Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-03-22 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUTES' CITY OF PALO ALTO Special Meeting Monday, March ?2, 1982 ITEM Interview of Candidates Seeking Appoint- ment to the Architectural Review Board Special Meeting Monday, March 22, 1982 The. City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fazzino, Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Renzel, Witherspoon - ABSENT: Eyerly The purpose of the meeting was to interview applicants for two vacancies on the Architectural Review Board: For Northway or Sutorius' Term 6:00 p.m. 7:10 p.m. 6:50 p.m. Jocelyn Baum Anthony Carrasco Virgil Carter For Northway's Term ending 9/30/82 6:30 p.m. Naphtali Knox 6:40 p.m. Jonathan Schink For Sutorius' Term ending 9/30/84 6:10 p.m. Ronald Hall 7:00 p.m. Roger Kohler 6:20 p.m. Richard Pennington ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. APPROVED: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ITEM CITY PALO ALTO Regular Meeting Monday, March 22, 1982 Oral Communications 1 7 9 9 Consent Calendar 1 7 9 9 Referral 1 7 9 9 Seismic Hazards Reduction Program Referral to 1 7 9 9 -Policy and Procedures Committee Action 1 8 0 0 Resolution re Conflict of Interest 1 8 0 0 Ordinance re -,Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance 1 8 0 0 Amendments (2nd Reading) Painting Exterior of Civic Center 1 8 0 0 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions 1 8 0 0 Public Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendations 1 8 0 1 - re a Specific Plan .for the Terman Middle School Site at 055 Arastradero Road Planning Commission Recommendation re Appeal of 1 8 0 9 Robert O. Roberts from the Decision of the Acting Zoni ng Admi-ni st rator Historic Resources hoard Recommendation re Request 1 8 1 2 for Delay of an Issuance of a Demolition Permit City Clerk Request for Council Support for AB 2400 1 8 1 4 (Sher/Stirling) - All Mail Ballot Election Request of Councilmembers Witherspoon and 1 8 1 4 Levy re Loans of City Funds ,Request of Counc1leeemoers Fletcher and Levy re 1 8 1 6 Control of Concealable Small Pistols and Revolvers 1 7 9 7 3/22/82 Request of Counci lmeinber Witherspoon re Santa Clara Valley Medical Center Request of Counci lmembers Renzel and Levy to Adjourn Meeting in Memory of Ethel Anderson Adjournment 1 8 2 8 1 8 2 8 1 .8 2 8 l 7 913 3/22/82 Regular Meeting Monday, March 22, 1982 1 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:30 p.m., with Vice Mayor Bechtel presiding. PRESENT: Bechtel, Cobb, Fazzi no, Fl etcher, Klein , Levy, Renzel , Witherspoon ABSENT . Eyerly ORAL COMMUNICATCOMMUNICATIONS 1. Dr. Harvey K. Roth, 3422 Kenneth Drive, Architectural Review Board (ARS) ca^di date, i ntroduced himself to the Council. 2. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, said it had come to his attention that 1 ett.ers were going out from Counci imembers which contai ned misstatements with regard to Measure A. He realized that no Counciimember would want to be thought of as misleading or misinforming the public or making an intentional misstatement of fact. Those who had not attended the Civic League debate might not be aware of some of the misstatements; and, he thought it would be appropriate to offer the corrections in the event a Counci lmember might wish to send out a correcting letter before, rather than after, the election. He said it had been said that the area to be resolved was in Commercial for 60 years which was false; it was in M-1 for more than 50 of those years. He said it was rezoned less than 10 years ago--the-difference was that h-1 had a floor area ratio of 1, and CC had a floor area ratio of 3; therefore, three times the density was allowed. Further, there was another misstatement that the nei ghbors opposed the rezoni ng to resi denti al in 19817. He read excerpts from the Planning Commission minutes of December 12, 1980 which indicated wi despread support from the nei ghbors. He sa& d there was tel k . about a 2% to 4% increase i n traffic which was based on 44,000 trips per . day. There was not ..a single street i n Palo Alto that carried over 40,000 cars —not even El Cami no Real. He said that on just one street --Park Boulevard -a very conservati ve City staff estimate said there would be a 20% increase in traffic on that street. ' Regarding whether the issue was fair to the developer , he was fed up with hearing about what was fair to the devel oper--he was i nterested i n what was fair to the. people. He hoped when the citizens voted, they would be fair to the public first CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Counci lmember Fl etcher moved, seconded by F azzi no, approval of the Consent Calendar. Referral SEISMIC HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM REFERRAL TG POLICY AND Staff recommends that the staff. report and proposed ordinance be referred . to the Policy and Procedures, Committee for consideration on April 20, 1982. The -owners of each property identified by staff as being affected by the ordi Dance will receive a copy of the staff repnrt and attached ordinance three weeks prior to the Policy and, Procedures Committee meeting. 1 7 9 9 3/22/82 RESOLUTION RE CONFLICT OF INTEREST The City Attorney and City Clerk recommend approval of the Resol Fiti on. RESOLUTION 6012 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADOPTING DESIGNATED POSITIONS FOR THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR DESIGNATED POSITIONS AS REQUIRED , BY SECTION 2.09.010 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 5738" ORDINANCE RE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS (2nd 21 For the second reading, several changes have been made in the pro- posed amendments to the zoning and subdivision ordinances. The changes reflect the Council's decisions of March 8, 1982. 1. Proposed changes regarding a cottage zone and the reduction of. the height limit for mixed residential and commercial uses in the CN District have been eliminated; these items were con- tinued. 2. Sections 9-14 have been added in accordance with the Counci 1 ',s preference for staff's "Alternate A" regarding temporary parking. Section 1€.83.060(d)(1) has been amended to state that minimum landscaping may be required of temporary parking facilities. 3. Section 18.90.040 has been amended to state that variances may be recorded at the request of the recipient of the variance or the City. ORDINANCE 3340 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE ZONING CODE (TITLE 18) AND THE SUBDIVISION CODE (TITLE 21) REGARDING CHANGES IN DEFINITIONS, CHANGES IN PERMITTED AND CON- DITIONAL USES IN ZONES, CHANGES IN THE OS ZONE, REORGANIZATION OF PARKING REGULATIONS, ACCESS TO FLAG LOTS, ETC." (1st reading 3/8, as amended, Passed 9-0) PAINTING EXTERIOR OF CIVIC CENTER (CMR:I63:2) Staff recommends: 1. Council award the contract to Tollner Painting, Inc. and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract for the amount of $92,885. 2. Staff be authorized to execute change orders to the contract. of up to $20,000. AWARD OF CONTRACT - Toilner Painting, Inc. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent, Renzei voting the second part of Ordinance No. 3340. AGENDA CHANGES. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS Councilmember Witherspoon added Item 11, the end of the agenda. o" on Family Medical Center, 1 8-0 0 3/22/82 PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS RE A SPECIFIC T 5b5 'CRASTRADTRU RUAU Vice Mayor Bechtel declared the public hearing open-, and deferred to the Chairperson of the Planning Commission for comments on the Terman Specific Plan. Planning Commission Chairperson Jean McCown-Hawkes commented that the only significant modification made on the Specific Plan by the Planning Commission related to the alteration of the provisions for a sound and noise buffer between the site and the housing on Ramona Avenue which was adjacent to the site. Those changes were to the berm to the wall in response to very specific requests from the neighbors most i mmedi.ately affected. She said the Planning Commission understood that the Jewish Community Center (JCC) was amenable to the change, and was discussed after the Terman Working Group had 'made its recommendations of the "berm" or ' buffer con- cept. She thought the desire was apparent that everyone wanted to provide whatever the appropriate Anechanism was to adequately buffer those homes from the impact of noise and lights coming from the parking which would occur immediately adjacent to those homes. At the same time, the Planning Commission was concerned about leaving sufficient flexibility for the architects and planners of the site so that the most compatible solution -could be achieved. She said that ,as a result, the Planning Commission changes included a recommendation that rather than a landscape berm, it be a solid wall. The Planning Commission left i n the text the languag which allowed the JCC to propose an alternative desi gn, if that were determined to be more appropriate, so long as it was not disapproved by more than 25% of the housing immediately adjacent to .the site on Ramona Avenue. She commented that the draft, which was originally discussed, included a concept which allowed those neighbors the ability to comment or veto the design. The Planning Commi ssi on arrived at a provisi on that the wall design or "berm" design shall be deemed acceptable if it was not disapproved by more than 25% of the households. She said the concept was to ensure that if people remained silent and took no position one way or the other, they would not be in a position to veto because they would actually have to speak- up and disapprove the design. Councilmember Klein asked about the status of the lease negotia- tions beteen the City and the JCC. City Manager Bill Zaner responded that the negotiations were still in progress. lie said that the JCC had a draft of the lease and were in the process of reviewing i t . Counci lmember Klein said he understood that a draft had been sub- mitted to the JCC at the beginning of the year, and urged that staff yet the JCC to move ahead a little faster. He was concerned about the language regarding the vote of the neighbors on some of the designs. While he was sympathetic .t.o the neighbors' concerns, he was worried - about what would ` happF n i f three neighbors said "no" to a design of the wall. He asked if, in the -worst situa- tion, that mould create a stalemate situation, or if the City had a mechanism by which to get out of a stalemate. Director of = Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber responded that under the plan, the City would end_ up in a negotia- tion situation and would have to attempt to overcome it. haphtal i Knox consultant, commented that,the vote was only on an alternative. He said the wall was imbedded into the Specific Plan and the `JCC had the option to offer an al ternati ve design of the wall. In that case, not knowing what the solution was, a .mecha- nism was offered that, the neighbors who immediately adjoined that buffer could have the chance to review it. He said it was stated before that 75% had to affirmatively-- approve the change and now it said that 25% had to respond negatively. 18 0 2 3/22/82 Councilmember Klein clarified that he was referring to the sen- tence which was added which stated "that design of the wall shall be reviewed by the residents...and be deemed acceptable if not disapproved by more than 25%." He hypothesized a situation where ten different designs were submitted and the neighbors still said no. He asked what the City's mechanism would be to get a solu- tion. Usually the mechanism for getting a solution was a final decision -making body and usually it was the .City Council that said yes or no. He was concerned that a procedure like that was not included and the possibility of a deadlock existed. Mr. Schreiber suggested that language could be added that in the event of a stalemate, those designs most acceptable to the neigh- bors could be made available to the City Council for resolution. Councilmember Levy said he was unclear about who was paying for what improvements to the property. Mr. Schreiber responded that there was a long list of improve- ments. He said the wall and the road were the City's responsi- bility, and that the resolution of some of the other improvements were part of the lease negotiations. Mr. Zaner said that the parking lot, the wall and access dri veway were the City's responsibility and were to be improved by the City out of its funds. Councilmember Levy asked if that meant all of the parking, including the parking that was essentially community center parking, and the parking that was essentially housing parking. Supervising Engineer, Jim Harrington said that was correct except for that required by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation. Councilmember Levy asked about the rationale for the parking related to the community center and the wall being. paid for by the City. Mr. Knox said that it was not possible4o o ferret out what parking was. -used by the JCC foe its clientele and What would be used by citizens going to City programs. He said the parking areas were clustered in one location, and that was taken into account in the initial discussions between the City and the JCC. -He said Jean Diaz had indicated that in the negotiations with the JCC as to the lease. payments to the City, they would take into account that the City was expending funds on a start-up basis initially to take care of the wall and the parking area. Councilmember Levy said he could not see the wall being part of _anything but the JCC, and asked what the. rationale was for the City's paying for it. Further, he asked for some rough estimates on the` st for the wall, road and parking.. Mr. Harrington responded that preliminarily the figures indicated that the ►wall would cost on the order of $40,000 to $50,000.. Further, staff allowed for 300 feet on the width wall --which wall was west of the site, ';and which bordered the nursery, which cost should be on the -'order of $15,000 to $20,000. He said the parking was on the order of $►140,000 to $150,000 and that . excluded areas that were needed for landscaping, which would be on the order of $70,000. He said that the elements could be separated, but for the first year's development, they were talking approximately $1.2 million. . —1---8"0 2 -- 3/22/82 Councilmember Renzel said that as she understood it, when the Council adopted the Specific Plan, essentially any subsequent details or plans that came in which complied with the particular plan would be administrative acts of approval. City Attorney Diane Lee said she did not think that was the case. She. said that part of the intention was to give the Council some flexibility• in drafting the plan. She said there would be occa- sions when there would be the application of discretion in a sub- sequent permit. 