate level or made a recommendation in the change of the strategy. It could be changed at any given date. Staff notified Council of exceptions in thepast and would continue to do so in the future. To not have a target did everyone a disservice in his opinion. It was a specific goal to try and achieve. Councilmember Bechtel said the F&PW Committee asked the same question and Mr. Harris pointed out that it was an investment strategy for the City for 1985-86, not a forever plan. He also pointed out the City had a larger percentage where the interest rate being earned was known so it was easy to predict. If the yield was changed, one might question the present yield on LAIF. In talking to the Finance Director of the City of Los Altos, they received 11.5 percent because they had some things tied up in the long-term markets that had not responded as much to the drops. All of the City's money could not be put into LAIF because it had a $5 million cap. At first she was persuaded by Mayor Levy's comments, but as she listened she was reminded, it was discussed at the Committee level, and she believed the strategy was comfortable and conservative and not something that would put the City at risk. Mayor Levy asked what the City received for short-term investments of one year or less. Financial Planning Administrator Gordon Ford said current invest- ments yielded somewhere in the eight percents. As pointed out by Mr. Harris, probably 80 percent of the City's money was locked up with what the City :would receive in interest rates .in excess of 10 percent. Staff believed it could achieve the 10 percent objective comfortably. Councilmember Sutori us said when the matter was discussed at the Committee level, the Committee was cognizant of changes in the financial market and asked questions directly related to the reasonability as a goal for the moment. The Committee was satis- fied with the responses that it was a goal staff was willing ,to be measured against. As pointed out by Mr. Harris, Council would be posted on significant changes on a monthly basis and would have the opportunity to modify. The City's interest income was a significant contribution to the budget, and there must be a way to estimate it. One way of doing so was to look at it as a percen- tage of the investment portfolio. He believed it was reasonable since the City needed to arrive at the number for budgeting pur- poses. AMENDMENT FAILED by a vote •f 2-7, LeV,y „ Renzei voting "aye. MOTION PASSED unanimously. ADJOURNMENT: Council adjourned at 11:55 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: