Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-13 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL MINUT€s CITY HALO ALTO Regular Meeting Monday, April 13, 1981 ITEM PAGE Oral Communications 7.7 1 Consent Calendar Resolution re Support of the Great California 7 7 1 Resource Rally Community Development Block Grant Section 7 .7 2 Three Affirmative Action Plan Housing Improvement Program Leveraged Loans- 7 7 2 Amendment to Contract Planning Commission and Archiectural Review 7 7 2 Board recommendation for approval of the application of the City of Palo Alto for Site and Design Review for the closure and future development plan for the City's Sanitary Land- fill and Byxbee Landfill/Park Design Development Plan Feasibility Analysis Downtown Parking Structures 7 7 7 Request of Councilmember 'echtel and Fazzino 7 7 9 Regarding Crime in Palo , to Request of Councilmembers Klein and Renzel re 7 8 0 Proposed Citizen Participation Training Program April 20, 1981 Council Meeting Cancelled 7 8 2 Adjournment to Executive Session 7 ' 8 3 Final Adjournment 7 8 3 7_7 0 4/13/81.. Reyular Meeting Monday, April 13, 1981 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:40 p.m. the regular meeting of April 13, 1981. PRESENT: Bei Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Klein, Rcnzel, Witherspoon, Eyerly ABSENT: Levy Mayor Henderson announced the need for an executive session regarding personnel which would be held at the end of the formal meeting if possible. Mayor Henderson welcomed the Boy Scouts and some Stanford Students who were attending to observe the City's Plenning process. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Bob Moss, 4010 Orme, spoke regarding the letters from Jim Culpepper and the Neighborhood Coalition concerning conflict of interest issues that were raised almost six months ago and to which there had not been a response. He felt the Council as well as the public way due a response. Mayor Hend-arson advised that he had just signed a letter addressed to hilly Davis, Palo Alto Neighborhood Coalition, and hoped it would answer all of their questions. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Fazzino, that Item 2, regarding Byxbee Landfill/Park Design Development Plan, be . removed from the Consent Calendar and placed with Item 5, which is a recommendation by - the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board for approval of the application of the City of Palo Alto for Site and Design Review for the Closure and Future Development Plan for the City's Sanitary Landfill. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-0, Levy absent. Referral Items.. None Action Items RESOLUTION RE SUPPORT OF THE GREAT CALIFORNIA RESOURCE RALLY Staff recommends . approval of the resolution regarding the Great California Resource Rally. RESOLUTION 5898 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE . CITY OF PALO ALTO ENDORSING AND SUPPORTING THE., GOALS OF THE CALIFORNIA RESOURCE RALLY AND URGING CITY - PARTICIPATIOM IN `RECYCL1IAG, LITTER CONTROL AND WASTE REDUCTION ACTIVITIES. f. 7 1 4/13/81 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT SECTION THREE AFFIRMATIVE Staff recommends approval of CDBG Section 3, Affirmative Action Plan. HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM LEVERAGED LOANS - Amendment to O'R` n 'a c Staff recommends: 1. That the Council accept the modification of the contract with Crocker Bank to use the current daily home improvement inter- est rate from which the interest reduction and subsidy would be based; 2. That .the Council allow the Housing Improvement Program to increase the effective interest rate to .the borrowers to five percent; and 3. That Council authorize the appropriate parties to sign the modified contract. AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT HO. 4079 - RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM CREDIT AGREEMENT CROCKER NATIONAL BANK. MOTION: Councilmernber Fazzino moved, seconded by Witherspoon, to approve the consent calendar action items. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-0, Levy absent. PLANNING COMMISSION AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW .BOARD RECOMMENDS 1 L DEIGN R of 1HE CITif OF PALO ALTO FOR SITE ANI5 L ;SENT PLAN Mayor Henderson r.ernarked that the Council had the report entitled Byxbee Landfill Park Palo. Alto Baylands done by Eckbokay Associates, the Architectural Review Board and Planning Commission minutes. He reiterated that the Council had read all the material, and hoped that the information •. would be condensed as much as possible. Ken. Kay of Eckbokey Associates showed phase 1 of the design. development of .the two phase processes. He indicated that ' the second phase of the process would come back to the Council for final approval and presented the total concept of the finished park which would oe in 1992. He advised that they had worked very closely with Dale Pfeiffer and Larry Whit , ;:given their expertise regarding the landfill and the -finished park. Mr. Kay continued that the existing site was presently being filled to meet the ,plan which was being " presented at that time. It was also the plan that was presented in the 1978 Baylands Master Plan. Changes reflected the Regional Water Quality Con- trol Board req irement.. i.e. ;;coning up to grade, orainage,, and the top cover re 'uuirements which allow for a minimum of three feet of top soil. . The technical criteria was established by Cooper, Clark and Associates.