1 1 i Councilmember Renzel said that page 15 referred to the bases upon which the Greenacres. 1 resid.enta could use the pool at Terman under the JCC auspices; and, No. 4 on page 16 said that when the Gunn pool became unavailable to the City, the JCC would continue to operate the Terman pool , but the public would have access to the Terman pool during the summer. She asked if -that meant the general public or just those that qualified under the Greenacres I exemption. Mr. Knox responded that it meant the general public, and added that the language in the excerpt read by Councilmember Renzel was taken directly from the Terman Working Group agreement. Councilmember Renzel said she understood that and said it seemed unclear because all the preceding language related to the Greenacres I -access to the Terman pool. She thought clarifying language should be added in #4 at the top of page 16 to make it clear that they were talking about the general public and not just a limited group that would have access if the Gunn pool was unavailable. . Mr. Schreiber said he thought that perhaps sub -item (a) indirectly spoke to that because it said that if at least two other pools other than Terman and Gunn were operated by the City, then the use of the pool by the public would be limited to the residents of the Terman neighborhood only. Councilmember Renzel said that on Page 17, she did not understand how the mechanism under ti4lA would work. She understood that the term of the lease would be determined by how much improvements the JCC made ;=luring the first five years, She pointed out that no improvements would be made in the first five years if the City did not have a lease with terms to cover that. She asked if it was because the language on the third line from the bottom of the first paragraph said "made by the JCC" instead of "to be made by the JCC," where presumably the City would know in advance what the JCC intended to do in terms of amounts and then the lease could be set accordingly. Mr. Zaner responded that "to be made" could be inserted. Councilmember Renzel said ;hat on Page . 1€l, #4, it said "the JCC will endeavor to obtain additi onal offstreet parking for special events." She asked for examples of where that offstre-et parking would be found, Mr. Schreiber responded that the paragraph referred to the unusual once or twice a year eventwhen anticipated crowds would be large enough that parking.:at Gunn high School might be necessary. Councilmember Renzel said that Page 23 and 25 made reference to a building height that would not exceed 25. feet. She wondered if that meant building heights under the zoning code . definition or if 25 ;feet was an absolute figure. Mr. Schreiber responded that that might be another item that was never spoken to directly. He interpreted building height to be as defined in whatever codes were applicable at the time. Mr. Knox said that all the references were to the zones---RM-2 or RM-3. He thought the references to the zoning ordinance were implied. Mr. Zaner responded to Councilmember Levy's question regarding finances and said Mr. Harrington had given the Council a gross figure of $1.2 million as the first year capital cost. He reminded the Council that they were under no obligation to appro- priate those funds. He said the agreement was that funds would be included in the C. I . P, budget and in the Operating budget, and that no amount was set in order to begin the improvement of the property or to provide for its operation. The funds would be included in the budget for Council consideration; however, they competed with all other funds recommended by staff. Ms. Lee commented that in response to Councilmember Renzel's ques- tion re Page 23, #3, "the following physical factors will govern any housing development 'irrespective' of any actual zoning that would apply." She interpreted that to mean that those would be the actual restrictions that would be applied to the development of the property. Mr. Schrei ber suggested that for clarification on page 23, it read "irrespective of the actual zoning district." He said that would bring it into conformance with Page 25, under subi tear? 3. Planning Commission Chairperson Jean McCown -Hawk es added a comment on Councilmember Klein's question regarding the wall. She said the original language provided for the opposite mechanism --that the wall had to be approved by at least six of the fi rst eight houses. She said that wording came directly from the Terman Working Croup. At the Planning Commission meeting, Joe Hirsch commented on Page 20 of the minutes, that he felt :the recommenda- tion wast not wise after all because the way it was written it allowed three people to have a veto. She said discussion followed as to how the wording should be changed to avoid the problem, and Mr. -Knox suggested the wording be "subject to the disapproval of 25%." She thought the concept the Planning Commission was looking for was something that would avoid the three person veto idea that Councilmember Klein described. She did not know if the Planning Commission's language solved the problem, but the concept was to try and get around the problem by a change in the wording. She thought that any changes made by the Council that went in that direction more clearly would be consistent with what the Planning Commission was after. Coun .i l member Witherspoon asked the City Attorney to explain what process the Council would have to follow after tonight if they wanted to change anything, Ms. Lee responded that as part of the Counci 1 's enabl i ng ordinance to adopt specific plans, provisions of the Government _ Code were also added. Those provisions provided that if a legislative body made additions or changes to any proposed specific plan, those changes must be referred back to the Planning Commission for a report. She said the Planning Commission would have 40 days in which to report back to the Council. After that, the Council could adopt the plan with or without the changes if they wished. Councilmember Cobb commented- that nothing was mentioned on Page 14 that the tennis courts might have to be moved. Mr. Zaner responded that . It : was a budgetary item and the ..tennis court moving and athletic field renovation were not included in the figures quoted earlier Councilmember Cobb asked if all the costs had been looked at, and if the City had some sense of what the budget would look like in the future. 1 8 0 4 3/22/82 1 1 1 Mr. Zaner responded that staff did not have precise numbers and commented that Council had just authorized staff to engage the design firm. He said the best estimate was still that the total capital costs would be about $3;5 million. He said the first year's costs had been identified as $1.2 million. Counci lriember Cobb said that on page 23 it said "an attempt will be made to ,limit the number of structures over two stories high" which he thought was "permissive rather than obligatory" language. He asked if everyone was comfortable that the surrounding people had been given sufficient protection. Mr. Knox responded that an agreement among those who served on the Terman Working Group was that the height would not exceed 35 feet and the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) agreed that it would make every effort to minimize the number of buildings that exceed. two stories in height. Mr. Schreiber said that when the housing plan was submitted, it would need Architectural Review Board (ARB) approval as any other development would. He said it would have to be ascertained if the plan was consistent with the Specific Plan and the ARB item was something which was appeal able to the City Council; and, in the event of a major breakdown between the design of the housing development and what the neighbors want that avenue would be available. Further, he said that the PAHC was on record that it intended to work with the neighborhood in the development of the housing; and, staff was on record that .they were interested in setting _ up an ongoing process with the nei gnbors all around the site to keep them involved as the JCC, the City, and the hoasi ng moved forward so that decisions would not be made in isolation. Harry Wood, 673 Arastradero, represented his wife's nursery, Ruth Wood Nursery School. He read a letter into the record, dated March 18, 1982, written by Ruth Wood, which is on file in the City Clerk's' Office. He said it was important to note that the nursery school's play yard was only 14 feet from the roadway --the nursery school was closer to Terman than any other neighbor. Also, the nursery school would be in close proximity to people and cars even if much of the JCC operation was on the opposite side. He said there would be a greatly increased use of the pool and the ath- letic field. The a road along the nursery school property line would be the most direct access to those activities. He said that when their son attended Terman, there were a lot of traffic prob- lems related to the many cars which went to the basketball courts on his side, to the swimming pool, the entire athletic field, tennis courts, etc. Because of the problems, the principal, at that time, asked that parents, children, and students not drive in and not use "the bus drive." He said that did not help and people flooded into the area because it was the most convenient. He said that had not changed and that the particular Layout of Terman was such that the best parking, and most easily available access to the athletic field and swimming pool was on the nursery school= side of Terman, which could change sometime in the future when parking was provided in front of the school. He said that since no timetable was mentioned in the Terman Specific Plan, the Nursery School requested that they be given the same consideration as the Pomona people; and when the proposed wall along the Pomona side was installed, theirs be installed simultaneously. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, a member of the Terman Working Group, said that regarding the 35 -foot height limit, he intended that 35 feet meant 35 feet --not 35 feet to the_ .mid point of anything, but 35 feet to the peak of whatever. was built. Regarding the improve- ments to be made by the JCC, the neighbors intended that they be completed and in place at the end of the five years. He said the JCC was not particularly concerned because they -assured the neigh- bors on a number of occasions that there were a number of things that had to be done to the site , in order to make it usable for their purposes. The JCC said . they would have no problem putting 1 8 0.5 3/22/82 in $1.5 million in improvements within five years. He urged that the verb not be changed. Regarding the neighbors veto power on the wall or berm, he said the neighbors intended to be protected from noise, traffic, dirt and commotion. From listening to the neighbors for over l-1/2 years, he sensed that they would not be unreasonable and that anything which met the goal of the neigh bors' and neighborhood's protection from interference would be accepted. He did not sense that any of the neighbors were unhappy with the design of the wall as proposed, He thought the Council might wish to make some arrangements for mediating any unlikely event of deadlock, but thought the people would be reasonable. In terms of. the two story bui 1 di nge ; he said a commitment was made that every attempt would be made --and it was finalized in the agreements- thot the buildings adjacent to Fni gl i o Way would be two stories. He said that when the various layouts were looked at ,. the Palo Alto; Housing Corporation thought it was clear that two story buildings could be put in adjacent to those few homes without impacting the rest of the development or unduly tying their hands in terms of development. Regarding whether the plan could be changed administratively once it was adopted, he said that the whole purpose of the Specific Plan was to go through the ful 1 plan hearings if any Significant changes were to be made, and there would be ample opportunity for appeals and public hearings. He said that was built into the concept of the Specific Plan. He commented that he would still like .to see a statement under "Phasing City Programs" about completion of the plan, He thought a time limit was useful and he proposed tea years from the date of the acquisition of the site --or July 1, 1992. Joe Hi rsch, 4149 Georgia, a .member of the Terman Working Group, said he supported much of Bob Moss' comments. Regarding the statement made by the JCC about the completion of improvements within five years, he said the JCC clearly intended to have the improvements completed in the first five years. He said it would be determined about 15-25 years down the road when it came up for renewal so clearly there was a time when it could be determined that the,,;. improvements were made. He said no time frame was men- tioned about when the wall between the roadway and the DeWitt property Would go in and he urged that the .Council add something to the effect that the wall would be erected at the same time that any wall was erected pursuant to paragraph 7(b). He thought th&t if the work was done between the Pomona property and the Terman site, the other wall- should .be taken care of between the nursery school and the Terman roadway which led to. the at_ hl eti-c field. Regarding the report dated March 18, 1982 from Mr. Schreiber and .the modification to paragraph 7(b) of the contract that a -solid wall would be erected, it was originally drafted that a,,berm would be put up, and it Was - also stated that a buffer could be substi toted. He ,said that the Planning Commission deleted the buffer and• the -provision that the .design of the wall would have to be reviewed was inserted. He said that was never a concept that the first and primary barrier could be approved by other . people. It_ Baas now suggested that the wall was the primary barrier for sound and other purposes. He agreed with Councilmember -Klein that the sentence at, the bottom of page 2, "The design pf the: -wall shall be reviewed by the residents of the houses located 'on - th.e Terman Middy School side _of- Pomona Avenue between';Arastradero Road and tl-enbrook Drive and shall be deemed acceptable if not disapproved by more than 25 per cent of these households," was unnecessary and should be eliminated. Thus, he said the recommendation would The "a wall,- and that would -go in if no other :substitute was provided and would eliminateet-he possi bi 1 i ty ofh having it, deadlock some- where along the line. 1 1 1 8 0 6 3/222/82' Mr. Hirsch said that under subparagraph (d) on page (3), the statement that "The JCC may propose alternative designs..." also contained the "not disapproved" language. He suggested that in addition the statement include that the Pomona Avenue residents could also propose an alternative, and that "if not disapproved by others" could go in. He thought that would provide an alternative mechanism for something other than a wal 1 if necessary. 1 1 1 Counci lmember Menzel asked for clani fi c ati on about the initial lease period. Counci l member Klein clarified that the minimum period of the JCC's lease was 15 years plus an option for a 15 -year renewal. He said that i f the improvements exceeded $1 mil l ion in the first five years, the lease would be for 20 years plus a 20 -year renewal option. Yf the Improvements exceed $1.5 million, the lease would be for 25 years, plus a 25 -year renewal option. -He agreed that the understanding was that those would be improvements actually made during the first five years, and that the JCC would have to submit -receipts to the City that their improvements exceeded either the $1,000,000 or the $1.5 million figure. Councilmember Levy said that the wall- along Pomona Avenue Was because of the proximity of the homes to the buildings and , the parking lot and that the purpose of the wall was to shield Pomona Avenue .from noise and the lights of the cars around the parking lot. - He asked what_ the purpose was for the wall along the southern part of the property. Mr. Hirsch responded that that wall dealt with the nursery school, and that in fact the children could play closer to the buildings if they were in that corner of the nursery school yard. He said it was the children's play yard and it went right up to the wall or the presently existing fence. He said that the roadway and the proximity of people who could be walking very close to the children playing was the concern. Marion E. Hill, 4270 Pomona, said that their property was con- tiguous to the Terman driveway.. He said that in the process of developing the Terman Working' Plan, the Terman Working Group Report, the resi dents of the "Pomona Strip" attended the Terman Working _.Group meetings, and in fact appended themselves to the working group. He said that in the course of the various plans being presented, it was recognized by members -of, the Terman Working Group that the proximity of the music room, cafetorium, and the definite fact that they were sound boxes arid projected their sounds very easily, the entire neighborhood new pretty well what was going on there if the sound was at any level- above ambi- ence to any extent. As plans were proposed, changed and elimi- nated, how best to ,maintain the livability- of homes along the driveway which was to be : parti al ly el iminated was discussed and the berm came up anid then later the JCC. presented the idea of the sound wail. 'It seemed that that was the best of the various solu- tions. He said they lived there 365 days a year and would, be sub-.. j ected to whatever . happened i n the community center, from early in the aiorni r!g , ti 1 late in -the evening. He_ said it was absolutely vital to the residents of Pomona Avenue, to maintain the 11 yabi l i ty of their homes by having' some sound,_ protection. He said he endorsed Mr, Hirsch's suggestions and changes i_n wording, and he thought that would cl ani fy the situation. a Further, he expressed appreciation, on behalf of the Pomona Avenue _resi-dents, for the cooperation -given to them by the staff, the Terman Working Group and everyone, concerned. 1 8 0 7 3/22/82 Marilyn Norek Taketa, 755 Page Mill Road, said that one of her children had attended the Ruth Wood Nursery School and she hoped to have her daughter attend shortly. She was uncomfortable with adults being in -close proximity to the childrens' play area in a rel ati vely unsupervised situation. She said it used to be stu- dents at Terman who were in classes or supervised by their teachers. She thought the area was fairly isolated and that it was most appropriate to have a physi cal and visual barrier between adults and little children-. She commented' that there could be behavior on the other side of the fence that children should not see_ and there could be ogling that children should not be exposed to and perhaps a dangerous set-up for the children. She thought it would be most appropriate to have the wall in sooner rather than later because of the: close proximity of two areas which were not very compatible. Vice Mayor Bechtel declared the public hearing closed. MOTION: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Cobb, to refer the following changes back to the Planning Commission: 1) Amend sub- paragraph B :on Page 2 of the staff report by deleting the. entire last sentence, 2) Amend Page 20 of the Specific Plan by adding a sentence at the end of the first sentence, "this wall will be con- structed at the same time as wall described in K7(b) _below; 3) On Page 17, Paragraph (h), Subsection A, insert in the 7th line following the word "will be not less than 15 years with a longer term .depending ....'f Planning Commission _to report —back to the Council in 40 days. Councilmember Renzel asked that the City Attorney rule that the language stated that the. 35 foot height limit was ,tbsol ute. City Attorney Diane _Lee responded that her ruling related to the 35 feet and not how it was measured. The 35 feet limit was binding, but how 35 feet was measured was not addressed by that language. Councilmember Renzel said she understood that the 35 feet would be the maximum height at the highest point of the...roorn. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Renzel moved, that the building height not exceed 35 feet at the highest point. AMENDMENT FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Fletcher . said she could not find any, mention of bicycle parking. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Levy, that bicycle. parking be provided subject to the determination of the Director of Planning and Community Environment. Councilmember _ Klein pointed out that discussion of the bicycle parking was on pages 39 and 40. AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN. 1 1 Counci lmember Cobb asked staff to comment about Mr. Moss' sugges- tion re the ten-year limit on completion. Mr. Zaner responded that no limitation was included with regard to the timing of the program, and he recommended that none be included. He said staff attempted to give the Council the maximum amount of flexibility in order to weigh the program along with all the other programs in the budget. Counci lmerber Levy said he was concerned that the City had paid a lot of money and the amounts kept escalating. He calculated that the City was paying about 60% of the value of the property and getting less than 50% of the land and not necessarily the most valuable land. He_ said that was understandable but thought that the City was paying much more than its percentage pro rata share. He was concerned when he also found that the City would pay for all the parking, and for the construction of both walls. Particu- larly with regard to the walls, the City was not the ' major cause for the need. He asked if it was correct that the negotiations so far with the JCC and the Palo Alto Housing Corporation had included discussion of all elements such as roads and parking, but did not include discussion of the construction of the wall. Mr. Zaner responded that the discussions with the 'Housing Corporation and with the J -CC always included all of the improve- ment factors. He said that the proposed lease was put together in .consideration of who would do which improvements. The arrange- ments were worked out with --the Housi rig Corporation so that all three parties were aware of what parts of the improvements would be done by the City, and what improvements the other partners would do. He deferred to Mr. Knox to comment on what was dis- cussed at the working sessions themselves. Mr. Knox said that was correct. Re said it was clear from the housing standpoint that there would be no design at thi s time nor any improvements made within the housing area --that would all be done by the Housing Corporation. The fuzziness was in dealing with the Terman buildings which would be occupied by the JCC, because the JCC would use some of the buildings, the City would use some of the buildings, and there was the joint use of the parking area. He said that the JCC was not enti relay the cause of all the noise because the City would have two of the wings. He said it was simply a recognition that the parking would be jointly used and there would be control on the use of the gymnasium and the location and access. As the things were worked out, it would get muddier still as to who was parking in whose place, or whose door someone was walking through to get to whose gymnasium to use which program. Councilmember Leey said that since many of the issues were muddy, he was concerned about future negotiations related to joint costs because the City had amply .paid its share. He did not think the Council should pass the item without commenting on the fact that it was an exemplary example of extended citizen participation among numerous _ parts of the community, the result of which was excellent in his opinion. He thought the plan _ was a definite plus for Palo Alto. MOTION PASSED ,.unanimously, Eyerly absent PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE APPEAL OF -ROBERT G. ROEAR1g rROA TH OVTATTTMTX171.- -EUN FRdFLOli L1}LAHHV Al bJr11r uA W01...• "TMEMPOMPOSINW Planning Commission Chairperson Jean McCown -Hawk es said that the request was for a variance to the daylight plane requirements and side yard requirements for the property. She said that the Zoning Administrator recommended denial of the variance, and the Planning\\ Commission unanimously recommended reversal of the . Zorn ng Administrator's recommendation. She said the variance was for a continuation of a six—foot encroachment into the daylight plane, and a one —foot encroachment into the side yard. It was a large building .on a small lot which :was built in Barron Park prior to - the . annexation to the :City and, therefore, was not built in accordance with the City's regulations, She said there was an 1 O 0 9 3/22/82 - open roof or deck area on the rear of the property which was felt to be a hazardous condition by the owners because of children's access to the roof and difficulties in keeping the roof water- tight. On -der the City's regulations, the -deck or roof area could not be completely _ enc:l osed because the building was already non- conforming, The Planning Commission on recommended granting the variance to allow a partial enclosure of the space:. She said one side would have to remain an open screened area in order to make the space usable and improve the safety-, provided that the con- struction met all the City's codes and: passed a review before the. Architectural Review Board (ARB ). The Planning Commission made findings under the variance procedures that the size of the building on the small lot, the prior existing nonconformity of the building, and the zoning were exceptional and extraordinary cir- cumstances -and that it Would be.a-hardship to refuse the owner the opportunity to improve the safety situation of the property and to make use of it as a recreational space and to provide protection for, the building because of -the water damage probl em. She said the Zoning Administrator concurred with. the finding that the pro- posed variance was not detrimental to any of the adjacent prop- erties. Marilyn Norek Taketa, Attorney, 755 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto, represented the appellant, Robert Roberts. She said that the roof line already existed and a minor extension of the roof line with an encroachment into the daylight plane and side yard were being requested. The Tot was very undersized compared to other lots in the area which was a condition the owner had to work with in order to protect the safety of the children and people on the property. The apartment traditionally had allowed families with children to. l i ve there and presently there were five children in the apartment --four were teenagers and one was a toddler. There had been problems in the past because the children had no other place to play but in the apartment building. She said the streets were hazardous and very close to El Camino Real, and the children tended to go up on the sun porch and pick nuts and throw them. She said there was not much that could be done about i t , the area. was hard to supervise, and there had been complaints from the neighbors about . the nuisance which was being created. She was concerned that it was a third floor area; and the railing was very low and there was a hazard that the children could topple over. She said that Mr. Roberts would like to close the area i n as much as possible, and provide a ping pong table and other recreational facilities for the children and their parents. She ' pointed out that other apartments in the area, because of their larger size, had recreational areas for the children and the tenants, and she thought it was appropriate that all apartments should provide for families. She thought there was almost a duty on the . part of .the owners to provide the recreational areas to go along with the amenities of living in the apartment. There were problems with water damage if the area was not closed off which would pose a financial hardship and a hardship to the tenants. She said that there had not been any neighborhood opposition to the granting of the variance, and in fact, letters were submitted by all the sur- rounding neighbors which indicated support of the variance. She understood that a lot of the 'original staff opposition to the variance was that it was thought that the lot was not undersized in comparison to other lots in the neighborhood. She thought there were sufficient facts relating to both the land and improve- ments to st;Pport the granting of the variance, and that the Planning -Commi ssi on' s recommendation should be approved. MOTION; Counci lmember ; Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazz i no,, to approve the Planning . Commission .