HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-03-27 City Council Summary MinutesCITY
COUNCIL
M1NUT€s
CITY
OF
PALO
ALTO
Regular Meeting
Maven 27, 1978
ITEM PAGE
Adjourned Meeting of March 20, 1978 8 0 6
Selection of Head Golf Professional (Executive Session) and 8 0 6
Approval of Draft Contract Language
Recess and Executive Session 8 1 6
Sand Hill Road Project --Alteration of the Assessment Process 8 1 6
and Development of a Supplemental Revised Environmental Impact
Report
Request of County Regarding. Regional Criminal Justice 8 2 0
Planning Board
Request of Councilmember Witherspoon re Guidelines for 8 2 1
Considering Proposals From Private Non-profit Corporations
(Continued from 2/21/78)
City Attorney's Report on Binding Arbitration Initiative 8 2 2
(Continued from 3/13/78)
Request of Mayor Sher re Memorial to Lucy Evans 8 2 3
Oral Communications
Hai Hudson, 535 Everett 8 2 3
Adjournment 8 2 4
Regular Meeting of March 27 1978 8 2 5
Minutes of February 6, 1978 8 2 5
Minutes of February 7, 1978 8 2 5
Oral Cirr i cats ons - None 8 2 6
Consent Calendar - Referral Items 8 2 6
Downtown Parking Feasibility Study Final wort 8 2 6
Consent Calendar - Action Item 8 2 6
Ordinance Concersimg Posting of Owners' Namee, Addresses, 8 2 6
and Phone llu bev s in Laundromats
Antmel Disposal Contract 8 2 6
it
1055 Forest Avenue: Appeal From Denial for Preliminary.Pertel 8 2 6
NO by Elizabeth Lance (Continued fire 3/20/78)
ITEM PAGE
Request of Councilmember Eyerly re City Flower Beds 8 2 8
Request of Councilmember Eyerly re Community Development Funds 8 2 9
Request of Councilmember Carey re Webster Wood and Request 8 3 1
to State Regarding Residency
Cancellation of Council Meeting of April 3, 1978 8 3 3
Oral Communications 8 3 3
Adjournment 8 3 3
1
805
3/27/78
March 27, 1978
Adjourned Meeting of March 20, 1978
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 8:00 p.m.,
in an adjourned meeting of March e0, 1978, with Mayor Sher presiding.
PRESENT: Brenner, Carey (arrived 8:02), Clay jarrived 8:02),
Eyerly, Fazzino (arrived 8:05), Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon
ABSENT: Henderson
Miayor Sher announced that Council had a quorum Counci lmember Henderson
was out of the country.
SELECTION OF HEAD GOLF PROFESSIONAL `
xecutive Bess on AND APPROVAL -
97:8 and CMR:206:Z)
Mayor Sher reminded Councilmembers that the matter of selecting a head
golf professional had beer considered briefly in Executive Session March
20, and a staff report in packets this week growing out of that meeting
recommended that Council approve the draft contract language. That
draft contract would become the base for negotiations with the choice of
candidate of the selection committee and staff.
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council approve
the draft contract as a basis for negotiation with the candidate.
Mayor Sher said his motion included the thought that the base for those
negotiations could be charged subsequent to Council discussion.
Councilrrember Carey referred to paragraph nine: "Any change in the
amount due agreed upon by the parties shall be made by an amendment of
this agreement and shall be executed with the same dignity as this
{agreement. . . ." - Coucilmember Carey assumed the word "dignity" was a
typo..
Robert Booth said that the word was not a typo but it was perhaps
somewhat archaic --a more fitting' phrase might be "...executed in the
same fashion." While the contract would be in writing, the phrase meant
that Council approval was needed, and the need for Council approval was
not commonplace.
Mayor Sher suggested "...shall be executed with the same formality."
Council r Carey referred to paragraph 7 which required that the golf
professional pay the City $4657.59 per quarter. Was that amount arrived
at by some formula? Also, the golf professional was being hired prior
to the January 20 commencement of the calendar year --he thought some
consideration should be made during construction of improvements.
Acting City Manager Charles Walker said that as a base for entering into
negotiations with the candidate the current financial at'rang nts with
the existing golf pro ' had been used. The contract had been written
three years ago, with the return based on what had been appraised as a
"reasonable estimate" of the value or the property. The precision of
the figure could be done away with --the use of the appraisal of three
years did, through the effects of inflation, stake allowance for start-up
costs and the fact that construction was underway. An assumption that
the candidate would speak on his own -behalf led staff to think the
City's offer was reasonable as a starter.
806
3/27/78
Councilmember Carey approved the flexibility. He referred to paragraph
16; it dealt with liability, with the language that the golf pro held
the City harmless from any and all claims, damage or liability, arising
from use or occupancy of the -golf shop or driving range. Councilmember
Carey said that in landlord/tenant laws the state got no such disclaimer
at the present time, for there had to be an exception for damage or
liability, loss or injury, that might arise from negligence on the part
of the landlord. The City was building the pro shop and any liability
arising from that should be retained by the City.
Mr. Booth said the words "...by reason of the rights, licences or
privileges under the contract,' or by any other activity connected with
performance of the agreement," meant the City could not force another
party to indemnify the City for the City's own negligence, though it
could force him to "pick up" for hie own negligence or when both he and
the City were negligent.
Councilmember Carey said the phrase "...any or.all.claims".did not speak
to the thought Mrs Booth had expressed. He thought language should be
supplied making the City's responsibilities more clear -the best contract
was a fair one.
Mr. Booth said he thought such responsibility was implicit, but if
Councilmember Carey preferred, such language would be added.
Councilmember Carey referred to paragraph 4, Maintenance and Operation:
"The City shall maintain the golf course, driving range and parking
area... the golf professional and the golf course superintendent of the
City shall be designated by the City Manager and shall each cooperate to
assure that the :;:arse is maintained in the highest standard. For that
purpose the golf professional shall meet at least once a week with the
golf course superintendent...to communicate the dents of the public
regarding condition of said course and point out to the superintendent
maintenance required for satisfactory play, offering advice for golf
requirements... including repairing greens, repairing dents. . . If the
golf professional determines that such maintenance practices are unsatis-
factory after consultation with the golf course superintendent of the
City, he shall notify the City Manager. The City Manager's decision
with respect to such practices shall be final." Councilmember Carey
said the terms of the contract gave the golf pro the responsibility of
advising the "City" in the person of the golf course superintendent, as
to the maintenance of the course, but did not "give him any authority to
change it. About seven City departments participated in maintenance of
the course, with the number of golfers among those seven maintenance
people unknown. Councilor Carey thought the golf pro should .have
the authority to hire the golf course superintendent, and also have the
primary responsibility for maintenance of the course --then if he did not
maintain the course satisfactorily the City would have `te authority to
fire the golf pro. Professional Golfers Association (PGA) had a pool of
golf course superintendents because it was . known that the maintenance of
the course was as important as the running of the course itself.
Mr. Walker said that among other "significant changes in the reporting
arrangement of the golf course professional" the primary change was that
all responsibility for all golf course operation was now directly under
the Director of creation, and that was in response to a directive from
Council to place that responsibility with one person. Staff had con-
ducted a number of interviews with golf pro candidates the situation
where the golf pro has no direct supervisory responsibility over the
superintendent, staff had found, was the rule. In subsection (a) of the
second paragraph of the contract the responsibility of the City Manager
was designate' to the Director :fit Recreation within the contract --
wherever "City Manager" appeared it should be replaced by the words
"Director of Recreation."
807
3/27/78
Councilmember Clay referred to paragraph 6, Collection of Receipts rind
Accounting, subparagraph (b); and read: "The golf professional shall
furnish to the City Manager a copy of his annual statement within ninety
(90) days after the end of each calendar year." He questioned the
necessity for that since the City had access to such records. He re-
ferred to the statement: "This statement shall assist in determining
future contract modifications," saying he thought it rather threatening
to a person under contract. He asked what degree of significance it
would have in determining pay scale.