` in a separate report in' -May of 1978. Mr. Kay 'iiresented slides to illustrate the various elements . and components= /of the plan and advised that it was a very complicated process because it was making a park on an active Class 2 land- fill. An active Class 2 landfill has a number of constraints and their design process alleviated a lot. of the potential problems which could arise in the future.,: The consultants felt that the design of the plan would allow free movement,throughout the 7 7 2 - 4/13/81 .meadows which is not a common factor at the Baylands presently, and it would become a unique recreational element. .An abundance of wildlife would be able to be viewed. They felt the municipal -composti ng was an important factor in the future closure of the. landfill. The intent of the Baylands Master Plan concept had not been changed, only refined. Embarcadero Way would be the future entrance to the Park. Above the treatment plant would be an entrance element with parking, visitors' center, and a destina- tion point.. The landfill design form that would take on a hill and valley texture which would allow for a view of the Baylands and the surrounding views, as well as inward recreation in the meadow. One of the basic concepts of the clan is to maintain a very rough character of the marshland while providing interior recreation spaces and very small irrigated meadows. The winds at the Baylands were a considerable factor. The con- sultants hoped ,that the vegetation plus the orientation of the observation areas" would provide a comfortable area - Mr. Kay concluded that the plan provided for converting the sani- tary landfill into a pastural park. Neither the staging. nor the design plans were intended to lock the City into any final deci- sion. In the stage 3 area in terms of grading, if resource recovery - is not realized by 1985, there was an opportunity to raise the grade of the third area as long as it conformed with the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Mr. Kay advised that every effort had been made to try to provide the least amount of interface between the service of the refuse area and the pedestrians using or recreating at the park. Mr. Adams advised that one of the reasons they asked the c)\ sul- tants to come to the meeting was because it was ari important step in the process of closing the landfill. Tha formations illus- trated are actually being formed now and if the City had the go ahead to . continue with this, they will continue on. the same gen- eral scheme. He referred to ARB reconmendaticn that no further design work be done until a more deta;ied estimate and sources of fundingwas provided. He hoped that the presentation had pointed out that a considerable amount of detail work was done on the plan, and there was no way they could provide a more detailed estimate without making a more detailed plan. He asked Council to amend the ARB recommendation in that regard and he pointed out that the refuse fund was the only known source of moneys for the project at present. Staff also asked that Council modify the ARB recommendation that there be a close examination Of alternative waste disposal methods. He pointed out than that was being taken care of:through the Joint PowersAgreement of North Santa Clara County cities and felt that, staff could not wait for those -inves- tigations to be competed to proceed with the detailed design, He clarified that Council approve staff to . proceed with' the detailed plan so they, can then execute' the plans into park form. (The detailed plans being exact deflrltion of contours, exact identification of vegetation, size and so'on.) Fred Nichols..' Cha'iraian ,�f the Olanning Commissioa, said that in general, they. approved. the designs. The Commission did not alter any suggestions, but felt there was perhap some -over- building. '' They felt >that the boardwalk and the marsh might be too expensive for the. City. The Planning Commission recommended that the whole project be reduced in various" parts. He reminded the Cour►cll that throughout their d1scussion they wondered about. the costs, the difference between the 'sealing of the dump, and completion of the park. They did not get into the numbers but they were concerned that they Plight be large. Another item that 7=7 3 4/13/81 was not fully covered in the Planning Commission minutes, was the further discussion of the present recycling center and whether there would be a recycling operation somewhere in the City when the dump was finally sealed, The Commission felt there should be thought given to maintaining some recycling operations in the City limits, and not necessarily at a regional center. Councilmember Renzel said that with regard te, the Mayfield Marsh, it appeared to her that right now the remnant of Matadero Creek extended far beyond where the marsh was shown as extending. and she wondered what happened to the remnants of Matadero Creek. Mr. Kay advised that the Matadero Slough did extend beyond the present form of Mayfield Marsh. The new levy walk that would be incorporated to retain the water would take up some of that land, That was the difference she saw in the plans. Councilmember Renzel asked if it was absolutely necessary to build over the top of the creek bed rather than to build around the creek bed. She asked if there was not an existing levy on one side of it and wondered if the actual Slough remnant was fully incorporated within. the Mayfield' Marsh. Mr. Kay responded that they would build over the existing levy. He also advised that, the remnant was incorporated within the Mayfield Marsh. Councilmember Renzel understood that they were not changing the stream bed, but simply incorporating it. Mr. Kay said that was correct. Councilmember Witherspoon asked for a clarification of what staff was asking for. Mr. Adams responded that staff needed approval to go forward with the final 'desi_gn. Such things as whether to include a boar=dwalk, what size trees should be put in and things of that nature, etc. would return for final approval by Council. Councilmember Witherspoon felt it was a very exciting concept and would be a very exciting park. She expressed concern about secu- rity in the baylands. She acknowledged some unpleasant incidents Which occurred at the Yacht Harbor area, which was a very secluded area and felt._ -they should plan af. way to make the area secure after dark if they couldn' patrol it. She assumed the paths :were not paths which could be .traveled by a police car, and short of a' motorcycle or a mounted policeman, there would be no way to have that area patroled. Mr. Adams advised her that the paths were to be twelve feet wide, but one of the ARB's recommendations was to make them narrower so that police cars could not be on it. Councilmember Witherspoon said it would then have to be ,secured at the gate somehow. She assumed this type of problem did not occur at the refuse area because they had a gate. Mr. Pfeiffer said they :did , have problems at the refuse area the plan took into consideration gates at all entrances accesses. and and Councilmember Witherspoon agreed with the Planning Commission and felt they should have as few paths as possible. They were sup- posed to be preserving the feeling of a marsh ar&a not creating a city'park, and that there should be enough paths to get people out to where they wanted to _ go in the Bayl and s without owerdoi ng it. They ,should ,keep in mind the cost Of maintenance as well as the cost of policing. 7 7 4 4/13/81 Councilmember Bechtel concurred with Mrs. Witherspoon's comments and felt that the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board did an excellent job of reviewing the Plan. She hoped that as they planned the next phase, the Plan would have different levels of construction, because of the cost of imple- mentation. She was concerned that perhaps it would end up that there was not enough money t.o do it to the extent planned, at at which time the Council would have to -decide whether to go the full route or a modified plan. Councilmember Fazzino felt the report was excellent. He was con- fused about the expenditure of dollars over the next few :years. He had a fear of waking up seven years from now, having spent $18 million and finding that they still have . a dump and not a park. He felt it was.important to provide for constant checkpoints, for the Council and the staff "°o agree to move ahead with various aspects of the plare and the expenditure of dollars, and to assure that such a plan would jibe well with the Joint Powers Agreement. He -assumed the clock had started to run in terms of expenditure of dollars, as a result of the City's ongoing landfill _ and resource recovery plan even if the Council did not approve the design of the park. At this point they were talking about the closure 'process and not until approximately 1983 would they be talking about major evolution of the park. Mr. Adams acknowledged Mr. Fazzino's understanding and said they had to close the landfill within the prescribed regulations of agencies which required a great deal of money. Councilmember Fazzina asked what would happen if in a couple of years the JPA decided it had reached its point of funding for developing a resource recovery project, and it aid not take place. Would the City be caught short without either a resource recovery alternative and still have a dump. Correction See Pg. 890 Mr. Adams replied that would present a small problem, but that 6/15/81 the JPA was working; on an alternative landfill and the last stage had enough flexibility that the life of the present landfill could be extended if that was what the Council wanted. Councilmember Fazzino said his concern was that at some point the City would not be able to turn back, and