- recommendation and grant the appeal of Mr. Robert G. Robarts from the decision of the Acting Zoning Administrator with findings: (1) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the propJ erty involved that do not apply generally to property in the same district; and that the physical characteristics of the property were unusual compared with . properties in the RM District; (2) The granting of the application is necessary for the 1 8 1 0 3/22'/82 preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unneces- sary hardship; and that the problems of safety and water damage required the issuance of a variance; (3) The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or can, eni ence. 1 1 Councilmember Fletcher commented that it was a clear case where there were 'substantial improvements to be made to the property. She thought it was refreshing to find a rental property which had children and which was trying to make the property more suitable for children. Councilmember Renzel asked staff if there was a way the porch could be enclosed within -the setbacks and daylight plane. Chief Planning Official Bruce Freeland said no. The probi em with the building. was that it was noncomplying --it was built in the County and was a much more dense structure than anything allowable under the actual zoning.. He said that anything that would be an enclosed space would be an expansion of the noncomplying use and was strictly forbidden by- the code. Councilmember Renzei said she thought that when they were working on the Zoni ng 'Ordi nance, the noncompliance of a particular aspect could not be increased. She asked if the building was already An excess in every respect. Mr. Freeland said it was. Councilmember Fazzina said that Councilmember Fletcher had made his speech, but commented that the application was a clear cut case for a variance. He said he was surprised and concerned that it was denied when it was first before the City, and was pleased that the Planning Commission reversed the decision. He suspected that on the basis of the laws there was not much else that could be done. He thought that safety was a major factor associated with this variance request and the major reason why the Commission voted to overturn the. Zoning Administrator's decisions and asked if safety was a factor when a variance proposal was consi dered. Mr. Freeland responded that he thought staff would like it to be. He said the reason he turned the variance down initially was because he felt the actual presentation at the first hearing was weak with regard to facts on which findings could be made. He said a wealth of material was submitted on the appeal that was not available at the hearing, and further, staff used the strict reading of the findings as they were instructed to do by the City Attorney's office. He said that in the next package of zoning ordinance amendments, there would be a specific amendment which included a broader definition of "property" than the one which was historically used and which would explicitly open :up improvements as fair game for future variances. He thought it would make the entire process work easier. Councilmember RenZel said. she was sympathetic with the fact that the apartment building rented to families with children., and that there were some unusual circumstances in terms of the amount of building currently on the lot. She was concerned that , properties. which were already more densely built than would otherwise be permitted in the zones were being used as a basis for a finding to allow a variance ' because if at variance were not granted they would not be allowed to build more. She thought there was a danger in doing a, hat, 'a'nd also in looking at the current occupants of the building in judging whether to grant a variance. She said she would support the motion, ;hut cautioned that the City ` should be extraordinarily careful in looking at the status quo as the basis for granting the variance, 1 8 -1 1 /22/82 As Corrected 5/17/82 MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD RECOMMENDATION RE REQUEST FOR DELAY, OF AN I SO N OF A DEMOLITION PERMIT FOR HOUSE LOCATED AT 610 CAI. FORNIA AVENUE (CMR:180:2) Gail Woolley, Chairperson of the Historic Resources Board, com- mented that the building was not large, but that the architectural value was typical of cottages which were built in Mayfield in the 1880's and 1890's, which structures were now rare in the area. She said that the exteri or - of the bui l di rig remained remarkably intact considering how long it was there. She commented that the 3-2 vote by, the Board did not reflect a disagreement as to the extension, but just as to the time of the extension. Councilmember Witherspoon asked Mr. Herman if the house was in shape to be moved. Chief Building Official Fred Herman responded that the interior of the house had not been inspected. He said the house was in some need of repair, but without a thorough analyst s, it was difficult to determine the feasibility of relocating the house and bringing it up to certain standards and bracing it for moving. Mil ly Davis , 344 Tennessee Lane, said that the of der homes in Pal o Al to were threatened with demol i ti on to provide the land on which to build condomi ni ums. She said that the condomi ni ums which replaced the older homes were'' more expensive . and usually out of the price ranges of many young adults , . femi l i es , and others that were displaced when the older homes were torn down. She thought that the elimination of the affordable housing resulted in Palo Alto's becoming a community of professionals. She said businesses had to raise their pay scales and prices or else lose clerical and staff help who could not afford to live in Palo Alto. The cost of condomi ni um developments included the higher price of the new units, the loss of affordable housi ng, the loss of segments of Palo Alto's society and work force, and the loss of some of Pal o Alto's heritage. She asked i f the Council imposed a 60 -day moratorium or some other time on the demolition permit , would the Council be bound to, grant the permit in sixty days, . and what: action should the Council take which would not bind the City to grant a permit toni ght or- any certain date in the future. She thought that an opinion from the City Attorney should be submitted to answer those questions. She said, the demolition of older homes was having a serious impact on meny residents, and: that it was a problem which should be studied further by the Council, staff and the public before _ any more houses were demolished and more people displaced from their homes. She requested that the Council take action which would not bind the City to grant a demolition permit at any certain ` time in . order, to allow time for an additional study of the problem. Mr. Herman said that if the Council took no action, he had an open demo] i ti on :permit application and had 180 days to act on the per- mit at which point , it must either be dani ed or approved. He said there was another code section , which _ requi rcd- -before a demolition permit could be i sued for a resi dence--that there must be a building permit issued for a replacement structure. He said that if no building permit were issued,- the appl i cant could apply for a one time 180 -day extension. He said that if the Council grantec+,> no extension that meant the City. would have a 60 -day automatic wait period, and then the 180 day demolition permit .process which, could be extended for 180 more days. If the moratorium were extended to six months: the 180 day permit application would not. start until -that, time.. - He said if no approved permit was received by ,then, the permit would be denied and the process would start again. 1.8 1 3/22/82' 1 1 Councilmember Renzel clarified that if an application was received during the 180 -day period with the proper application for a replacement structure, the Chief Building Official was obliged to issue the demolition permit. Janice Dodge, 164 Main Street, Palo Alto, represented the owners and commented that the proposed six-month delay, which ended September 10, 1982 was not a problem as long as the demolition permit would be issued at the time approved plans were submitted. Mr. Herman said the plans must be submitted, Architectural Review Board approval received as required, and a building permit issued, before a demolition permit could be issued on the property. Councilmember Faxti no asked what step could best be taken by the Council _ to avoid demolition. Mr. Freeland said the six-month mo� atori um should be applied as proposed; otherwise, as soon as the applicants could meet the conditions for the issuance of the permit, Mr. Herman would be obliged to grant it. He said the six --month moratorium in no way increased Mr. Herman's obligation to grant the permit once al l the conditions were met, it just delayed the time in which i t ' coul d be granted. MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Cobb, to adopt the Historic Resources Board recommendation directing the Chief Building Official to delay issuance of a demolition permit for 610 California _Avenue for the maximum period of six months from date of application (until September 10, 1982) for the purpose of exploring alternatives to demolition. Councilmember Fazzino said he doubted that the home was built in 1931. He said it was a beautiful old College Terrace home, and he was concerned that the City lost some of its heritage when homes like it were demolished. He wanted to see the home saved and would not look kindly upon any proposal to demolish it and place any other structure there. Al though he preferred to see a demolition prohibition on old homes of this type, and hoped the Planning Commission's demolition subcommittee would eventually recommend such a prohibition, and that the Historic Resources Board (HRB) would be given some teetn, he would support, the HRB proposal to delay issuance of the demolition permit. He was very concerned that as a precedent, the Council not alloy_ homes to be demolished before a: specific use was proposed for the site. He did not want to see an empty lot being used as a lever to invite potential buyers on areas around town which once had old Palo Alto homes. He encouraged the Council to. support the motion. Counci lmember Witherspoon clarified that the intent was to save the building and if the_ representative of the owner indicated that they wanted the building off, the site, she assumed that while the time period was running, it would not preclude someone coming in to get a permit to move the building. Mr. Herman said that was correct. Councilmember Cobb said he attended the HRB hearing, and .strongly concurred with Councilmember r=azzi no's comments. He noted that the staff report stated "that a six—month delay would allow and might result in either offers to move the house to another lot, or bring forth a developer who would rehabilitate and retain the house; or :its facade on the present site." - He asked if there was anything, during the six-month period, that could be done to get a solution along those lines to happen. 1 Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber responded that the reality was that there was very little, if anything, the City could do. He said staff was not in the position to solicit development for a particular property, and thought the process would need to run its course. He said the intent of the City's ordinance was to al 1 ow for the waiting period, but not to get the City involved in actively trying to line up a developer or line up a mover of the house. He thought that would go beyond the role intended for the City and staff. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. CITY CLERK RE UEST FOR COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR AB 2400 SHER/STIRLING MOTION: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the Coun;il go on record in support of AB 2400, and that the Mayor be authorized to send a letter to the Committee members, with a copy to the League of California Cities, and Assemblyman Sher. and Senator Stirling in time for the March 29 meeting of the Committee. Councilmember Fletcher commented that the bill was in the legisla- ture, sponsored by Assemblyman Sher and Senator Stirling, to per- mit jurisdictions to conduct elections by mail for sped &1 elections and ballot measures only. She wholeheartedly supported the legislation. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. RE UEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS WITHERSPOON AND LEVY RE LOANS OF CITY Councilmember Witherspoon said that she and Councilmember Levy were concerned that the City's second largest source of income was interest income, and that when a loan was made to an entity, no matter how worthy, it resulted in lost revenue. .She and Councilmember Levy proposed that the City's policy be that the City loans carry a floating rate of interest equal to the average return on the City's investment portfolio for the preceding year. If it. was a one --year loan, it would be the year preceding the beginning of the loan, and if it was a five-year loan, it would be a floating rate based on the previous year's interest rate. She said it was a policy they would like the Council to adopt. because in retrospect there was an item before the Council a few weeks ago where an interest -f-ree loan was made to a nonprofit entity. She said she .believed that- the City staff negotiated the loan, and felt that if -it was the City's policy and the Council's intent to have the policy, an interest -free loan would not happen without staff requesting that the Council override the policy, eend therefore, the Council would have more control. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Levy, to adopt a general policy that all City 1 oans carry a rate of interest at least equal to the average return on the City's investment portfolio for the preceding year., Councilmember Klein said he was not persuaded on the necessity for the motion although he agreed with its reasoning. He said it was true that interest -free loans caused the City a loss of revenue, and were a form of benefit to the recipient. He thought the motion implied that the City was willy-nilly granting Interest - free loans which was hardly the case.` He did, not think that had been done, and staff did not have the authority to do i t , so the necessity of going before the ,Council Was already there, and a policy was not needed do it. He:, thought the Council members were well-advised, and it was nice to be reminded that they had a r,ns,t to them, but it was a means . for the City to do things. He 1 -so thought it was a relatively -inexpensive _ way for the City to J l 3/22/82 accomplish certain social goals. He could not understand the pur- pose of the motion and thought it was intended to mean that the Council would tie their hands about projects they knew nothing about at the moment and totally rule out the idea of making interest -free loans. He was not willing to do that without further bases as to why he should, and commented that the Council. was careful, and was well-advised that interest -free loans carried a cost to the City. 1 1 1 Counci lmember Fletcher recalled only one incident where the City advanced moneys to outside agencies. Those were in the area of housing when Community Development Block Grant -(CDBG) moneys had been applied for by the Housing Corporation, and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) moneys were advanced from the City's budget and .then replenished when the CBDG funds were received.. She said that recently the City permitted the Housing Corporation to use an interest —free loan in order to pay a developer fee in order to qualify for revenue bonds -for subsidized housing. She reminded the Council that in each instance the Council had the opportunity to review the appropriation and weigh the benefits. Further, the City had policies to facilitate affordable housing and the funds did not really go to an outside entity, but directly into the housing ..which made the housing more affordable. She said that if interest were added in the instances where the City had made loans, the cost of the interest would be added to the cost of the housing and would raise the cost of the housing. She said she would oppose a blanket prohibition on interest -free loans and leave each instance to be weighed on its merit. .Councilmember Renzel said :.,he was• concerned that the policy appeared to be a fixed one .and more than just a situation where occasionally the Council would make exceptions She preferred to see such a policy referred to the Finance and Public Works Committee (F&PW) for discussion and let it come back to the Council with a recommendation. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Fazzino, to refer the matter of interest -free loans to the Finance and Public Works Committee. Councilmember Levy commen ed that truly proper municipal accounting requi red . that all costs be visible. He said many cities had gotten into fiscal.: trouble by dealing with too many off -balance -sheet items, and he thought this was one of those. He said that interest on money was not truly visible and should be because if the Council utilized its reserves without receiving proper interest for them, they were costing the City money. He thought everyone understood that, and that it was visible to all the current Councilmembers; and, therefore, the purpose of the policy was to make it continually visible to all Councils. He asked that in connection with the referral to the Finance and Public Works Committee, staff report on the loans made, the amounts, interest rates, etc. Vice Mayor Bechtel said she would vote against the - referral because she agreed with Councilmember Klein that the policy was unneeded. She " said that in those extraordinary and exceptional circumstances when a request came through and was recommended by staff, as with the Housing Corporation item two weeks ago, it was clearly something that was for the public good and the benefit of the citizens of Palo Alto, and by making the short-term, interest - free l jan the City enabled the Housing Corporation to provide units at a lower cost. She felt ,that it was pointless to refer the item. SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO REFER. PA=SEU. by a vote of 5-3, Bechtel , Fletcher, Klein voting "no," Eyerly absent. 1 8 1 5 3/22/82 ESS FROM 9:35 e.m. TO 9:50 p.m REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS FLETCHER AND LEVY RE CONTROL OF MEW Counci 1member Levy read the memo submitted by he and Counci 1menber Fletcher to the public, which memo is on file in the City Clerk's Office. MOTION: Councilmember Levy moved, seconded by Fletcher, to request the City Attorney to report on the legality of Palo Alto enacting a handgun control ordinance along the lines of the Morton Grove, I 1 l i not s ordinance, for consideration by the Policy and Procedures Committee, Counci1member Levy said that the issue was an important one and deserved a full public hearing. Be said the nature, of the pro- posed action' was to first request a report from the :City Attorney so that the Council would be aware of the options available in Palo Alto. He said it was important to note that no substantive action would be taken toni ght--the City Attorney's report would go to Committee, be discussed there, and recommendations would be made by the Committee to the Council. He said both Committee hearings and future Council hearings would be fully advertised public hearings. He wanted it to be clear that the motion was limited to conceal abi e:, small weapons. only, - He said there was no intent to limit a ci ti zen s right to possess a rifle or other long gui. Vice Mayor Bechtel clarified that the motion was to refer the mat- ter to the City Attorney, and the City Attorney would report to the Policy and Procedures (P&P) Committee who would meet when the report was ready, and that meeting would be advertised and announced i n local newspapers. Fol l owi ng .the P&P Committee meeting, interested citizens would have another chance to come before the City Council when the the P&P recommendation was made. Counci1member Cobb asked the staff action to include some informa- ti_en that would define the extent to which there was a gun problem in' Palo Alto, i.e., how many handguns were registered in Palo Alto, to what extent handguns had been stolen in Palo Alto in past years, and that sort of general information. He wanted to know what kind of problem they were dealing with in Palo Alto. He asked that when the report was made on the legality of handguns, the question of whether State 1 aw preempted the Counci 1 from acting would al so be addressed as had been suggested by some parties at the State level. Amy Vossbrinck, 552 Kellogg Avenue, supported referring the ques- tion of a handgun ban to the City Attorney. She read some articles from the newspapers which regarded handgun incidents. She spoke about a 17 -year -old boy in Nevada who used a handgun to shoot and kill his 55 -year -old teacher, and wound two of hi s_ fellow students. The- boy was subsequently killed himself as a result of his trying to be stopped from shooting other -people. She sal d the reason he was ab1 e to.,get away with the handgun was because it was easy for him to hide it, and easy for him to take it into the classroom without anyone seeing.it. The next article spoke about a 15 -year -old boy in, - San . Francisco who used a handgun to shoot himsel f while playing Russi an Roul ette, She said the boy found, a gun in the bushes at school and was able to hide the gun from his mother until he shot himself with it. She spoke about an incident which recently occurred in Palo ' Alto on the corner of Arastradero Road and Page Mill. A man got into an argument with another man and the second man fired four shots from a smal 1 hand- gun into the roof :,.of, the other man's car. The man was not hurt. She commented that those incidents were not isolated and that during the Viet Nam war, there were more pecpl a killed on the streets of America with handguns than were killed in all the fighting in Viet Nam. --- She said the numbers had increased since that time --40 to 50 people per day were killed with handguns in the United States. 1-$ 1. 4 3 /22/82 Ms. Vossbri nck reiterated that they were talking about concealable handguns. She said one argument against the handgun ban had to do with a Second Amendment argument. On five separate occasions, the Supreme Court of the Uni ted States ruled that the Second Amendment was intended to protect members of a' state mi l i ti a from being _di s- armed by the federal government. In addition to those five Supreme Court decisions, the American Bar Association stated that every federal court decision regarding the Amendment had given it a collective militia interpretation and/or held that firearms con trol laws enacted under a state's police power were Constitutional. She said that meant that the right to carry a handgun or other weapon was a pri vi 1 ege--not a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Another argument against handgun control was that usually a handgun was needed to protect someone in a hor;►e. Studies on actual handgun deaths showed that six times as many family members and children were ki 11ed as a result of acci - dents as opposed to deaths due to protection. She said the City needed a cooperative sol uti on to the probl em, and that the protal em was for handgun owners and non handgun owners alike because everyone was threatened by the existence of the guns, and everyone needed to work together to find ,a sol uti on. Those who supported a control on shotguns and rifles needed to realize that other people wanted to use shotguns and rifles for hunting, but everyone needed to underst and that handguns had •ki 1 l ed over 11,000 people per year in the United States. She thought those who used handguns were being done a disservice because they were so readily available, and reiterated that handguns oftentimes were used against family members or by children who accidently found them. She recommended that the Palo Alto City Council be the first in the Bay Area to support a handgun control ban even if no problem existed in Palo Alto. She said such an acti on. would ref l ect a significant step toward Palo Alto's nonsupport of violence as a way to solve prob- 1 ems. Donald L. Cline, 2455 Al varado Road, Santa Clara, said he thought handgun control was like an epidemic and was getti ng out of hand. He spoke about the relationship between a legally -owned handgun and , crime. He said that San Francisco had one handgun per 9,5 residents purchased legally in the last ten years. San Francisco was a very violent city according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, and San Jose by compari son had almost the same population and almost the same amount of handguns. He said that the number of handguns purchased in San Jose amounted to one handgun for every 9.9 residents in the last ten years, and yet the FBI Uniform Crime Report said that San Jose was one of the four safest cities in the United States. Thus, handguns were not the cause of violent crimes. Palo Alto had 39 robberies in the last eight months --25 of which were perpetrated at the point of a firearm, which was 64% of the total amount of robberies. He said that according to the Palo Alto Police Department, 39 robberies, with Palo Alto's fairly smai 1 population, took Palo Alto ri ght of f the scale as far as the number of robberies which normally occurred per capita in any normal jurisdiction in Santa Clara County. He thought it was si g- ni fi cant to point -out that San Francisco had one handgun : per 9.5 ee'.i dents, San Jose had one handgun per 9.9 residents, Sunnyvale had one handgun for every 11 residents, and, Palo Alto had one handgun for every 47 residents. He pointed out that Palo Alto had a very small handgun popul ati on but a very hi gh armed robbery rate. He said that with today's Taws on unl awful search and seizure, it was virtually impossible to make ai drug bust stick -- the police could not go into a house and hunt for drugs without a great deal of information proving that drugs were there. A hand- gun:control ordinance would be equally impossible to enforce, it would be -,ignored by criminals . who by definition- did not obey the laws . anyway, and an even i urger percentage of Palo Alto residents would be made defenseless as was currently the case, and the remainder of the population that owned firearms would not submit to the law because the right to defend yourself and your family superseded any aw _ ever written Including the Uni ted States Constitution. 1 8 1 7>- 3/22/82 Hugh Le Master, 3285 South Court, Palo Alto, said he agreed with Councilmember Levy, and wanted the Council to . research some ques- tions. He said that Handgun Control Incorporated had stated that people who carried handguns increased their chances of being killed during an armed assault. He thought some statistics should be gathered in order to educate the people before passing such an ordinance. He did not think that private handguns served the pub- lic safety --an effective police force and public cooperation with the police force were much more effective in protecting the public than everyone trying to protect themselves by carrying a handgun around. He rejected the idea that possession of concealable weapons were protected by the Constitution. He thought that the purpose of such an ordinance should be considered in terms of its effectiveness, and obviously a ban in Palo Alto would not be effective in and of itself unless other communities followed suit. He thought that if the ordinance was to be passed, Palo Alto should take an educational role in doing so, and that a voter referendum would be more effective in carrying out that education, and would foster confidence that the ordinance represented the will of the people and was not imposed against the voter's desires. He was in favor of studying the issue further, and eventually bringing the matter before the voters. Steve Vi rgi l i o, 1251 W. McKinley, #A, Sunnyvale, agreed with Mr. Cline and said their figures were the same. He said that in fis- cal year 1971-72, Palo Alto had 78 armed robberies, and in fiscal year 1969-81, Palo Alto had 135. In less than 10 years, the amount of armed robberies had doubled, and according to the infor- mation officer, the police staff in Palo Al to had remained the same. He said there were 55,225 people in Palo Alto, and 100 police officers, and only 94 were sworn in, the other six were available for training positions. The most officers on duty at a time in Palo Alto was 20 --one officer for every 2,761 people. Between the hours of 9:00 -p.m. and 7:00 a.m., there were only 17 police officers on duty --one officer for every 3,248 people. He did not think Palo Alto needed gun control , he thought more police officers were needed. He asked if people's guns were taken away, how One officer would protect 3,000 people in the middle of the night. James Westenberger, 756 Rosewood Drive, Palo Alto, said he had lived in Palo Alto for 24 years. He said he did not want the City Counci 1 to think they had a right to take his weapons from him. Alan Henderson, 565 Arastradero Road, Palo Alto said he thought the gun control issue- was a subject on which the Council would be sorely tested. He had past experience with the subject both as a Councilmember and as a member of a National League of Cities com- mittee. He recalled one session of the League of Cities conven- tion in 1972 where he watched John Lindsay, then Mayor of New York, endure unbelievably vicious personal attacks from members of the audience when has' epok-e out for handgun control. He said it came very close to being a physical attack. He commended Councilmember Fletcher and Councilmember Levy_ for being willing to take the :initiative to speak up publicly on the issue, but cau- tioned that for many people, .the desire to possess guns was equal in fervor to the strongest of religious crusades and for many of the same people and others taking away their guns was seen as taking away their manhood. He said the feelings were very intense, but he was confident the Council could stand up to them. He said they kept hearing that guns' did not kill --people killed, automobiles killed, knives killed, and baseball bats ki l l ed, but the difference was that guns existed- for the single purpose of killing. He could not drive ,a gun, cut bread with a gun or hit baseballs with, a gun --a gun shoots bullet$ --that's it. '1 8 1 8 3/22/82 1 1 1 He thought it was ridiculous to say that banning handguns made no difference in the death counts. He reiterated some 1980 figures on handgun deaths: Japan, 48; Canada, 52; Israel, 58; Sweden, 21; West Germany, 42; Great Britain, 8; United States, 11,522 and growing. He said there was no need to discuss the Constitutionality of gun control, it was ruled upon favorably a number of times. The favored statement of gun advocates was that if guns were outlawed, only outlaws would have guns. He thought it was unfortunate that the City had to attempt anti -handgun possession laws at the local level because local laws could not be totally effective if guns were found in neighboring communities. He thought it was insane that no federal legislation existed banning handguns, but since there was no federal legislation, it was a step that must be taken at the local level. He thought that if cities and then states enacted such laws, perhaps the national leaders would overcome their fears of National Rifle Association threats. He realized that some people were reluctant to support a local law and would rather support a state initi ati ve. He urged that they support both. He thought the issue was so important that it must be fought at all levels and the proposed state law spoke only of registration and an eventual banning of new weapons. He urged that the first step be taken and that it be done unani- mously. He did not believe there was one person who did not believe deep down that society would be far better off without the existence of handguns. Dr. Herbert H. Zeman, 464 W. Charleston Road, commended Council - members Fletcher and Levy_ for their courageous support of the handgun measure and" said he agreed with Councilmember Levy's and Alan Henderson's statement. Further, he pointed out that a shot- gun was a much better weapon for protecting a home than a hand- gun. Eric R. Auchard, 235 Churchill Avenue, said he was working, an the State Handgun Initiative and reaffirmed the comments made by people in favor of -referring the ban to the City Attorney. . He said that in California there were a number of cities that were considering the same acti on. As he understood i t , Palo Alto was the furthest al org in terms of actually carrying out plans to ban handguns in the local community. He thought it was part of a growing movement of a lot of towns in the area and in other areas in the United States. At the state level, there were at least five states that were going to have initi ati-ves for stronger hand- gun control. He thought i t was all a movement towards stricter controls over types of weapons that were used in crimes and street crimes so often. Joshua Goldstein, ` 1082 College : Avenue, said that on behalf of those that lived in Palo Alto, and wno believed that the U. S. Constitution ''had priority over the right to bear arms, he hoped the Council would unanimously support the motion. He said that although it might not solve the problem, it was certainly a step in the right direction and one that was long overdue. John Rogers, 921 Maddux Drive, said he was against the proposed ordinance to:. ban handguns in Palo Alto: He said he : had lived . in Palo Alto for 10 years and felt that Councilmember Fletcher's 'pro- posed ordinance, given the long history of liberal support for social issues and civil liberties, was . ironic in that if the ordi- nance passed, it would result in a serious need to bridge some of the civil liberties which h supposedly had been guarded over the years. . He said it would make many law abiding citizens, who refused to turn in -their handguns, criminals and subject _ to some. kind of search. A < lot of -pressure would no doubt develop for various kinds of - information to ascertain where the handguns were and.:possilb'ly:s`ame►:searches .would be the result of ,Informers giving information . as to ,,the whereabouts of the handguns. He thought the scenario , Was hard to imagine in Palo Alto and guessed that " .many. people felt it -could never happen here. He remembered that toward the .end of the Viet Nam war there was a time when Palo Alto enforced an anti -commune ordinance, and searches were conducted to ascertain if more than five unrelated people lived in one house. He said several searches were conducted either early in the morning or late at night to find ;out how many people were sleeping in the beds in the house and_if f they were related.. Al though that type of thing might not -happen in this case, the possibility existed. He said most, people in Palo Alto did not have handguns, and if he were a criminal and was thinking about breaking into a home, he would be afraid of being shot by a gun; and if he knew there was little chance that a gun would be present'in the house, it would- be more of an incentive to commit a crime in Palo Alto as opposed to Hayward where no such ordinance existed. He felt the ordinance was a legitimate reaction to the problems in America of crime and violence; but on the other hand, he felt the effort was futile in that it did not attack the real problem of crime and violence. He thought the community should be trained in some form of nonviolent . self-defense, and trained` ,so that- people could relate to one another and be aware of what :gas going on in their neighbors' houses so they could protect each other, Ross Thompson, 555 Forest Avenue, said that he was personally against guns, had never owned one and had only 'fired one once. He said he was drafted during World War 11 and: spent 4-1/2 years as a medical soldier because he refused to bear arms. He believed that he who fought and ran av:ay lived to fight another day. He was totally against handgun control in any form ,. tsoever because it was a very -superficial approach to the probem. He showed a Sample Ballot and although he spoke '-:Spani sh, ` he had to wade through half of the ballot in Spanish ,-when he lived in, a country that spoke only English. He thought putting a foreign language on a ballot where a person should be educated in the language of the country he was voting in was silly. He thought that if such silly things as that were done, they should not be surprised that people killed each other' with guns. Another illustration was labor unions in the United States. They knew that some of the companies union members worked for were going under financially, but the labor unions were too stubborn to take a cut in wages and insisted on getting a good salary when they knew it would kill the company. He said the young people in the country's.:colleges and universi- ties were the most psychologically advantaged, highest educated and sharpest ever in hi story, and yet those rating- people would argue i n favor of using drugs which was downright silly. Another example was the Roman Catholic -Church, which knew very well that this country had separation, of church and state, but every month' ,the Roman Catholic Church- got millions of dollars in federal moneys to run their -pri-vate schools. In his opinion, no. one person was any more capable of determining whether another. person should have a gun, and the Dan White case in San Francisco was the best example.. Joe D'Ambria, 777 W. Middlefield Road, said he was bony and raised in the lower east side of Manhattan,. New -York, and for the most parte lived under very strict gun -cont ebl laws. He said the Sullivan laws" really flowered when he was about ;ten years old, .and his neighborhood ' became a very nasty place in which -to live. As a result,- people became very impersonal. with one:OnOthervr and. in, one i nstan'Ce a .man was ki l -led right outside hips door. Police would not r=espond and'--"neighbors could. not respond and- were terrie.. fi ed, He said the neighborsneighbOrsa would not ` even testifytestifya against the people who had committed -the cnimu fair "fear of reprisal. He hoped the Council did not follow the -failure -of that kind of l egi sl a - ti on. Robert S. Ha4gqui st, 132 Emerson Street, Palo Alto, said he had heard the same arguments for gun control for the past ten years. He said police officers carried handguns because they had been establ i Oed as an effective means for pr'otecting their lives, and he did not understand why it would not be a perfectly good and effective means ft:ill protecting other peoples' lives, As he read the ..Constitution, his life_ was; valued: as highly . as- .: that of any police = officer. He said that one of Pete McCl oskey' s favorite arguments was that a handgunwas not effective to protect a life,. a shotgun was a .:wonderful weapon to use for.. that. . He agreed with that under certain circumstances. He had heard the same arguments for many years, and had yet to hear one of the groups say well let's get a range available and a police officer to train these people to 'use a shotgun as a weapon for defending a home. He would like to see Counci1members look into that proposition. He said that several years ago when he first moved to Palo Alto he was living on Emerson Street, and much of his furniture was out in the garage. He said he happened to be sleeping on a hi deabed one night, without a handgun, and i n the middle of the night he heard a woman screaming "he'.s ki i 1 i ng me, he's ki l l i ng me." He grabbed his knife and headed i n that direction, and when he got to the street, several other people were there and informed him that the woman had mental problems and that it had happened before. He said it bothered him that if that sort of situation happened again, and he had a handgun instead, he would have to think about the person in dire need, and whether he should let whatever was happening happen, or whether he should go out and make an attempt to protect .her knowi ng that hi s fell ow citizens wished to see him arrested because he had a handgun in hi s possessi on. He assumed that most people would act like they did in New York City several years ago when a woman by the name of Gennovese was `being raped and murdered i n. the street and more than 50 peopl a in nearby apartment houses looked down and watched and not one person came out and lifted a finger to hel p her. If they had, under the Sullivan law, they could have _been arrested and prosecuted if they had a handgun. Barbara Reid Brown, ;02 Charleston Court, congratulated the Council for the proposed action and was delighted that her -City Council was brave enough to take such an action and to lead in an idea whose time had come. She added that she supported the peti- tion for a California initiative for the ballot on November 2. She spent three- hours in the shopping area on Saturday, and reported that she spoke to about 130 people in that ti me, and the vast majority signed the peti ti on and said to hurry up. Andrew Maier, 252 Swett Drive, Woodside, said he was a member of the Nati anal Ri fl e Assoc' ati on (NRA-) by choice, and that the NRA had not solicited his presence at the meeting. He empathized with those who wanted to take steps to curb today's violence, and wished there was a simple formula to do so. He thought that many seemingly perfect solutions to problems created many unintended side effects, and the idea of gun curtailment was not without the unwanted effects., He agreed that handguns existed to ki l 1 some- one --to kill someone that was trying to kill you. He said that in 1930, the FBI began compiling crime statistics and publishing