Mr. Walker said that was a policy question that was up to Council, who,
he thought, would want to -know -the net income each year. In the past
that examination of the -receipts had resulted.in a more favorable
financial arrangement for the' golf pro, in the circumstance when it
appeared he was not making a "competitive income for a person in his
position."
Councilmember Clay said that in any case he thought the pro, rather than
the City, would raise the'question of the adequacy of his pay.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Clay moved, seconded by Carey, that subparagraph
(b) of paragraph 6 be struck.
Mr. Booth stated that deleting the last sentence would suffice, rather
than the entire subsection. It was standard practice for the City to
require all of its contractors to provide an audited financial statement.
Since the City did not have the facilities for doing an in-depth audit
it was usually contracted out at City expense.
Councilmember Clay said that all the candidates had seen the statement;
the balance of the paragraph supported the sentence. Was not paragr`,aph
(d) sufficient? Could not -an audited financial statement be made a part
of the records to which the City had access?
Mr. Booth said that it would be acccptable to delete subparagraph (b).
Councilmember Clay said that the requirement for an available audited
statement could be -included in paragraph (d), with the last sentence of
(b) making such requirement having been deleted.
Councilmember Carey said that the sentence "The statement sill assist in
determining future contracts. . *: " bothered hint. Paragraph 9 said
"The aunt due and the manner of payment set forth in paragraphs 7 and
may, at the City's sole option, tee renegotiated at the end of each
calendar year during the term of this agreement." The City had given
tho golf pro a five-year contract, but paragraph 9 took it away.
Councilmember Carey said that he concluded, from reading paragraph 6 (b)
requiring that the golf pro disclose what he made, that if the golf pro
made too much money the City would reduce his salary --the City 'mild
probably not increase it: "...The amounts due...at the City's sole
option, may be renegotiated," spoke to the truth :of that. "So, the' pro
is stuck with a five-year contract, and if there's an inequity payment
to the golf pro he has'absolutely no ability to otiate." If the
golf pro raised the level of play and generated t�140,000 needed to
make the annual payment on -the bonds he had done his job and should be
able to reap the. profits. He said that he would like to see the City
have the right to terminate the pro if he could not run the course more
effectively than it had been, and raise enough money to pay off the bond
issue annually. He emphasized that paragraph 9 read along with paragraph
6 made it obvious that the City could reduce the pro's salary if he was
making too much gooney. Councilmember Carey said, that any professional
would not want to be around if he was not wanted. Councilmember Carey
would vote for the motion on the floor, but he was .primarily concerned
with the last sentence.
808
3/27/78
Councilmember Eyerly said Councilmember Carey had covered his views on
the matter of the "City's'sole-option." He*said the contract said the
City was going to charge $23,286 annually --what if the City Council
decided to raise the-fee'should patronage fall off? Was there any place
in the contract that -spoke to -reviewing those two matters?
Mayor Sher referred to Paragraph 7 (b) which said that the golf pro, got
the green fees and monthly playing card fees; the balance of the money
went to the City.
Councilmember. Eyerly asked if the golf pro could set fees on his own,
for example, the driving range.
Mr. Walker said the golf range fees were set by the pro. The fees
mentioned in paragraph -7, subsection. (a) represented a lease for the
City facility. The pro' was free to set whatever fees he liked on his
services and equipment. That was etandard with other golf courses also.
Mayor Sher reminded Counci lmembers . that the document was only the bat i s
for negotiation. It was a- starting point only. Councilors seemed
to be extremely sensitive to the -concerns of the golf pro, who was
perhaps better able to -make his'oen determinetion about his require-
ments. Mayor Sher said that the document Council approved ought to
include matters which Council would like to see In the contract. ,He
himself had nQ problem about requiring a. financial statement'prepared by
a licensed public accountant, and the like, for it was in the City's
interest to know those things.
Vice Mayor. Brenner . concurred with Mayor Sher. She preferred to see the
requirement for the financial statement clearly stated as a separate
paragraph, as it was.
CouncilmemberClaysaid he didnot want to see staff enter into negotia-
tions with the golf pro in the same way -it did "under our labor unions."
Council was taking the time to look at the details at the present time.
The golf pro would be more visible than anyone in the City management or
Council; and it was important that the contract not frighten away
capable people.
AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment that subparagraph (b) of paragraph G be
struck from the proposed contract -agreement failed on the following
vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly
NOES: Brenner, Fauino,-Fletcher, Shur, Witherspoon
ASSENT: Henderson
Councilmesber Carey said he thought the issues involved presented a
microcosm of a governmental concern:; -that i s , the reluctant* of govern-
ment to relinquish control to the private sector, while at the same time
maintaining control over the power to sever a contractor who did not do
the job. Council was setting policy.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Carey moved, seconded .by Clay, that the last
sentence of paragraph 6 (b) be-stricka : 4This (annual financial)
statement will assist in' determining' future contract modifications."
Mr. Wdlker said that staff could delete the sentence without Council
action.
Mayor Sher confirmed that no other Councilmember wanted the sentence
retained.
809
3/27/78
AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN: Councilmember 'Carey .withdrew his amendment. He
referred to paragraph 9, Payments Subject. to Negotiation. He said that
if the City had the unilateral right -to eenegotiate the salary of the
golf pro he thought -the contract should.be for a shorter length of time.
The contract of five -years was meaningless if one contract party was
stuck.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember:Carey'moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the
contract be written' for' a• two=yearperiod, without modification.
Mayor Sher.observed that paragraph 1 would also have to be changed.
Paragraph 9 could be -deleted, though, as he understood, the City could
not unilaterally change the amount.of payment, but it could say uni-
laterally that the contract -should be renegotiated.
Mr. Walker said he preferred that just the first sentence of paragraph 9
be deleted, leaving in -language -regarding the manner in which amendments
would be made to the contract and also the way the -rate and manner of
the payment would be. changed. He added that staff had hoped to tiave a
minimum of a three-year contract to offer the professional --PGA had said
three years would give an appropriate length of time to prove himself.
Councilmember Carey said that if -staff were willing to delete the first
sentence he would withdraw his motion.
Mayor Sher said he felt it -was more a question of willingness on the
part of the Council, rather thin. of willingness of the staff.
Councilmember Carey said that ifany other Councilmember wanted to make
en amendment on what remained after deletion of tie. first sentence he or
she could do so. He said he -would restate his amendment that the first
eentence be deleted and the time' of -the contract be -set for three rather
than five years. He -asked the agreement of his second.
Councilmember Fazzino said he did nct agree to that change.
Council aber Clay asked that those two items be -voted on separately. He
himself was satisfied to- have the -first aentence deleted; he would like
to see the four-year. term remain.
AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN: C€uncilmember Carey withdrew his amendment.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Carey moved, seconded by Clay, that the first
sentence in Paragraph 9 be deleted, and the length of the contract set
for four years.
Councilmember Carey said he would make the change to four years for the
sake of expediency.
Mayor Sher said it could not be voted on without debate. He would not
set up a four-year term without possibility of renegotiation, which was
to the good of both the City and the golf professional. He would be
agreeable to puttieg in paragraph 9 that the golf pro could also ask for
renegotiation if he or she thought the salary was too little.
Councilmember Witherspoon said she thought the second sentence in
paragraph 9 would allay any of Mayor Sher's fears about there being no
provisions for changes. The second sentence did not say, however, that
the golf pro could have the option, or that he could do so at the end of
two. years.