he wanted "to be assured that along with the development of resource recovery -alternatives - even' up to -establishment and operation of that alternative, that alternative landfill would be potentially available. Mr. Adams said that was the current plan. Councilmember Fazzino-had another concern which related to main- tenance costs. He expected maintenance costs of this project to grow by leaps and bounds: over the next few years and •wanted to know when staff would have a better idea of maintenance responsi- bilities and potential costs. Mr. Pfeiffer said .they would have a. better idea after Stage I was completed -f ' Staff would then have are idea of the type of settle- ment they. had and what was needed for the park. He added that landfills are high in maintenance .costs and, because of . di fferen tial settlement and the•Regional Board's requirements fu.. drain- age, _ mat ntenarice was . goi ng to be especially important so they Wouldn't have pondage. Councilmember Fazzilio ; asked if .they would feel co lfident in projecting maintenance cost$.by:1983. Mr. Pfeiffer explained that thepathswere primarily for drainage because the landfill shape was so shallow that run off paths were needed. The' parallel paths would be looked at i n Stage I I . 7 7 5; 4/13/81 Councilmember Fazzino complimented the consultant, the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board for their out- standing work. 'He felt that it was extremely important that they be vigilant about the project because, of the amount of money being spent aid felt a close watch should be made, and that - at. least once every budget year, the Council should review the pro= ject in terms of expenditures necessary for the next year. Councilmember Eyerly wanted reassurance that the vegetation in the Baylands would have the same passive impact which was cur- rently there. - Mr. Pfeiffer said that staff was working with Helen Proctor who was a long-standing.landscape architect with experience in the Baylands. The project was not easy to landscape and there were some problems with putting vegetation on the landfill, but they felt that they had solved quite a few of the problems of their initial design, but further review would be necessary. He said Ms. Proctor had a list of salt tolerant plants that could grow in conditions which existed - in the Baylands. He said there would be no recreational element except for informal picnicing, viewing, sitting, bcycling and walking. Councilmember Eyerly asked if the $19 Million included rejuvena- tion of the ITT property after the excavation for the impermeable fill and if not, what would happen to that property in order to make the park. Mr. Adams said that the ITT property was not included in the cost and that currently the plan was to use the refuse fund for that property. Staff hoped that by the end of summer they would have an idea of haw much it would cost to rejuvenate that property. Councilmember Eyerly asked where the North County JPA was on solid waste disposal, how far they had proceeded, and what were the expectations for operational date. He felt it was important that they be able to coordinate solid waste disposal with the completion of the landfill operation and if they could not, he felt they would be in trouble. He asked for reassurance that they were not tied down completely and asked staff to submit -a staff report which spelled out where the JPA was; how soon they would ire operational .and what that type of garbage disposal would cost Palo Alto residents. Also, if Council approved the concept tonight, and later did not like the costs, would they be flexible on the landfill operation. Mr. Adams said a staff report would be submitted soon and that there would be.budgetary impacts on it. Further he said that the plan had sufficient flexibility to ease Council concerns. - - Councilmeaber Klein said the staff report referred to funiing which would come dirom the Refuse Reserver and wanted to know how ''-much money was in that reserve and how much money would be spent during the year. Mr. pf-iffer responded by saying the reserve fund was about $1 million and that- every year, tied in -_with the budget process, "they analyzed the cost Of. landfill closure, added funds to the. cost of. Palo Alto -Sanitation Com_pany., and=landfi.11 operation, and came up with a projected figure - for garbage rates for , not 'only the current year, but - for the next . ten years-.— Lase year pro- jected figures. included. 1a dfi.11 closure, but not-JPA.- Councilmember Renzel commended both the, Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board; • Councilmember Fletcher expressed concern about the security of joggers on the paths. Mr. Kay said the trees would be up on the slope so they won't. be as close as thsy appeared on the plans. 7 7 6. 4/13/81 MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, to approve all 11 Planning Commission recommendations plus #1, 4 and 5 of the Architectural Review Board recommendations. MOTION PASSED by d vote of 8-0, Levy absent, MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, • seconded by Renzel, to approve recommendations #2 and #3 Of the Architectural Review Board to be accomplished in Phase II. MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-0, Levy absent. FEASIBILITY ANALYIS, DOWNTOWN PARKING STRUCTURES (CMR:217:1) Staff recommends that the Council; 1. Approve -a resolution of _intention to make changes and modifi- cations' to the University Avenue area offstreet parking Assessment District No. 75-63 for purposes of authorizing the use of unexpended 1980 bond proceeds (in the amount of $37,000) remaining after completion of the project to conduct a Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Analysis. 2. Schedule a public hearing to declare Council's intention to cake such changes and modifications. 3. Immediately after public hearing, authorize staff to create a new Capital Improvement Project (No. 80-70) and to proceed with the consultant selection process for a Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Analysis and return to the Council with a consultant contract. Councilmember Fetcher asked if the lot by the Holiday Inn was the area where there may be a park and ride lot for downtown employees. Mr. Noguchi responded yes. Ned Gallagher, 440 Melville Avenue, spoke for Downtown Palo Alto, Inc, and added their endorsements of the staff recommendations and urged Co,unc i 1 approval. Downtown-,\Pa1 o Alto, Inc. felt expen- diture of the excess funds which were deeived from the 1980 bond issue within the Offstreet Parking Assessment District for the study was very appropriate. David Midlo, 320 University Avenue, a downtown merchant, felt the study should also determine what rots should be reserved 'for the possibility of future structures, particularly dealing with the air rights question. Councilmember klein wondered if 'site B would really _ be used by people. He asked were :there preliminary indications that it would be a usable site and were people willing to walk that far from where their cars were parked. Mr. Noguchi responded that the i sues were not simply the parking structure and t at, the Downtown Parking Management Plan offered a two -prong approdch. First, parking structure effect, the park and ride facility; and, second, the shuttle bus approach, which would take the employees from'the parking areas, to theft,. places of employment, for which staff had made an application to the Federal government for funding. Councilmember Klein asked if the government t:,'those funds from the budget would staff still look at Site B. Mr. Noguchi responded that there were two parts to, the analysis: the `;idea of a shuttle, and, the core area concept of the downtown area. The intent` was to keep the employee long-term parking as 7 7 7 4/13/81-< far away from the core as possible so as to free up the retail core from employee parking and also to remove the traffic circu- lation problems attributable to employee parking irom within that core area. Mr. Gallagher said there was a time factor in both recommenda- tions regarding Lot J and the Urban Lane. He said Downtown Palo. Alto, Inc. had looked.at Lot J as an ideal spot for a multi- lev l storage garage because it was surrounded with commercial and residential buildings which screened it from the public, view. Site 8- and Urban Lane was a new development and was coming together with this plan for multi -level structures, Site S was a late development related to the plan to charge for onstreet parking. Bill 8yxbee, Downtown Palo Alto, Inc. said the Urban Lane area was exploratory. He said money was being spent at this'stage for plans, review of possibilities and said there was no assurance that they would go along with Lot J or Urban Lane. He said that if the economics were favorable they would like to have the multi -story garage on Lot J. Urban Lane probably had complica- tions such as land ownership and geographic location, but felt the study should be done. Councilmember Witherspoon commented, that the City: had about $37,000 left from the bond sale and that staff estimated the con- sultant would probably cost between $25,000 to $40,000. She thought it prudent to specify in the motion an alternative means of finding more money, in the event the consultants' costs were more than $37,000. The report mentioned. the City advancing the money and being paid back through permit revenues and she thought teat that money was earmarked for something else. Mr. Noguchi said that permit revenues were earmarked for retire- ment of the 195? bonds. One of the bonds was to be retired this year and, after that, money would accrue nexi;: year wh,ch could be used for other things. This yea..r, there would not be enough. money for a parking study, and it as staff's intent to limit the study to the $37,000. Councilmember Fletcher wondered if the consultant could be asked to explore what other cities have done to revitalize their down- towns, and felt that they were limiting parking and . increasing transit. She was not sure if that would be appropriate for the City, but thought the consultant should keep in mind at least exploring whether this was the correct direction to go. Mr. laner said that this study did not provide for _that and that to include it would cost considerably more money. Councilmember Fletcher asked about the tieing for the study because she felt the cost of a parking structure would be sub- stantial and should be spread over the members of the assessment district. She was concerned about the impact of increasing the cost to individual merchants, Mr. Schreiber said Councilmember Fletcher was referring to the Downtown Retail Study which was being done by staff, and. that the status of that study was r that five or six economic : consultants had been contacted to assist in analyzing the current makeup of the downtown retail function"and to analyze where that function was going, given land values and other factors. One element of that' study would be the identification of ways in which retail in the downtown -area.` could be=retained and improved. Mr, Schreiber felt that that study and the' parking structure `feasibility analysis- were tied together because the future retail part was tied, to the parking policies and access questions., but that they were two separate _studies. Mr. Schreiber added that the Downtown Retail Study would look at what other cities were doing in that area, but., would probably not include . an- extensive tomparati ve analysis with other communities because it .-.would push the, dollar amount up considerably. 7 7 8 4/13/81 Councilmember Fletcher asked about the traffic impact on neigh- boring streets and wondered if that should not tie in with the University Avenue Corridor. She thought they were directly related. Mr. Noguchi said that the University Avenue Corridor study was an attempt to address how to` control traffic movement along University Avenue in terms of speeding, etc., and though it was - tied somewhat to the downtown parking issues, he felt they were mutually exclusive in that parking downtown was already identi- fied in terms of total shortfall. He felt that the University Avenue Corridor study would not make any difference in terms of the parking need. Councilmember Flet%<<er said that mechanical parking was supposed to be addressed and she wanted the study to include bicycle mech- anical parking. She described a structure in Japan where there were shelves for bicycles, and .said t=iat when the number of parking spaces were determined, room should be left for the bicycle lockers which would prevent making room for them at a later time. She then addressed the need for purl is restrooms in the downtown area and wondered if that could be addressed in con- nection with the parking structure study. Councilmember Eyerly felt the Urban Lane study was a viable one and felt it would help move along the Downtown Parking Management Plan. MOTION: Councilalember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Klein, to approve the staff recommendations and to adopt the resolution of intention to make changes and modifications. RESOLUTION 5899 entitled "RESOLUTIOf1 M -F THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY- OF PALO ALTO RESOLVING ITS INTENTION TO MAKE CHANGES- AND MODI_FtCATIONS - UNIVERSITY AVENUE AREA OFF-STREET PARKING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 75-638 - $175,000 BONDS OF 1980'' MOTION PASSED. by a vote of 8-0, Levy absent. RE UEST OF COUNCILMEMBERS BECHTEL AND FAllINO REGARDING CRIME IN Councilmember Fazzino expressed concern about increased crime in. Palo Alto and felt that the Council should know what the crime situation was and what additional resources -would be needed by the police to deal with the problem. He referred to an article which appeared in a local newspaper recently, which .talked about the loss of police staffing which occurred at the time money was being collected for the Arastra settlement, and he wanted to have. that issue answered. Hips assumption was that staffing levels had remained the same for the. Police Department. It was quite aI,par- ent to him that the crime prevention program was :a successful one and he wanted to see emphasis placed on it. .Councilmember Fazzino felt personal protection was a basic- civic right; Council Correct- had been lead to believe that crime. was not a Lig problem in Palo ion Alto and he felt a report should- be prepared addressing the See Pg. issues; 890 6/15/81 Councilmember Bechtel said she had - rec4i ved a number of calls regarding the crime' probler►:t in Palo Alto. Her reasons for wanting a report from the Police Chief were 'that crime.)was-_every- one's problem. She want0f to' find out what was happening, what the pol ice. were doing about it, and how citizens'could help. She said she had -spoken to Chief Zurcher' and he suggested reporting,. to the Council on May" 18, at 6:30 p.m. Councilmember Fazzino asked when the Police Department budget was to be heard because he felt Council should have the report before 7 7 9 4/13/81 the Finance and Public Works Committee heard the Police Department's budget. Mr. Zaner suggested that a report be prepared by Chief Zurcher in writing, by May 18, which could be reviewed by the Council and then the Finance and Public Works Committee could discuss the content of the report in the context of the budget. Councilmember Bechtel said she would like to have a. written report as well as a study session. Councilmember Eyerly felt the decisions by the Council would need to relate directly to the budget. He wanted to see the meeting held during budget hearings. He suggested that the Council - members attend the Finance and Public Works Committee and there'y have the matter discussed in one combined meeting. Councilmember Fazzino sueeested that the Council be invited to the May•19 Finance and Public Works Committee budget hearing for the Police Department. He reiterated the immediate concern and encouraged that citizen/Police Department meetings continue. Councilmember Bechtel was concerned that if the Council had just one single meeting, that they do more than discuss the extent to which Police Department staff would need to be increased. Mr., Mr.; Zaner' assured her that the Finance and Public Works Committee meeting would deal exclusively with the Police Department and would be are in-depth discussion. MOTION: Councilmember Bechtel moved, seconded by Fazzino, that a single meeting be scheduled for the Finance and Public Works Committee (with the entire Council invited) to discuss Police Department issues and budge',; only on Tuesday, May 19, at 7:30 p.m. in the- Council Chambers. MOTION PASSEDby a vote of 8-0, Levy absent. RE'uEST OF COu ;CILMEMBERS KLEIN AND RENZEL RE PROPOSED CITIZEN PAT I O N Councilmember Klein wanted to be assured that any training pro- gram would not interfere with full, fair and vigorous discussion of issues which was the City's tradition. He was concerned that the cost of this training program was between $?5,000 and $30,000. . He wondered if it was appropriate for Stanford University to be a_part of a City training program, particularly with regard to citizen participation. He felt it was important for the City to have a good relationship with Stanford, but felt Stanford was not a government agency and it had different goals than the City. He said that ;he program was being planned with Stanford, and aske4 if that was appropriate, MOTION: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Renzel, that the proposed citizen participation training ,program be referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee. Councilmember Renzel added that there had been citizen interest and agreed with Councilmember Klein's comments. Mr. Zaner said Council _had increasingly given staff assignments which `entailed working with organized or ad hoc community groups, i.e. Terman, Downtown Park North, etc. He acknowledged that those assignments were appropriate`, and said, the purpose of _ the program was to address the issue that some City employees were not well -trained to deal with the public. They did not know how to ,put together an agenda, how to follow-up on . commitments,' -'how to consistentlydeal with the same people, how to listen, how to conduct themselves and how to give a presentation. There was also an opportunity for the public to sign up for their own 7 8 0 4/13/81 training program. The public portion would not be financed by the City, it would be separately run and administered. The parallel would. be to see where the two tracks would complement each other. Staff tried to design a program where City staff and the public would be better able to meet with each other. Milly Davis, 344 Tennessee Lane supported referring the program to the Policy a;zd Procedures Committee. -She said the Neighborhood Coalition would discuss the program at their next meeting so that citizens would -have an opportunity to study the proposal further. Edward Freiberg, 726 Charleston Road feared that through the training program, citizens and staff would learn to avoid contro- versy. He felt the purpose of the proposal was to effect a smooth flow of ideas, ' so that by ,the time issues were, Made pub- lic, Compromises would already have been made. Further, he felt that some proposals should not be given such consideration and did not warrant concessions, or compromises. Citizen opinion should be heard by the government not relegated -to a committee where voices could be muted. He felt the proposal was designed to put decision -making at the appointive levels of government rather than the elective levels and he -did not agree with that. R. J. Debs, 3145 Flowers Lane agreed with Mr. Freiberg, It was nothing near that staff and citizens locked horns. and then. worked things out. This program involved a policy decision and the Council should make a policy statement that there be no training of voters to work with staff. He pointed out that there was a history of conflicting goals between Stanford and the City. Citizens deserve to be heard and did not need training. Regarding administrative training of City staff by the City. Manager, he felt it should be conducted with the aid of con- sultants who were not in conflict. FORUM far the Environment and Community had been working for Stanford for some years. They were a good outfit, but did not belong in the training unit. He was concerned about where the independent funding for citizens' training would come from. He was upset that the details of this item had not appeared in the packet. Andy Doty, 4072 Scripps Avenue, Palo Alto, Public Information Officer at Stanford, was a participant in a new management devel- opment program at' Stanford, the objective being to make staff more objective and efficient. He became interested . in the work of the organizational development program and was told.. that Palo Alto had two half-time professionals- doing work with the City staff. He called Juanita Brown and Frances Kaufman to find out what they did and how they did it and 'what the results .were. They were thinking of setting up a new program for the City that Would help the staff better serve the public. He Was _`asked if Stanford would_ be interested in joining -hands. He- solicited responses from Stanford and said the response was not good. He felt the,.proposed program was a farsighted one, conceived by an - extremely able staff. There was nothing, undemocratit about it and hoped it could go forward with or without University's par- t1Cipat141. l r. Zaner said the object was to teach people new skills He felt-- staff needed the skills to enable them to serve the ,public and Council well. Tt was A1nfair for people to . think that the program would preclude citizens from coming before the Planning Commission, or -City Coudcl1 and expressing their views. Staff's t,structions are to gu. out and get a compromise, consensus or agreement for'Council's position and what people in the neighbor hood- want. He felt_ sWf needed. to learn' how to Work with -the public and, as City Manager,. had attempted to address - that :_:need by developing a program for them to do it. 7 8 1 4/13/81 Councilmember Witherspoon felt there was no way Council could overlook the fact that they were the policy. -making body of the City. She did not feel there was anything that could be done that would preclude citizens from expressing their views at City Council or Planning Commission meetings. She felt staff should be trained and if citizens did not want to be trained that was fine. Mayor Henderson felt this program was an administrative decision made by the City Manager. He felt Councilmembers could have dealt with the matter in various ways, i.e. asking the City Manager questions, taking it up in Personnel Executive Session, but that by agendizing it, responsibility was being taken away from the City Manager. It appeared that any relationship between the City and Stanford is suspect and he felt there was nothing sinister about toe program. He hoped the Council would not set a precedent of agendizing administrative decisions, and not take the time to ;end this matter to the Commission or Committee and back to the Council. Councilmember Fletcher felt any skills staff Can acquire to t °y to work, out community problems were beneficial, not only to Council but also to citizens. She was pleased that Stanford was trying to work with the community. She also felt the program was a management decision. Councilmember Eyerly understood the City Manager's concerns, but felt that some of the comments in the memo delved into policy decisions. He stated he was not a supporter .of FORUM and, did not want FORUM involved in staff training programs. He did not have a problem with setting up the program, but did not like some of the objectives. - Councilmember Fazzino would not support referring the subject to Committee because he could not stand in the way of the City Manager's legitimate, administrative and Charter, rights to establish training programs for his staff. He felt staff skills for dealing with the public were important and should be empha- sized. He also objected to agendizing this type of matter and encouraged Councilmerribers to deal with the City_Manager person- ally if they had problems. He did Rot like, involving the public and Stanford, Even though he was supportive of the University, he felt Stanford had to be treated carefully and could not be viewed -as another governmental jurisdiction. He encouraged the City Manager to drop the idea of including the public and Stanford. MOTION: Councilmember Klein moved, seconded by Renzel , to refer the matter bf Citizen Participation Training Program to the Policy and Procedures Committee. MOTION FAILED: Motion failed by a vote of 4-4 as follows: AYES: Eyerly, Renzel, Klein, Bechtel NOES: Fletcher, Henderson, Fazzino, Witherspoon ABSENT: Levy APRIL 20 1981 COUNCIL MEETING Staff recommends that April 20, 1981 Council meeting be can - MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that April 20, Council meeting be cancelled. MOTION PASSED:: The motion passed by a vote of: 8-4, Levy absent. 7 8. 2 4/13/81 ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION - Meeting adjourned to Executive Session re Personnel at 10:45 p.m. FINAL ADJOURNMENT - 11:45 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: city Cl erk/ MGyor (' 7 8 3 4/13/81