them as the Uniform Crime Reports. The stati sti cs,.. were grim and sug- gested that anyone concerned with the issue should obtain a copy from the nearest bookstore and study .it. In 1980, the Director of the FBI did not consider handguns worth mentioning as a factor in violent crimes. The idea of handgun control was not new and had peen around since about 1900 with the original Sullivan law. He said that the areas in the :United States that had the type of 1 egi sl ati on-; Palo Alto was considering were experiencing a wake of crime increase-- about one and one-half to two times as much as the areas which didn't have that type of legislation. Massachusetts alone experienced a 17% increase against an increase on the Nest Coast of 8.8% during 1979. He said there were many incidents Involving individuals which were not found in the statistics. For example, he liked to fish, but did not like to hunt, and a few Yeats ago he was in northern Nevada in a 'remote area- and ran into a young man who claimed that his father had gotten drunk and driven off and left him. He said he was a sucker for kids and tool(" the boy and fed him some breakfast, _ supplied him with a fishing rod, - and took him out and they fished. They y :came back, cleaned and cooked the- fish for dinner, and when.. he walked up to get Something from the cab of his ,'_tr'uck, the boy ..picked up the re 1 8,2 .1 _ 3/22/82 _ hunting knife he had used to clean the fish and told him to drive him into Elko. He said he was wi•thi n reach of his handgun and 'told the boy no, to lay the. knife down very quietly and very . slowly. He said that he and his wife tied the boy up very securely with .some clothesline, and took him to a friend's house about 20 miles away, and contacted the local authorities who picked him up. When he returned to the area about nine months later to do more fishing, someone_ recognized him as the fellow who had brought the boy to the friend's place the preceding year; the man told him he was lucky to be alive because the boy was an escapee from the Nevada Youth Authority, and was there for killing his father with a knife. He felt that when something like that happens, statistics mean nothing. Mike Breslin, 2123 Ramona, Palo Alto, said he was a native Californian and was educated in Palo Alto. His father was an NRA life member, and a certified rifle, pistol and shotgun instructor. He said he loved the sport of handgun shooting, and was not into killing anyone, but assured the Council that if the situation arose and .he had to protect himself with a handgun, he would do so. He said he valued the sport of shooting, and started out when he was six years old shooting a 22 -cal i ber rifle. His father would not- let him shoot a. handgun until he was 18 years old --the fact was that handguns had a short barrel and were easily con- cealed and carried about by youths. He thought that according to thch statistics, a lot of the crimes were committed by youths. He was not a parent, but wondered how youths protected themselves, and What parents were` doing to protect the youths. He said one statistic which stood out in his mind Was the fact that there were /1,000 handgun deaths each year and i n the United States there were 50 million handguns. He thought there were very few deaths compared to the total number ofehandguns in the. -country. He urged that when the Council looked at'the ordinance, each Councilmember ask themselves . if anyone they knew in the City of Palo Alto was ever confronted with a handgun and had violence committed to them, before casting their vote. Tommy Bright, 2271 Cowper, said that he and his wife were about to start the fifth generation of Palo Alto natives. He told the Councilmembers not to worry, that they could get away with it because executive action could get away with anything. He said American people believed what they were told to believe. He said not to worry about the gun nuts, tell them that concentration camps were not always the result of pistol registration. He said to ask his grandfather, Isadore Bright, of Poland. He could not contradict them because he was too dead to say anything. He said not to worry about- all the dead victims of . Fascism or, the ex executive councils, or of any of history's other benefactors of enforced public order, because those victims were all too dead to speak up. He ' said " not to worry about the victims yet to come because they did not know what was in store for them. He told the Council to. do whatever they felt noble --whatever• could be rationalized could be enforced. He said' to leave the people defenseless for their own good or some such noble notion. He said not to worry about the taxpayers because they were just simple- minded .. serfs who enjoyed working for a living. Only idiots like. himself loved his family and worked profitably with his neighbors. He asked the Council to pity the poor victims of society who shot each;; other during screaming drunken arguments, those poor victims of society who knocked down the elderly and held bankf of ds of the helpless hostage. He said to pity and protect those misunderstood saints amongst -them and help " them` and force them, to .save- more of them. He said he held a thief at gunpoint for 45 minutes waiting for a police: car to respond, but what would -he know. He said he identified , the body of a good- friend in the morgue_. killed by an unrepentent youth ;who was subsequently .releaseddue to en adminis- trative error -only to ki l l_ again;. but again, what .would he know. He said he wondered why he _marched for : the underprivileged in voting drives in high school. He said that was why he Was down on the i 1 1 1 1 pavement being kicked by hoodlums. He said his wife's 87 -year -old grandfather was knocked down in a robbery this year --he was being robbed with a kitchen knife. Should he be found guilty of not offering enough to the good guy who was holding him up. He said not to worry though, it's in the bag. He did not think that such frivolous questions as who should live and who should perish needed to be answered. He said the historical trend was with the executive council to promote lawlessness-, create helpless victims, and prevent effective self-defense. Eventually it would demand a dictator to bring order. He said punks should be encouraged to cultivate the more refined ski l l s of breaking the bones of old folks, killing policemen and byst andees in hold-ups, and raping; but by all means the sweet punks should be prevented from shooting their drug suppliers, getting shot by their battered wives, or from accidentally ending their own pitiful lives. He said not to worry, the American people believed what they were told to believe, they did not talk back anymore --not like they did in 1776. He pointed out how far people had come in 200 years. He asked the last time Switzerland was invaded, and said he believed Switzerland had a mandatory gun possession. People had to train, and have ammunition,in the household. He thought Japan could hardly be used, as a statistic because Japan did not border Central America —Central America had been killing its own people for thousands of years. He said it was not for them to decide who would live and die, but if someone was going to kill themself why should they be stopped. He asked if the police would be disarmed, and said he thought the same arguments were true for the police. He pointed out that Dan White killed with a police gun. He said Richard Speck killed eight nurses slowly with a kitchen knife; the Manson kids were lovely, they killed with knives. He said it was just the good guys versus. the bad guys. People could not be forced to be good, they could only be prevented from -being really, really bad. Stan Cottrell, 990 Blair Court, said that Al an Henderson had made his speech. He said he heard a lot of expressions of concern about the ability to defend oneself. He thought that the fact that the element of surprise was always with the attacker was being overlooked. He said he could not help wondering what would have happened to the gentlemen who spoke earlier if the young boy he spoke of had reached for the gun rather than the knife. He said if he were a burglar and was entering a house where a handgun would likely be, he would simply shoot faster., If he was in then bank when the man entered with a shotgun, he hoped to God no one was standing next to him with a handgun in his pocket. J. Jeffrey Clyde, 3031. Sibbits Drive, said he worked at Century Liquors for three years, and had never been approached by anyone with a handgun, but was hit on the head with a bottle. He thought that if everyone was seriously concerned about getting shot by a. handgun, they should go out and get a flak jacket which would be readily available. Robert Schauer,, 546 Jackson Drive, represented the Palo Alto Civic League, and said the Civic League supported the concept of local handgun control. While the Civic League recogni zed the strong feelings of those who opposed such controls, it felt that on balance; the unrestricted availability of handguns presented more of a hazard to the community than control s. The Civic League urged that the City Attorney be directed to examine the legality of local restrictions on handgun possession and use, and that an appropriate ordinance be drafted. Doughl as: McGaughy, 464 W. Charleston Road, :supported the handgun control concept and applauded the courageous efforts of . Council members. Levy and Fletcher. 1.-8 2 3 3/22/82: John Braun, 3494 South Court, said he supported handgun control with some reservations. He said he grew up on a farm and had used shotguns, rifles and handguns when he was younger, and did enjoy it. He -did not like anymore _ government interference in peoples' lives than was absolutely necessary for order, health and safety. He did not think the amount of weapons one had in the home would help them if one was robbed on the street. He understood that the purpose of handgun control was to control domestic violence, and the kinds of things that go on in the home between members of a family, the accidental shootings, and the moment of anger when someone got shot. He said a policeman had to_ have a probable cause to enter ones house for search and seizure. If someone had a guh in his or her home, there was no way the police could come with a gun control ordinance and' search that house to find out who -had a gun because it was forbidden by the Constitution. He said people would still be able to- have their guns in their homes, but -- .hopefully some people would turn them in and -fewer guns would be around town. He hoped the issue of compensation for anyone who did turn in _a weapon would be -di cussed so that .people were fairly compensated. He was offended by anyone saying that police were killers in the same sense as hoodlums on- the street who were robbing banks and older people, etc. The policemen were desig- nated by the legally constituted society to apprehend bankrobbers, insane people, etc. He said the Council was elected, by society to make decisions based. upon what the people felt was their will. Baxter H. Armstrong,' 4339 Miranda Avenue, Palo Alto, thanked Counci lmembers Fletcher and Levy for proposing -the study for a handgun control resolution. He seconded everything Alan Henderson said. Elaine Lotter, 739 Layne Court, was Chairperson of the Palo Alto Area Democratic Association (PAADA). She spoke as ei individual and on behalf of the PAADA in favor of an ordinance banning the sale and possession of handguns i n Palo Alto. She was proud to have grown up in Palo Alto, and .sal d it was a wonderful ly safe and peaceful place then. She could remember only 'one murder by a handgun the entire time she was growing up, and subsequently she lived many years in Germany and England where citizens could still safely walk through large cities alone at night. When she returned home to Palo Alto, she was shocked at the violence both on the Stanford campus and in Palo -Alto. She said the United States was known throughout the world as the most dangerous and violent country in the -free world. She pointed out that Great Britain, in spite of unemployment and racial conflict, had only eight deaths from handguns last year. She said Europeans were in far more danger traveling in_the Bay Area than anywhere in Europe. She hoped Palo Alto would be the first to pass the ordinance. Bart Anderson, 2091 Amherst Street; said he was a night desk der!: in e downtown Palo Alto hotel. He saw a lot of unbalanced, and regular people get into fights and it made him nervous to have a lot of handguns floating around. He wanted to see ---P al o Alto pass a handgun law. He realized that a city could not solve' the prob- lem by itself, but the only way anything would be done was by cities like Palo .Alta making a start. He said someone had to stand up to the handgun law, and it would take courage. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, commended Councilmembers Levy, and Fletcher for having the courage to support and bring the issue to a head. He thought that Ms. Vossbrinck and Alan Henderson covered the issue eloquently. He thought it should be pointed out that the 52 handgun deaths in Canada, on an equivalent population basis,' would be 885 in the United States. He said it was true that both Israel and Switzerland. were essentially . °armed camps, and that-! the adult males were almost required to have weapons, but not handguns, to defend themselves and their country. He said ' accidents did happen and spoke . of the : Young fourth grade ,girl in an East Bay school who found ' her parents' gun, took it to sohopl , and fired some shots 1 8 2 4 3/22/8Z 1 1 into the school yard ground narrowly missing a group- of children. The only reason no one was injured was because the gun jammed. He thought that a total ban on handguns in Pale Alto would not solve the probl em, but was a necessary first step. He-- thought that since the people were afflicted by gutless legislators in both Washington and Sacramento, it was time that someone on the local 1 evel spoke up. The police should be depended .upon for protec- tion.) He said he would be terrified if his neighbor thought he heard a burglar and started shooting away. - --He would much rather he 'picked up the phone and dialed 911 and.. cal led the professional s to come and handle the job the way it should be done. Regarding whether people would break into homes because someone had guns, a coworker of his had a gun col 1 ecti on that was an attracti ve nui - sance and he was burglarized .and the en ti re collection was ripped off. The fact that he had more than a dozen guns in his home, both handguns and rifles, did not dissuade _ the burglars in the least. He felt that having handguns in the house as a means of personal protection was_ foolhardy. He commented that one of the most heavily armed countries in the world was. Afghanistan. He said it was a right of passage to manhood that a male child be given a gun --not a pistol, but a lotto gun. - Handguns would not be of much use, and rifles had been proven to be even less use, in resisting the invasion of a modern army. Carroll U. Fruth, 108 Lois Lane, said he had lived in Palo Alto for- 23 years. He said that his 45 was registered. All his children and his wife had had formal training in the use of guns. Once, when hi s chi ldren were quite small , he was glad his wife was checked out on the 45 because the "front end" Was convincing in -a certain si tuati on and that was that. ' He said a federal law existed that no felon could possess a gun of any kind --it was another felony automatically.. In 0.01 and a couple of weeks ago, two police officers stopped a speeder, the one on the left hand side asked for the registration. The driver reached in the glove compartment and hauled out some kind of rather large handgun. Fortunately, the pol iceman on the right hand si de took charge, they took him, and the' judge released him. He was a felon, had already killed one policeman and was released. He understood that the fel on had since been picked up again and was rel eased another time. He said the Supreme Court decided that a felon could not be required to declare, turn in, or register any gun' in his posses- si on because it was sell-i ncrimi nati on; and, therefore, felons would get a free ride. Questionnaires were sent out to. a random selection of citizens of all ages and occupations, and 511,765 people responded. Some questions Were as fo l lows: "Do you bel i eve pri vate citizens have the right to own fire- arms to defend themselves , their families . and their property from violent criminal attack?" 90.9% said yes, "90 you believe judges should be required to impose heavy prison sentences on criminals- who _use guns or other weapons to commit - crimes?" 86.7% said yes. "Do you believe that a ban on .pri vate ownershi p 'of firearms would significantly reduce the number of murders and robberies in your -community?" 96.0% said no. "Do you bell eve that a new law prohi bi t i•ng all ownershi p of firearms would make it impossible for criminals to ;;get guns?" 98.3% said no. The poll concluded that 1) an overwhelming majority - of Americans believed they . had the' right to own firearms for self-defense; _ 2) Americans primarily blamed, the crime problem on the court system and would favor . mandatory sentences for - criminals _ using guns to commit - violent crimes. He said that in an eastern state, there was an automatic mandatory ten year sentence to be served consecu- tively -and the judges had,: no.. discretion in the matter, _and the violent crooks moved' out. 3) Americans also believed that gun controls are not an " effective means to` control crime; and '` 4) nearly 100% of Americans polled indicated that new laws outlawing the use and ownership of firearms would directly affect every citi xen! s right to a safe = home. He added that the boom should be lowered ors the crooks, and there should be : a . "use: a. gun, go to jail" law with no possible discretion by the courts, so that the 1 8 2 5 3 82 soft judges would have no choice but to throw then in jail and have them stay there. Scott Williams, 835 Thornwood Drive, said that rather than banning handguns, more serious thought should be given to tightening the restrictions on criminals. He thought that rather than setting murderers free after serving seven years of a life sentence they should be put to death. H.e also felt . there should be a state funded educational program for handgun training. Lou Cava, 826 Nectarine Avenue, Sunnyvale, said that since January, he was doing work on the handgun control issue in a charter committee. He hoped Palo Alto would upstage them, and the committee would follow Palo Alto. He said that waving the 1979 FBI Crime Report seemed to be a habit of NRA people. He said it was pointed out that the FBI had not made menti on of handguns in that report --it was not mentioned because the FBI had not yet attacked the subject. He said that report would be out in a. couple of weeks. He said that 92% of all burglaries were com- mitted when the home was unoccupied, and of the remaining 8%, 4% of the people slept through them. The police recommended that if you suspect a burglar is in your home, lock the door, dial 911, open the window and scream, and turn on as many lights as possible because a burglar hates noise and light the most. He said he had asked Mr. Fell from the NRA what the NRA had done with regard to supporting the Assembly Bill now in the California Assembly regarding the sale and possession of the teflon coated cop -killer bullet. His answer was that "it was a silly question and a silly law to think about. What possible difference would it make to a policeman if he was killed with an ordinary bullet or with a tef- lon coated bullet.0 The fact was that if a police officer had on a flak jacket or a bullet-proof vest and an ordinary bullet was used, he had a chance. If the teflon coated bullet was used, he had no chance, it could go through three policemen let alone one. He said that a San Jose police officer addressed a letter to the California representative of the NRA regarding that same question, and the answer was that they had taken no position. Ken O'Neil , 652 Melville, said he was reminded of a quote by Wi l l Rogers that there were three kinds of lies. There were lies, there were damn lies, andthere were statistics. He thought that dependent upon .a point of view, the statistics could be moved favorably one way or the other. He did not own a handgun, but may decide to buy one regardless of which way the vote went. He agreed with several people that perhaps the problem was dealt with in a manner that was not in everyone's best interests. He wished they could get away from the mentality that said when a complex, and controversial subject was dealt with, a ban was .adopted.. He spoke of the historical passage of the Harri son Act which was passed in the same kind of legislative furor that this one was except, that the subject was drugs, which at the time were licit and not illicit drugs like opium and heroin. He said the contro- versy raged and what the legislators ended up doing with the passage of that Act was to guarantee one of the largest, most flourishing businesses in America today. It happened to be illegal, but nevertheless it was there. He was concerned that if handgun legislation passed, what guarantee would there be that in 1983 there would not still be 11,000 deaths occurring with hand- guns. His mind was not made up, -but he admired the courage of Councilmembers Fletcher and Levy, and admired the NRA for taking a stand. He -liked the .idea of a forum to address the issues, and since he was a new American, most precious to him was the ability to decide what was: his and _ given to, him by _-the rights of the: Consti tuti Qn. 1 r Angie Fa, 235 Churchill , thanked Councilmembers Levy and Fletcher for introducing the resolution. She thought she was fortunate to be working in Santa Clara County as the staff coordinator for the Handgun Control Statewi de initiative. She said that 80% of the American public was in support of a strong sense of handgun con- trol. She said that the current laws had a problem with enforce- ment because if she' sold someone a gun, th.e fact that she sold the gun would not have to be reported back to the State Registration System. She said that the gun that, killed Robert :;Kennedy was hard to trace back to Si rhan Si Than because he had purchased the gun from an individual and a big loophole existed in the California Gun Legislation in that regard. She said one reason for that was that the National Rifle Association was a power lobby i n the country, and the United States Legislature and the California Legislature were intimidated by the lobby. She urged support of handgun control, and thanked Counciimembers Levy and Fletcher for their courage and all they had done to put the issue of banning handguns on the agenda in Palo Alto. Mark Diamond, 4146 Fain Way, said that over� the past few years he had been a sal esman in various nei ghborhoods throughout Palo Alto, and 251 of the time when he went to the door, people would not answer. He said Palo Alto wa.s often spoken of as a model com- munity and was considered to be sheltered. He said that when one out of four people he went to would not open the door because of fear, there was a reason behind it. People were afraid of crime, and afraid because their neighbor was burgl ari zed, and afrai d because people right in Palo Alto were being killed. His experi- ence was that the room was not full tonight because there were people who did not want to go out in the evening. Counciimember Fletcher said the charge was made that peoples' homes would be invaded in searching for handguns, and the Chief of Police had assured her that that was not the way Palo Alto envisioned enforcing an ordinance. . She said that if a handgun was evident at the time the police were present, they would have the right to confiscate it at that time if an ordinance were passed. She said many references were made that people would not be able to bear arms, and said that the Council was not addressing any control of rifles or shotguns. She was shocked at the indi- vidual who claimed that 10,000 or 11,000 deaths per year in the United States was small compared to the number of handguns. She felt that a human life was much more valuable than the percentage over the number of handguns. She. said that Morton Grove, Illinois was the first city to enact a handgun ban, and she .-read a 'portion of a letter she had received from the Mayor of that city regarding their handgun control: "Handgun control law_ reflect not only the feelings and desi res of our resi dents , but those of the majority_. of Americans as wel l . National ,polls . of the past 10 years support this goal. "Our ordinances have been upheld. by two courts and we anticipate that ultimately both the Illinois and United States Supreme Court : will also uphold these laws. "The National Ri f'1 e. Assoc.i.ati on, . which represents the manufacturers of weapons, promulgates _; tnei r sel fish myth that any controls on handguns are `unconstitutional.' With over 50 million handguns. now in circulation and an estimated two million more added each year, we can see their fi nanci al interest i n opposing these regulations at the expense of everyone's: safety. But the NRA does not _have. tiff responsibility for interpreting -the Constitution. This responsibility belongs to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court had never ruled.., that we have the right to-possess.any- weapon we' wish. In fact, just the contrary is true. A 1939 opinion from the Supreme Court.. prohibits our owning sawed-off shotguns. Ownership of automatic weapons are also severely re.stricted." 1 8 2 7 3/22/82 A i Councilmember Fletcher stated that the proposed action was only to ask the City Attorney to look into\ the legality of enacting an ordinance, and to refer that to the Policy and Procedures Committee. She said the Committee would explore the possibilities of such an ordinance, and refer a recommendation to the City Council. She hoped that everyone would show their interest and air their concerns at the Committee level. She said that prohi - bi t l ng the private possession of handguns was what was in, mind, and if Morton Grove's example was followed, law enforcement and security service personnel would be exempt 'as would antique gun collectors and licensed gun clubs. She said they had been told that a ban on handguns would deprive law abiding citizens of the ability to -protect themselves. She said no restriction was being proposed on rifles or shotguns, but she recommended tear gas for self-protection. She said about 100 handguns were stolen from Palo Alto households in burglaries in 1978 alone, and there was not one instance of which the Police Department was aware in which a handgs.n .-in. the hands of,a private citizen in the City aaf Palo Alto had deterred a criminal act. Instead, the 100 handguns stolen both before and after 1981, were now in the possession of criminal s. She said the situation must stop. She urged a vote in favor of the motion. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. Vice Mayor Bechtel commented that the item would not be before the Policy and Procedures Committee until May or later. She encour- aged citizens to watch the newspapers to determine the exact date, REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER WITHERSPOON RE SANTA CLARA VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER Councilmember Witherspoon said she received a letter from the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center urging support for their appli- cation for a Certificate of Need to remodel and update their facilities. She believed that Mayor Eyerly had written a letter on his own behalf saying that the facility was very valuable and should be certified by the State for an update. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Council send a letter to the Santa Clara Valley . Medical Center expressing support for remodeling. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly absent. REQUEST OF COUNCIEMEMBERS RENZEL AND LEVY TO ADJOURN MEETING IN ,Councilmember Renzel said that i ast Friday, Ethel Anderson, .a long time Council watcher and person who was active in civic affairs in Palo Alto passed away. MOTION: Councilmember Renzel moved, seconded by Levy, to adjourn in memory of Ethel Anderson. MOTION PASSED unanimously, Eyerly. absent. ADJOURNMENT Council` adjourned at 11:30 p. ATTEST: