Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-12-03 City Council Summary MinutesCITY couriai M 1NUT€S Regular Meeting December 3, 1979 ITEM Minutes of November 5, 1979 Oral Communications Consent Calendar - Action Items Site and Design Review of Palo Alto Golf Course Driving Range Fence --Park Improvement Ordinance Revision of Joint Powers Agreement for Intergovernmental Employee Relations Services North Santa Clara County Municipal Solid Waste Management Program - One Year Extension of Joint Powers Agreement Approval of Contract Extension/Amendment with Earth Metrics, Inc., - Coordinator for North Santa Clara County Municipal Solid Waste Management Joint Exercise of Powers (JPA) Agreement 727 and 744 Ramona Street - Application for Change: of District by Thomas Harrington Appointment of Two Human Relations Commissioners for Three Year Terns Commencing January 1, 1980 Canvass of Results of November 6. 1979 Special Election i+ sures A and B y Proposed Housing Development —Parking Lot Q School Site Purchases: Status Report Reports re Item Pricing of Goods in fiery Stores Recess Report of City Attorney re #end 'ts to Chapter 9.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code re Smoking Public Hearing: Peter Coutts Hill Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Annexation of Peter Coutts Hill Finance and Public Works Committee Recommends re Proposed PASCO Contract Request of Mayor Henderson re Pennington Parcel Division Application Adjournment CITY Or. PALO ALTO PAGE 304 304 304 304 304 305 305 305 305 306 306 3 I 0 3 1 0 3 I 2 3 -1 3 3I 9 319 322 322 323 Regular Meeting December 3, 1979 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto Councilchamber at 250 Hamilton Avenue, at presiding. PRESENT: Brenner, Eyerly, Faezino, Fletcher, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon ABSENT: None met on this date in the 7:43 p.m., Mayor Henderson Henderson, Levy, MINUTES F NOVEMBER 5�. 1979 Councilmember Renzel asked that on page 249, the motion to continue give her name as the person to second that motion, Councilmember Renzel asked that on page 252, asked that the third line of the second paragraph read instead: "I think the Comprehensive Plan should direct land -use, and not the other way around MOTION: Councilmember Fazzino moved, seconded by Menzel, that the minutes of November 5, 1979, be approved as corrected. The lotion passed on a unanimous voice vote. (ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR Referral Items None Action Items Mayor Henderson ascertained that no member of the public nor Councilmember wished to speak to an item on the Consent Calendar. The following items reined: SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW OF MIO At GOLF COURSE DRfY1NG )ANgE FENCE—PARFINCE—PARY MI NTORDI CE (CMR:418:9) ORDINANCE 3172 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COWOCIL OF THH CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING AND ADOPTING A PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF FENCE IMPROVEMENTS IN BYXBEE PARK." (First reading 11/19/79) REVISION OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT IMEItsavelwarA tlipiftEE Funding for City of Palo Alto fees of about $2000 under this agreement are budgeted annually in the Personnel Department. AGREEMENT. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL NTAL RELATIONS SERVICES 304 12/3/79 NORTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY MUNICIPAL SOLID WXITTRUTMILI CITTITTENs OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Staff recommends that Council approve the °°Agreement to extend until January 1, 1981, the Joint Exercise of Powers agreement." AGREEMENT TO EXTEND UNTIL JANUARY 1, 1981, THE JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT -- NORTH SANTA CLARA COUNTY MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT APPROVAL OF CONTRACT EXTENSION AMENDMENT Staff recommends that Council, as general administrator for the Joint Powers Agreement, approve the amendment to the agreement with Earth Metrics, Inc., to provide for coordinating services through March 31, 1980, at a cost of $9000. AMENDMENT 2 TO AGREEMENT 3853 --PROFESSIONAL SERVICES --EARTH METRICS, INCORPORATED MOTION: Councilrnember Fazzino moved, seconded by Renzel, that Council approve the Consent Calendar. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. NOTION: Vice Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Renzel, that Council bring the matter concerning 727 and 744 Ramona Street forward for continuance. The motion passed an a unanimous voice vote. 727 AND 744 RAMONA STREET DISTRICT MOTION: Vice Mayor She. roved, seconded by Renzel, that the application of Thomas Harrington concerning 727 and _744 Ramona Street be continued to January 21, 1980. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. APPOINTMENT OF TWO i# i RELATIONS COMMISSIONERS Mayor Henderson read the names of the candidates; saying -that Council had i niervi a tie on. November 26, 1979. Ahisgard, Harry W. Podolsky, Joseph L. Brown, Pat Robinson, Jerry E. Cahill, Salty Ann Tao, Helen Cottrell, Stan Weiner* Fred S. Oeerkop, Barbara Winslow, Douglas S. Kass, Michael He said that the first candidate to receive five Ccuncilmembers1 votes wind be elected to the post of commissioner. Helen Tao was elected on the first ballot to serve a three-year term on they SRC, commencing January 1, 1980 and ending member 31, 1982. Joseph Podolsky Ms elected on the fourth ballot to serve a three-year ter on the ice, commencing January 10 1980 and eadi ng December 31, 1982. 305 12/3/79 1 1 ANVASS OF RESULTS OF NOVEMBER 6 1979 SPECIAL ELEdr i -grXtUREcX AND if Mayor Hendersee announced that 10,985 votes had bean cast in favor of amending the Charter to hold the general municipal election at the same time as county, state and national elections, in November instead of May in odd numbered years; 797 votes had been cast in opposition. Also, voters had approved amendment of the park dedication ordinance re El Camino Park. MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon introduced the following resolution and, seconded by Fazzi no, moved its adoption by Council. RESOLUTION 5753 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 6, 1979." The motion passed on a unanimous vote. PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT -- Mayor Henderson said that Council would address itself to the question of whether or not it epproved the general concept of the proposed housing development. If Council did approve, it would direct staff to proceed with preparing an option agreement, that would cover the details mentioned in the September 27, 1979 staff report CMR:431:9, now before Council, with the matter then to return to Council before further action took place. Napttali Knox, Director of Planning and Community Development, said the proposal by Pr. Kinney and Mr. Arutunian represented the first proposal made to the City for the use of air rights. Specifically the two men proposed to construct housing between Alma and High Streets and Lytton and University Avenues using the air right of the present City parking, while at the same time adding to the number of available parking places in that Parking Lot Q. On September 24 Council had asked the Policy and Procedures Committee to dicrueC the mat�'er, of it _righi�. .... matter �.c� er s air r rights yn �� 9eii@Z`dil i y. The Committee had toured the subject area; an application for zone change would have to be made, and, since the City owned the property, the Committee felt that Council had to know about the proposed project before coesidering the zone change. A seven -point list of criteria had been drawn up by the Planning Department in 1975 for guidelines to judge whether or not air rights should be granted should application for thews be ate, Those criteria had been reviewed and minor changes had been made November 6, 1979, by the Policy and .edures-Committee.: Council would review the ceittria January 7, 1984. Mr. Kinney, in the brown spiral notebook presentation, hod presented his proposal to Council and addressed the seven-po i n t cri ter, i . - Mr. Krox pointed out that a proposed development, whether or not it was for air rights or other, could not exceed zoning restrictions on height,. density, parking, or daylight plane. Mr. Kit continued: he said that zoning restrictions applied to air right -held lots as well es conventional lots; each air -right proposal would be considered individually, and in the sane fashion as all Planned Community (PC) applications and so consideration of specific details would be inappropriate at this time. The nature of the option agreement staff would draw pup would be quite broad and not pre -determine matters to be resolved during the P -C approval process. The option agreement would establish whetter the property would be sold or leased, number of below-.arket-rate (MR) units, and nor of public and private parking spaces, and the like, then the option agreement would return for Council approval. 3 0 6 12%3,79 Charles Kinney, partner in AK Properties, 125 University Avenue, outlined his partner's and his history of property ownership at the 125 University Avenue address relating to the proposed project. He said the project would give more housing without disrupting a settled neighborhood. There would be two levels of public and one level of private parking at a place that now offered only 74 spaces. He lauded the potential housing opportunities in downtown Palo Alto. He referred to the model AK Properties had submitted of the proposed project, explaining that AK Properties had been involved with the proposal for over a year. Kermit Knopf, 930 Palo Alto Avenue, represented Downtown Palo Alto, which, he said, supported the AK Properties' concept. He qualified that support by saying that Downtown Palo Alto had asked that more'dowhtown parking be provided; the project could excavate for additional parking, he thought, with longterm to be the deepest, and shortterm closest to the surface. Council ber Witherspoon asked how the parking assessments would be worked out. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, said his office was at present researching where funds from sale or lease of air rights might be apportioned, and more information would be available January 7. Vice Mayor Sher said the question of whether or not it was advisable to make available to other contractors the opportunity to bid on air rights had cone up; if a decision had been made to wait instead for proposals for contractors to bid on specific projects, Council should be aware of having made that policy decision. Jean Diaz, Real Property Administrator, said that staff had suggested that the Policy and Procedures Committee discuss that; he thought that whenever possible the City should use the market process, that is, competitive bidding, to determine values of properties. In the present matter, :however, the developer was to use his own adjacent property as a part of the development. Mr, Diaz said that the Comprehensive Plan stated that incentives for developers of air rights plans should be offered. This first proposal could play the part of a "trial run" for additional air rights proposals; competitive bidding processes could be used on ensuing projects. Vice Mayor Sher ascertained it was staff's recommendation that competitive bidding not be used on this project. He noted that in the option agreement to be worked out by staff and the developer a broad range of areas would be worked out; those questions about density and the like, then, would be fully debated Area the matter returned to Council, was that the case? Mr. Knox replied that staff planned to keep the option agreement broad -- details were to 1... worked ..._i --h-- .. _� -- d_oa.ls be woe ked out n the P -C application was addressed. For example, the proposed number of units had ranged from 30 to 40 --"the "the number of units has a great bearing on whether or not the project will fly." Mayor Henderson said he thought it might profit staff to have some guidelines from Council. Vice Mayor Sher said that a staff study had begun on the balance of the properties on the subject block, with an eye to ultimate private development. lie thought the staff study should take into account the possible wish that this private development of underground parking should be so planned that it could perhaps tie into other development on the block, Roy Abrams, City Attorney, said that the option agreement would have to recognize the ultimate decisionmaking authority of Council on such matters as zoning and site and design review, both a part of the P -C process. That authority could not be negotiated away. 3 07 12/3/79 Conncilmember Brenner said that Mr, Abrams' remarks spoke to her concerns also, and Downtown Palo Alto's wish for more parking was a case in point --that is, the need to keep access for more parking. Councllmember Levy said he thought that the project should be open to competitive bidding --the City would profit from input from various developers; rather than a detriment the ownership of the lot by AK Associates would work to AK's advantage in the bidding. "I would be uncomfortable working out a negotiated arrangement.° Mayor Henderson said that before staff was directed to draw up an option agreement Council should decide whether or not the project was to he opened to competitive bidding. Mr. Diaz said that if Council wanted to open the project to competitive bidding it could hake some difference in how the terms were structured. Information would have to be obtained from developers about their concept, their experience, their financial resources, as was the case in other properties put out for bid. Councilmeiber Levy said that the Policy and Procedures Committee meeting had discussed leasing or selling the property with the qualification that a specific number of parking spaces be developed, Mr. Abrams said Council had to go through a specific process to declare a portion of the proposed development 'surplus' so that it could be used for something other than the assessment district --they were trying to decide what that process might be, and if a sale with a leaseback provision might necessitate some differing procedures --the enswer was not yet known. Councilmember Renzel said she thought it was important for the City to have a solid proposal in order "...to figure out where to begin and how to proceed." Though she favored competitive bidding she thought the proposed project afforded a simplified case without "...an enormous number of variables. . . ." She was willing to proceed with an option agreement with AK Associates. MOTION: Council nber Renzel moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that Council approve the conceptual proposal and direct staff to prepare an option agreement to be returned to Council for its approval. Council tber Renzel added that fill excavated from the proposed project be stockpiled for the City's use to cap the dump. Couftcilmember E,yerly favored the motion. He wanted to emphasize that the project concerned a new ldei--air rights, and proceeding with an option egreeaent did not preclude other developers from making proposals on the proposed site. Ile recal i ed having talked with two developers some time back about air rights, and neither had cane forward with a prowl yet. If Council proceeded with directing the option agreement to be drawn up other developers might be encouraged. Councilmember Fletcher supported the idea of the project --she hoped some solar conservation was to be included. d. Mayor Henderson agreed with the motion; he amplified that in this case the developer, not the City, had taken the initiative. Courcilaember Fazzino praised AK's air rights proposal --it would have been difficult for the City to have developed an air rights concept and AK had done so; It was in line with Comprehensive Plan guidelines and the proposed price range seed reasonable; it offered some actual, not in -lieu pal nt, BOIR units also ---a rare thing. He supported the motion. 308 12/n79 Councilmember Witherspoon agreed with Councilmember Fazzino's points. The developer was not only taking a financial_ risk. h',t al:;o a risk toward overcoming psychological resistance to the idea; it would provide a well run demonstration project, and so she would forego the idea of competitive bidding. Councilmember Levy said he thought it would be irresponsible for the City not to let the project out for bids as it did in other sales or leases of its land --a competitive bid process would also assure that nothing illicit was taking place. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Levy moved that Council direct staff to draw up an option agreement with the provision that air rights be offered for competitive bi d The amendment died for lack of a second, Vice Mayor Sher said he had wanted the question of offering air rights for competitive bid to be discussed by Council and he was glad to have participated in the discussion; stiff had decided that in this case it would be more efficient to work with AK Associates on this demonstration project. - There were merits in that recommendation, but he foresaw that the option agreement would have so many elements of the AK Associates' proposal it would not provide a good base for comparison. He thought it was important for Council to understand that it was choosing to work with AK Associates and that such would be the case. Councilmember Renzel added that each air rights proposal had to be evaluated independent of other air rights proposals, with the evaluation aimed at the goal of providing the most public benefit for the City. She thought the major benefit to the City in this case was that AK was willing to take large risks in a heretofore untried process. Pat Cullen, 409 Melville, said she was uneasy about the process Council was setting precedent for, without, having discussion on legal definition of air rights; she thought that to make a decision now would be premature. She acknowledged that delay would increase costs to the developer, but she wanted the project to be pondered more. She would like to see a study session held on air rights in general, Mayor Henderson said that the overall subject of air rights would be an agenda item January 7, before any approval of the option agreement was given. Joseph Hirsch, 4149 Georgia Avenue said he agreed that the protect should be let out for bids --he feared the City was being locked into a process preietureiye Hie - feared Palo Alto would become a, m ni-San Francisco and he thought it would 1ead.to more than allowable density. Cuwe i fi ber grenner recalled that -the Planning Commission had discussed the scatter of air rights extensively before it had presented the Comprehensive Plan to Council for approval in 1975 --in that sense an open invitation to developers to bid on air rights had been extended for about four years. She reviewed the process when both Bryant Avenue site and the eorparation yard site were up for bid, they were long involved matters and bidders had always extended the parameters of the project. She would favor the staff proposal to draw up an option agreement with AK Associates. NOTION PASSED: The motion that Council approve the conceptual proposal for developing air rights over parking lot Q, and direct staff to prepare an option agreement to be returned to Council for its approval, passed on the following vote: :YES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon NOES Levy 1 1 1 SCHOOL SITE PURCHASES: : 9, 484:9) William Zaner, City Manager, said he had given Council a report two weeks ago giving the status on Terman and Ventira school sites; the Palo Alto Unified School District and the City were still in negotiations. Council had asked that the staff report on the purchase of school sites be ready by December 15; since there were other topics Council had to deal with this month, Mr. Zaner recommended that Council extend its December 15 deadline to late February, 1980, at which time both the City and the school district would have more definite information. MOTION: Mayor Henderson roved, seconded by Renzel, that Council extend the time for staff to report to Council on the status of the school sites, to the end of February, 1980. Vice Mayor Sher favored the motion. He said that on the matter of -- price, mentioned in the memo, he questioned those prices mentioned, along with the underlying assumption that those amounts had to be paid. He noted that it had been said that the taxpayers had bought the sites once already --were they to buy them again? and at the appraised value? The sites were, after all, to be publicly owned, albeit under another governmental entity. Vice Mayor Sher said he also thought some public groups had faulty ideas about the City's ability to pay. He thought that how the City was to acquire means for payment, that is, issuance of bonds, or the like, should be a part of the negotiations in the option agreement. He would like the staff report to speak to those questions. Mayor Henderson noted that how the land was zoned would have a great deal to do with what the price of the land would be. MOTION PASSED. The motion that staff return to Council with a report on the status of school sites in late February instead of December 15 passed on a unanimous vote. REPORTS RE ITEM PRICING OF GOODS Mayor Henderson recalled that Vice Mayor Sher had first requested information on the matter of item pricing. Vice Mayor. Sher complimented both City Attorney and City Manager for assembling information helping Council to decide if a local jurisdiction ought to adopt an ordinance for item pricing since a state law requiring such pricing was about to expire, He said he would like to hear members of the public who wished to speak on the matter. Meyer Henderson sale. that C154114;11 had rece=ived a great deal of inforsation on• the matter, ont large detailed pamphlet from the Northern California Grocers Association, and others. Richard Kluzek, president and manager of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, said he thought the conce: ► v1th item pricing was trivial. r :e'do not need more government regulation over our daily lives." The electronic scanner, he said, had been designed so that lower prices to consumers would result. At present no Palo Alto food store had installed such a devrice--he understood they cost $l 50,000 --about 150 stores in the state had such devices. He thought legislation on item pricing was unnecessary -- consumers would decide, he said. Claude L. Fernandez, secretary and treasurer of the Retail Store Employees Union in Santa Clara County, 240 S. Market Street, San use, said he had given Councilmembers a copy of San Francisco's ordinance on item pricing; he noted that municipalities could legislate on the utter so long as 311 0 - 12/3119 x. their legislation was not in conflict with legislation of the state. He said his union had 8000 members; they were concerned as consumers and they thought that though the automated checkstand was fast and efficient, visible and understandable pricing was a right of the consumer. His union was not afraid of losing jobs by the process --the contract had been adjusted for that. Councilm ber Eyerly asked how long the current clerks' contract ran and what the protection was. Mr. Fernandez said that the current contract ran out December 31; he felt that any job loss inherent in automation had been adjusted for in a contract written some six years ago, Vice Mayor Sher asked if Mr. Fernandez knew of stores where automated checkstands were used; if so, had steps been taken to monitor the prices to avoid inaccuracies? Mr. Fernandez replied that Continental Market was fully automated at the checkstand. He thought neither consumers nor checkers could be expected to remember prices. He said no stores abandoned item pricing --.it was compatible with the automated checkstand. Henry Meyer, saber of the Northern California Grocers Association, 591 Pico Way, Sacramento. He represented independent grocers in Northern California, who opposed the proposed ordinance because automated checkout reduced amount of needed labor and increased productivity. State law had forbidden automated checkout --the first major advance in the food industry since the self -serve concept in the early 40's. He thought the savings would be passed on to customers, in spite of stated belief by others that it would rots because food marketing was very competitive. Since there was no price scanning in Palo Alto food stores, no law would be needed. Leslie Howe, California Retailers Association, 1127 Eleventh Street, Sacramento, said he had battled the issue of unit pricing for five years in state legislature. Now, with discontinuance of the law, the public could find out if scanning was economical and practical. He thought unit pricing would continue even though the store had scanning equipment. National Cash Register, IBM and National Semiconductor sold- such scanning equipment. He asked that the consumer make the choice by where he/she bought groceries. Norman Hightower, 248 Lytton Avenue, said he had an independent market in Palo Alto, He thought the scanner would make labor costs less and the record of groceries purchased more clear to the consumer, Though he did not have one now, competition might force him to install one. Carl usniro, attorney with hest Coast office of the Consumers' _ Union, the non-profit publisher of Consoler Reports magazine, with 2 million circulation. Since 1974 his publication had recommended price -marked i trams , and it recommended unit pricing now also: prices on each item facilitated comparison shopping. Prices did not have to be removed -- automated checkout could be used along with unit pricing. Shelf labeling was not adequate. He thought savings resulted from lowered labor costs would go to shareholders rather than consumers. He foresaw rising costs and blind buying as a result of automated checkout. Ctwnc11a tuber Eyerly asked the differences between a scanner tape and a unit pricing tape. Kr. Oshira replied that the scanner tape gave consumers more information; consumers should have both systems, he thought. He thought that when the legislation terminated January 1 more stores might go into scanning. 311 12/3/79 E 1 Councilmember Fletcher said she had heard some talk about having customers mark their own groceries when they talk them from the store's general supply. Fir. Oshira said that system would not be adequate --it represented a "let -'em -eat -cake" attitude on the part of store owners. Councilmember Levy asked what the case was wieen it was legal not to price mark. Mr. Oshira replied that there was much less consumer consciousness. RECESS Council recessed from 9:47 to 9:52 p.m. Ronald A. Howard, 646 Tennyson, said that City government's intervention in the matter of grocery pricing was inappropriate. He did not think anyone would buy anything without knowing the price of it. He said he thought the message had been made clear that people wanted less government. Robert Johnson, board member and vice president of Co-op Groceries, Palo Alto, The Co-op had 28,000 members. He did not think installation of scanners would result in food cost savings, nor did he think that: if such savings resulted they would be pessed on to the consumer. He thought Palo Alto Co-op members were unanimous in their wish to have unit pricing because it made comparison shopping easier. Bernice DeGiovanni, 632 Chi lus Drive, asked that item pricing be continued. She had learned that if one large chain store started using scanners other chains would follow suit. She reviewed some of the hazards of unit pricing but she felt it was a guard against inflation. Gypsy M. Lawrence, 1031 Harker Avenue, concurred with Mr. Oshira's comments. She felt item pricing was best, particularly with senior citizens, and she listed some of the hardships they endured while shopping for food. Melvin Bernstein, 126 Loma Verde, rationalized the virtues and ills of unit pricing and scanners; he favored unit pricing for the present, and perhaps more coMperison could be wade with scanners as time went on. Councilmember Levy ascertained from Mr. Johnson that Co-op members would not choose to drop unit pricing and goo to scanners. Vice Mayor Sher said that people favoring each side of the question had spoken with him; he said he was impressed by the technology that could perhaps lover prices, and from what he had heard that evening he did not think adoption of the ordinance for unit pricing wuu d eliminate price scanner. systems. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher introduced the following ordinance for first reading and and, seconded by Renzel, moved its adoption by Covncilr ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER 5.30 Tt) THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ITEM PRICING Cou ci 1 r Eyeriy said that as an inert retailer he would resist legislation that told him how to run his business and interfered with free enterprise. He thought the scanner did save costs and also gave more information on the tape. He urged Councilmembers to vote. against the motion. 312 12/3/19 Councilmember Brenner said she favored the ordinance; it retained the customary procedure, and that avoided confusion. She noted that goods were in effect, purchased, when they were removed from the shelf, not at time of checkout. Councilmember Witherspoon said she thought some of the speakers from the food industry equivocated, depending on what locality they were in. She hold that speakers from the present locality knew their own situations best, relative to grocery shopping. "As far as I'm concerned, it's a non -issue and I'll vote against the ordinance." Councilmember Fazzino said he thought that broad issues of productivity, emploernent, and pricing level were not appropriate concerns of a municipality. He thought it might better be lobbied at the state level, and he thought the proposed legislation might have a negative effect on smaller businesses in town. Councilmember Levy said he thought the issue was freedom of choice --he thought that was best effected by letting opposing issues compete. He did not wart to make choices for consumers, and he would vote against the ordinance. _ Councilmember Renzel said the consumers could handle the issue by choosing to buy where there was the kind of pricing they favored. She recalled a study in which it had been demonstrated that a number of grocery stores raised their prices on the first and fifteenth of the month, taking advantage of when consumers felt they had money. She equated that with gas stations that no longer took charge card payments. She favored keeping unit pricing and would vote for the motion. Councilmember Fletcher said that enactment of the ordinance would maintain the status quo. Testimony showed that the consumer would be at a disadvantage if item pricing were eliminated, and also, with scanners, prices could be changed too rapidly. She favored retaining the present method of unit pr=icing: when grocery stores wanted to go to scanners they could appeal for that change. Mayor Henderson said he did not want to regulate until need for regulation had been demonstrated. MOTION FAILED: The motion that Council adopt an ordinance regarding it.em pricing in Palo Alto grocery stores failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Renzel, Sher WOES: Eyerly, Fazzi no, Henderson. Levy, Witherspoon REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY RC AMENDMENTS Counciliar Witherspoon asked why the City Attorney's report suggested prohibited smoking at events and performances but not art exhibits or fashion shows or the like. Roy Abrams, City Attorney, said Council had di reel ted the City Attorney to make the City ordinance accord with the county ordinance; places had been designated saucing or non-smoking according to the public or private nature of ,the place. Peter Bagatelos, 1 Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, said he represented the Tobacco Institute. He said the basic message he had was that Council or others should not legislate unreasonably or unnecessarily. If an 313 12/3/79 ordinance were drawn it should be precise. He felt that the requirement that 50 percent of a restaurant be set aside for non-smokers "...is extremely burdensome." He enumere ted some of the ambiguities, such as, would 1t mean 50 percent of the bar? He thought times of business fluctuations should be taken into account. He wondered why Palo Alto was drawing up an ordinance that duplicated a county ordinance. He hoped Council would consider information on•smoking regulations before it had the second reading of the ordinance, Mayor Henderson said that the county ordinance applied only to unincorporated areas of the county. Jerry Richter, 2700 El Caminos owner of the Antique Restaurant, said his restaurant had about 25 percent area designated non-smoking. He thought the requirement to have 50 percent non-smoking was excessive. He said that eating and drinking were not only life sustaining they were also social events; selling drinks was what kept him in business, and drinking went with smoking. He noted that Proposition 5 had lost by a majority. He said he himself had quit smoking, but fer business purposes he hoped Council would not legilate 50 percent non-smoking area. Counci lmember Renzel ascertained from Mr. Richter that at present the non-smoking 25 percent at the &ntique Restaurant was not fully utilized. Richard Kluzek, president of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, said he approved the legislation against smoking in public rooms where people were compelled to share space, such as elevators and public meeting rooms and theaters. He thought prohibition of smoking in retail stores would be acceptable to store owners. He thought 50 percent was excessive for restaurants; he questioned the right of government to limit smoking in meeting rooms of private employers. He cautioned about the amount of policing needed to enforce the proposed ordinance. Vice Mayor Sher ascertained that Mr. Kluzek did not think it inconsistent with the w i eh for less government to approve a prohibition against smoking in retail establishments --for. Kluzek said that the prohibition protected the merchant as well as the general public. It was difficult for the merchant to zone his own establishment a non-smoking area. Dr. Robert Decker, University Avenue, said that his group, the Lung Association, had pressed for legislation. He cited the low number° of restaurants and coffee shops that had voluntarily set aside non-smoking sections. He gave figures showing how many people did not smoke; he alluded to the great number of diseases related to smoking. He praised the Palo Alto City Council "...for taking steps to clear the air." Frank Koch, President, Syntex, said Dick Kluzek had spoken to their concerns re use of Syntex facilities by outside groups. If the ordinance is soap -tea, as proposed specifically sections f) and e), Syntex would have to pot i c,.e these private events on the € r premises and would be liable. Gloria Wall, 291 Creekside Drive, spoke in favor of the ordinance and the effects of smoking on cardiac and respiratory problems. Ed O'Dwyer, President, S.C.C. Chapter, GASP, spoke in favor of the ordinance. Melvin 5ernstein, Palo Alto, expressed dismay that 5O percent non- smoking requirement applied to restaurants with seating for 50 or more. That comber exerted many restaurants, and Na predicted many would state that they had seating for 49. He did not think 50 percent was at all excessive. 314 12/3/79 Mr. Abrams noted that application of smoking proscriptions to places of private ownership was a matter of policy rather than one of law; that right, which was to benefit the public health, safety, and welfare, was pursuant to the City's charter authority and its police authority. He said that, for example, Section (f) would apply to Syntex's meeting room when private groups not under their control used their facilities. He noted that subsection (e) had a provision for private banquets. Mr. Abrams added that places serving food were affected; bars, which did not serve food, would not be affected. Mayor Henderson said he thought the proposed ordinance would afford health protection to people who could not have the protection in any other way. MOTION: Mayor Henderson introduced the following ordinance, and, seconded by Fazzino, moved its approval by Council: ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING CHAPTER 9.14 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING SMOKING Counci barber Witherspoon said she favored the protection to non-smokers the ordinance would provide; she noted there were inconsistencies in it --some locations, for example, had been excluded and others had not, and some events had been excluded, but not others, and so on. Mr. Abrams replied that the ordinance distinguished between public and private restaurants and meeting rooms. Councilmecnber Fletcher noted that in 1978 Ballot Measure Proposition 5 had passed in Palo Alto, and that proposition had prescribed 50 percent non-smoking area in restaurants. She thought it important to cover places of employment because employees found it hard to object because they might jeopardize their positions. She thought banks should be included. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Henderson, that to AMENDMENT: 4'1 s the prohibition on smoking in retail stores be added a prohibition to sacking in barks. Councilmember Renzel said she did not think people were compelled to stay in banks; she thought it would be difficult to enforce the non- smoking in hanks and commercial establishments. Counci lrsmrriber Levy noted that if the amendment were passed 100 percent of the bank would have no smoking, whereas only 50 percent no -smoking was asked of restaurants -.he noted that the municipal code was entitled "Public ice, morals, and safety.- He rhOught some prohibitions reere made -for r=easons of safety, as in retail stores, but for health -in restaurants. He thought the reason given for the prohibition in each case should be made clear. 14e thought that where people could smoke should be stipulated. Vice Mayor Sher said he thought theater and store operators could establish areas where it was all right to smoke Councilaember Fletcher said she would include that modification in her amendment. Councilmember Fazz#no said he thought smoking should be prohibited in all commercial establishments and not single out certain kinds of stores. He would vote against the amendment. 3 1 5 12/3/79 AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment that to the prohibition of smoking in retail stores be added a prohibition on smoking in banks, and that permitted smoking areas be designated, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Renzel Councilmember Fletcher said she would propose an amendment giving a subsection of Proposition 5 passed in 1978. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fletcher moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the language, "Any entire room or hall for a private social function, which function is under the control of the sponsor of the function and not under control of the owner or manager,..." be included in the ordinance. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher, Witherspoon ABSTAIN: Levy Councilmember Eyerly said testimony from restaurant owners asking for 25 percent non-smoking, rather than 50 percent, was persuasive to him. AMENDMENT: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the ordinance prohibit smoking from 25 percent of tables in restaurants% rather than 50 percent. Councilmember Witherspoon ascertained with Mr. Abrams that the percentage of floor space in which smoking was to be prohibited included any floor space available for the serving of food. "Presumably," he added, "at certain seasons when outside areas are not available." An upstairs room that was available to the general public would be included in available floor space. He said he would return this present ordinance for another first reaiing, so some points could be define; further. Councilmember Fazzino said he did not like regulating the behavior of others, but smoking was a health issue. He knew of only two restaurants in town who gave patrons a choice of a non-smoking area. He did rot think setting aside 50 percent was excessive. He added that he thought smoking was prohibited from coliseums and the like out of consideration for the health of the players. AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment that smoking be prohibited from 25 rather than SO percent of available floor space in restaurants, failed on the following vote: AYES: _ Eyeriy, Levy, Vitherspoon NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson. Renzel, Sher Counrilmember Eyerly said that he thought section 2 of the proposed ordinance asking employers to designate smoking and non-smoking areas had the effect of having employers do the City's work for it. ART: Councilor Eyerly moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that. section 2 of the proposed ordinance be deleted. Councilmember Witherspoon noted that the City of Palo Alto, with 750 employees, had not designated smoking and non-smoking areas. The Cite should practise before it legislated. William Z aver, City #tanager, said a draft stroking p l icy for City buildings had been prepared. 316 12/3/79 Vice Mayor Sher agreed that section 2 was not consistent with what other sections of the ordinance were designed to accomplish. Councilmember Renzel noted section 2 appeared to have been taken from the county ordinance which had adopted a policy and procedure for companies to follow; perhaps itcould be shortened and included as part of section f. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fazzino moved that the words "Each public and private employer with 50 or more employees shall inform its employees of the City smoking ordinance and its intent" be added. Councilmember Eyerly said he thought the amendment to the amendment kept a bulky and puzzling ordinance just that way. The proposed amendment to the amendment died for lack of a second. AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment, that section 2 be deleted from the ordinance, passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Eyerly, Levy, Sher, Wi therspotion NOES: Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel AMENDMENT: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that section 1(f) concerning smoking in private conference rooms and the like be deleted. The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Levy, Sher, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Fenzel AMENDMENT: Councilmember Fazzino moved, that the following language replace the language now in section 2: "That each public and private employer with 50 or more employees shall inform its employees of the City's smoking ordinance and that ordinance's intent.`. Mayor Henderson ascertained that way the employee would of the smoking ordinance in Councilmember Levy said he the ordinance's intent, was that Councilmember Fazzinc meant that in also learn about the employer's application his place of business. thought the ordinance would be well known; not clear. Councilmember Witherspoon said that it would be difficult for the City to suppy the employer wi g information on the ordinance, and difficult for the comer/employer to interpret. ►4 . f $said there was a provision in the ordd i nance that required the posting of no smoking' signs in certain areas. Couacilmember Brenner said she seconded the proposed wmendment because she favored having the employer understand the obligation to inform that the ordi nanee imposed. Councilmember Fletcher asked how the employer would be informed of his obligation if the proposed ordinance passed. Mr. Abrams replied that it was presume that people affected by an ordinance knew about the ordinance: It was not the responsibility of the City to inform ail of those who were affected by the ordinance individually. Should a complaint be lodged against an employer people found out about it through the posting of fines. Untie Councilmember Fletcher was curious how many employers in the City had 50 or more employees, and if it would not be wise to send each of them a copy of the ordinance, if it passed. AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment that the language in Section 2 be replaced with "That each public and private employer with 50 or more employees shall inform its employees of the City's smoking ordinance and that ordinance's intent," failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Henderson, Levy, Sher, Witherspoon MOTION TO RECONSIDER: Councilmember Brenner moved that Council reconsider the question of deletion of Section 2 of the proposed ordinance, The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel NOES: Eyerly, Levy, Sher, Witherspoon AMENDMENT: Councilmember Brenner moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Section 2 be reinserted in the ordinance. Councilmember Levy said he had ascertained that an employer could tell the City that he had set his own policy in regard to smoking in his establishment, in that way obviating the municipal law. Mr. Abrams said that any employer who wished to establish a policy that was consistent with the law could do so. Councilmember Renzel said she thought the portion of the ordinance that required that 'no smoking" signs be posted filled the primary need in places of employment. AMENDMENT FAUEI): The amendment, that section 2 be reinserted in the proposed ordinance failed on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson NOES: Eyerly _ Levy, Refuel, Sher, _ Witherspoon Councilmember Eyerly said he would vote against the ordinance and its amendments; he thought that all of the time that Council had spent on it demonstrated how unclear it was, He would approve of sending it back to staff for re..writing, however. Mr. Abraem said that he would rewrite the ordinance; even with amendments further_ciairificatfnn-race Lei i - MOTION: Councilmember Lever moved, seconded by Eyerly, that the proposed erdifialce return tp staff then go to the Policy and Procedures C i ttee . The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, levy, Witherspoon NOES: Brenner, Faezino, Fletcher, Henderson, Renzel, Sher MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED: The ordinance, adopting amendments to Chapter 9.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code regarding smoking, as amended, passed for first reading, on the following vote: AYES: Brenner, Faz ino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy, Reuel, Sher NOES: Eleerly, Witherspoon 318 12/3/79 MOTION: Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Eyerly, that Council bring forward the matter concerning annexation of Peter Coutts Hill (which was continued from 11/5/79) to be discussed at the same -time as a discussion an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan related to that site. The motion to hear three items together passed on a unanimous voice vote. Councilmember Witherspoon and Vice Mayor Sher did not participate since Peter Coutts Hill is owned by STanford University, their employer. PUBLIC HEARING: TZTERMOTTrrtl tomkamtms141 PLAN AMENDMENT The Planning Commission, by a vote of b-0, one absent, recommends regarding the Comprehensive Plan amendment, Peter Coutts Hill. ANNEXATION OF PETER COUTTS HILL (CMR:491:2 and CMR:49b:9) z ou rn n Vem r 9) Councilmembers Sher and Witherspoon withdrew from the discussion because they are employed by Stanford University. Councilmember Brenner noted that in the Planning Commission minutes of October 15 Commissioner Nichols pointed out that the Commission did not deal with the annexation issue, as it was awaiting agreement between Stanford and the City on that point. Councilmember Brenner said it was yr: that basis that she would make a very slight amendment to the Planning Commission recommendation. She said the staff report, CMR:491:2 of October 27, 1972, noted that property taxes from Frenchman's Terrace would more than balance expenditures for City services based on a very low and premature estimate of the development's value. She said that in relation to costs and revenues, the report said "The subject under discussion isannexation to the City, and whether such annexation will cost the City more in services than it can expect in revenues, or vice versa." On page 4 of the report it said, "The summary of expenditures and revenues prepared by the staff in December, 1971, for discussion of annexation of Stanford residential areas, has been slightly revised and is attached....The revenue and expenditure estimates were based on the anticipated annexation of not only Frenchman's Terrace but also Frenchman's Hill and mine Hill I and II." The report, in discussion of policing costs, noted that patroling Peter Coutts would be an extension of an existing beat, rather than addition of an another beat. The report, on page 5, pointed out that the Stanford employment situation had been a major factor in creating scarcity of low- and moderate -income housing in this area. Page 9 of the same report read, "For the City to encourage development of . Frenchman's Terrace in an unincorporated area would be to oppose the County's goal of _ pro ±oti _orderly+ _urban_ th__w sthi n _ ci ties . This _ philosophical concept," the report said, '°should be kept in mind _while _discussing thR practical possibilities of providing service," Corrected See Pg. 373 1/ltl8P 9 Councilmember Brenner continued: She read from a letter to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) "As you know, the application for annexation is being made by Stanford.University, not by Palo Alto, as was indicated in your April 10th letter." Councilmember Brenner said she had read the three quotes because, they pointed out to her that a definite direction had been taken, both by Stanford - amp• the City. She wondered what had changed since Stanford petitioned in 1972 to have the City of Palo Alto .annex•Peter Coutts Hill. LAM had heard the petition and approved it July 6, 1972; the City Council unanimoesly approved a resolution on the annexation December 18, 1972. The annexation discussion lapsed in 1977. bemuse of la►ck.of • funding for the project. It was during this activity. regarding •Peter • Coutts Hill, when tht County CS ordinance was under discussion and • evolved, that Stanford was asking and the City was accepting the Concept that Peter Coutts iii l l is an i ntegra l part of -P0,10 Al to . • She thought the discussion hod the effect -of separating Peter Coutts ° fiill from the ongoing discussion about how to handle the rest of Stanford Universlt "s land. • 12/3/79 Councflnrember Brenner said she would welcome the new neighborhood --it was adjacent to Stanford land that was already a part of Palo Alto, and it is across the fence from College Terrace, She said that in any case Palo Alto's new neighbors shared the same College Terrace Library and the same view from the hill. She said the City would also share with these residents the ballot box and Foothill Park. 'In my view it is high time we shared the problems as well as the amenities of our City," she said. The amendment she oroposedo she added, did not imply that annexation had to be a part of approval of the project --it meant only that the City's Intent was that Peter Coutts Hill be welcomed whenever the proper time for annexation, in the opinion of Stanford, the City, and residents of the Hill, was reached. NOTION: Councilmember Brenner introduced the following resolution, and seconded by Renzel, moved its adoption by Council: RESOLUTION 5754 "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF NE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (Continued from 11/5/79) AMENDMENT: Counci lm ber Brenner moved, seconded by Renzel , that the words, 'S...consistent with the general objectives of the 1972 pre- zoning,4 be inserted into the Planning Commission recommendations, at the end of the first sentence on page 61, under „Major Institution/Multiple Family Residential, with the recommendation then to read: "This designation is applied to peter Coutts Hill in anticipation of a Stanford faculty housing development of approximately 125-140 units, most of which will be available at below market rates, consistent with the general objectives of the 1972 pre -zoning. This housing is to be combined with a contiguous reasonably shaped open space area of approximately 4-6 acres, including the top of the hill, and is to be accessible to the public." Mayor Henderson recalled that in 1972 disfussio1, atm u sclosed that annexation had been specifically related to a federally subsidized housing programme -it was not the faculty housing development now being discussed. He thought the 1972 proposed project and the present project should not be discussed together. The proposed change in the Comprehensive Plan now before Council that evening was undertaken to eliminate that reference to 1972 and make the Plan current. "So I just can't see how we can use the phrase as relating back to 1972 --we might as well leave the old Comprehersive Plan statement.' AMONOMENT TO AMENDMENT: Mayor Henderson moved, sec e*_ by Everl y. _ that the mo da, ^eohaiatent with the general objectives of the 197P . pre:ming,' be eliminated. Couvici lmmxsmnber Levy asked if the general objectives of 1972 had been below market rate housing or federally subsidized housing. Mr. Knox said that as he recalled the 1972 pre -zoning called for 225 units with 135 units to be subsidized under federal Section 236 --that section no longer• existed, he said. The present project of 125-140 emits was to be all Stanford University related. Subsidy was to be by Stanford rather than federally. P -C zoning permitted any kinds of conditions. Mayor Henderson added that the City had pre -zoned in 1972 because the Mill was to be annexed to the City. Now the project was to be a county development. Pre -zoning had occurred before because the land was to have come into the City. 320 12/3/79 Councilmember Brenner said she thought the land related to the City and the area much as it had in 1972. Councilmember Levy said he thought that, according to Mr. Knox's comments, the 1972 pre -zoning objectives had been changed. He understood clearly that the choice to annex Peter Coutts Hill should remain to the City, but he would vote against the Brenner amendment. Mayor Henderson emphasized that the City dii not want to preclude the annexation of this portion or any portion of Stanford land. AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment that the words, "consistent with the general objectives of the 1972 pre -zoning," be deleted from the page 61 statement proposed by Councilmember Brenner, passed on the following vote: AYES: Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Henderson, Levy NOES: Brenner, Renzel NOT PARTICIPATING: Sher. Witherspoon Colin Mick, 2130 Hanover, suggested modifying the Planning Commission recommendation so that it was specified that the planned housing go to people whose incomes were below the county median. Mr. Mick said he supported the movement toward annexation of the area; people in his neighborhood at present had to discuss nearby land with the county --he preferred that it be controlled by the City. Jim Culpepper, 2121 herst Street, said he represented the College Terrace Residents' Association. He said his letter now in Counciyaembers' packets contained his suggested revisions. He thought the Comprehensive Plan should describe the proposed housing development as being designed for junior faculty members. The initial reason for the proposed housing was for Stanford's lower level employees and workers in the Industrial Park. He said he thought the federal Section 8 program should be applied, to provide housing for lower incomes. He favored some statement that intended annexation in due course --annexation, he said, would afford common solutions to problems common to both College Terrace and residents on the Hill. He would like open space on the Hill to be five acres, minimum --he thought the developer would use as much lard as zoning permitted. With 4.6 acres being the stipulation, Mr. Culpepper predicted the developer would leave the rainier! -.4 acres. John Schaefer, 1487 College Avenue, said he supported the compromise on the Peter Cutts Hill issue. He asked that Council support fir. Culpepper's suggestions. He asked that Planning decisions ha gad. 116fir° John; 3reedlove, Stanford University, said he thought a return to trying for federal funding on some of the hews i ng would be a death blow to the project, because the federal government would not accept the eligibility standards set by Stanford for its own faculty and staff. That had killed the first "Frenchman's Terrace° project, and it would kill this one as well, he thought. He said Stanford would not restrict the housing to junior faculty only, as Mr. Culpepper had suggested; it was intended that the housing serve older retiring staff and faculty also. MAIN MOTION PASSED: The main motion, that Council approve the resolution making changes in the Comprehensive Plan for the development of the City of Palo Alto, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember Witherspoon and Vice Mayor Sher not participating, 321 12/3/79 Councilmembers Witherspoon and Fazzino left the muting at 12:30 a.m. and did not return. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE , T (CMR :499:9) an nue ran oveaT er , Vice Mayor Sher, chairman of the Finance and Public Works Committee, recalled the background of the proposed contract. Staff proposed that the City pay the operating deficit between what PASCO took in and what PASCO had to pay out on refuse collection and resale of recyclable materials, up to a total of $171,000 for an 18 -month contract, calculating a $9500 average deficit per month. Vice Mayor Sher said that while the program was not inexpensive, the City thought it was important --he emphasized that the cost figures were potential expense. The incentive for PASCO wa3 to keep its costs at $171,000, because it could not draw down more. MOTION: Vice Mayor Sher, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, moved the fcilowing recommendations and budget amendment ordinance, for their approval by Council: that Council approve the proposed contract with the Palo Alto Sanitation Company (PA!C0) for the operation and expansion of the curbside collection program and the operation of the recycling center, to become effective through June 30, 1981; and, approve the budget amendment ordinance transferring $57,000 from the refuse reserve fund for system improvements to the 197980 refuse operating budget for this PASCO contract through June 30, 1981. AGREEMENT OPERATION OF CITY OF PALO ALTO RECYCLING 50Li0 WASTE PROGRAM Palo Alto Sanitation Company ORDINANCE 3173 entitled "ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1979-80 TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR THE RECYCLING CONTRACT WITH THE PALO ALTO SANITATION COMPANY." Councilmember kennel said she preferred to have more incentives in the contract; she hoped thet would be the case in the subsequent contract. Counci lm a ber Levy noted that the stated increase was 8 percent but the net figure was about 12 percent; he wondered why charges to the City went up yet the revenues stayed constant. Da l e Pfeiffer, Department of Public Works, answered that revenues had been predicted as constant by-'taff because it was an average figure taking into account recent years when they had fluctuated. The 12 percent _ s.�.a.s.e nw 1'.sd �aa� _ S 4_�w.rlfe _ ..eas.�. ___. �rJ.. west - 6 a7..+bl.. peri e, 4 - tcta1 l.. 1 2 4 . • r,:i ...».•w.0 Va.b a, e�--o.�Mi. Wi'�wYi , Nim 4.i $I v' : ii .*l �J*.i 1Vta, *4 f # 1 t 4 % )art Councilmember Brenner ascertained that PASCO collected refuse only in Palo Alto. The motion that Council approve the agreement and the ordinance passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmembers Witherspoon and Fazzi no absent. REQUEST OF MAYOR HENDERSON ION APPLICATION Mayor Henderson said there had been some misinformation at the hearing on this matter on November 19, 1979. It was not possible, Mr. Abrams had advised him, to waive the fee from that former application;. Mr. Abrams said that Council could direct the City Manager to establish a no -fee category in the municipal fee schedule. NOTION: Mayor Henderson moved. seconded by Fletcher, that Council direct staff to amend the muwicipal fee schedule to p # t persons rem -applying for as substantially similar permit within % days of, denial of the original permit* to petition the Ci .Coemctl for waiver of application fee. 3 2 2 12/3/75' Mayor Henderson amplified that his motion did not intend that there be automatic dismissal of fee --the applicant would have to petition Council. City Attorney Abrams said that Council would have to establish a no -fee category; Council could not waive the fee based or an undefined set of circemetances. Council could establish categories of circumstances. He said he advised that a no -fee category, across the board, be established -- then the City Manager could determine if the fee was legally entitled to waiver, MOTION WITHDRAWN: Mayor Henderson said he would withdraw the motion, with the agreement of the second. Councilre tuber Renzel asked if a person could reapply at any time or did the applicant have to wait a year, Mr. Abrams said that the code addressed different permits in different fashions, Councilmember Renzel said that the applicant could have avoided being charged another fee had he used the means then at his disposal. She did not see the value of changing the code for one isolated case. Mayor Henderson replied that the applicant's representative had made a mistake. Councilnember Levy asked if the applicant could not appear before Council in regard to his former application. Mr. Abrams said he thought Council had to recognize that its November 19 action had been final, but nothing in municipal ordinances precluded the applicant from reapplying. To reconsider the former application was to consider evidence outside the proper problem. He said that in the legal sense the applicant had received a fair hearing. Councilmember Renzel noted that procedurally the applicant would come through the Planning Commission when he reapplied --it would be bad for Council to direct the outcome of Planning CoCommission deliberations. Council ber Brenner noted that the fee helped offset City services, it was not a penalty. She added that the applicant had called her and other Councilmembers, and in effect had been heard. ITEM WITHDRAWN: Mayor Henderson said he would withdraw the item from the agenda. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Councllet' r shoved."_Secon0d .h,-Le?y y: 1.-w Cw;inci o ediOurh, ine motion passed on a uneni us vie -ice vote, Couneilmembers 448 s3_ Wi rspoon-and Fazzlno absent, The meeting adjourned at 12:55 a .m. AFFIRM: APPROVE: 0 Ci ty C . Mayor 323 12/3/79