Mayor Sher said he thought the second sentence was built on the first
sentence which was the operative sentence. What Council was engaged in
81 0
3/27/78
• S'/C)
demonstrated the difficulty of wrapping up a contract with eight different
points of view. However, Council worked in that fashion, and they would
keep plugging away.
Vice Mayor Brenner said she was inclined to be against the motion. If
the amendment failed she would make an amendment to simply drop that
phrase "...at the City's sole opt':n," which seemed to be the main
question.
AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment to delete the first sentence in para-
graph 9, and set the length of the contract for four years, failed on
the following vote:
AYES: Clay, Eyerly, Witherspoon
NOES: Brenner, Carey, Fazzino, Fletcher, Sher
ABSENT: Henderson
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Carey moved, seconded by Eyerly, that the
length of the contract run for three years, not unilaterally amendable,
which meant the first sentence would be deleted.
Councilmember Carey said that if the phrase "...at the City's sole
option" were deleted the compensation and payments would be renegotiated
at the end of each year, and that would be a year--to-year contract.
AMENDMENT FAILED: The amendment that the length of the contract run for
three years, and the first sentence of paragraph 9 to be deleted, failed
on the following vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino
NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon
ABSENT: Henderson
Councilmember Clay refereed to paragraph 12, subsection (a) end read the
second sentence: "If any person employed by Golf Professional is not
satisfactory to City, Golf Professional agrees to conduct a hearing with
the City Manager to evaluate the employee. If the employee is not
considered satisfactory, such person will be dismissed within fourteen
(14) Joys after notice from the Golf Professional." He said he thought
the golf pro had the responsibility for employees he hired, and the
pro's effectiveness on the job depended on his ell oyees . The City
should not have authority to hire and fire those people hi' .4 by the
pro.
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Clay moved, seconded by Carey, that the second
and third sentences of paragraph 12 (a) be deleted.
Mayor Sher said the paragraph gave the golf pro the authcrity to hire
his own employees, but employees at the golf course would be perceived
as employees of the City and if, after a hearing, the City Manager held
that the employee's behavior was inappropriate there should be a pro-
cedure to iismiss the employee. The golf pro should not have the power
to retain employees that did not t standards set for City employees.
That same difficulty surrounded ` the argument about government relin-
quishing power to the private sector. Operation of the golf course -
would reflect on Palo Alto; also, Palo Alto citizens had the right to
expect the usual standards from the personnel connected with the golf
course operation; it was not a private golf course
81 1
3/27/78
Councilmember Carey said he thought that if the
whose work was not liked the golf pro should be
pro should be allowed "...to run his show," for
hired for his assumed ability to do just that.
departments had run the golf course, and it had
golf pro hired someone
fired. Until then the
the golf pre would be
In the past seven City
been a problem.
Mayor Sher pointed out that the contract was for fur years and the golf
pro could only be fired for reasons stated in paragraph 21.
Councilmember Fletcher said the golf pro could not be fired on fourteen
days' notice; earlier difficulties from multi -department operation would
not be present since the Director of Recreation was the sole adminis-
trator. The Golf Advisory Committee had been very critical in the past
of the golf course operation, but it was now "very satisfied with the
way things are going."
Councilmember Clay asked that attentipn be directed to the phrase "...if
not satisfactory to the City." The phrase gave power to the City on
perhaps the whim of not liking the way a pro's assistant sold golf
balls.
Councilmember Carey said he knew the Golf Advisory Committee was not
satisfied with having the golf course operation under the Recreation
Department; some members felt very strongly that the operation of the
course should be in the hands of the golf pro. He said he knew that for
a fact.
AMENDMENT PASSED: The amendment that the second and third sentences of
paragraph 12 (a) be deleted passed'On the following vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Witherspoon
NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Sher
ABSENT: Henderson
AMENDMENT: Councilmember Carey moved, seconded by Eyerly, that sub-
section (a) read that the golf professsional would maintain golf course
and driving range, (instead of the City`; subsection (b) was to be
modified so that the golf course superintendent of the City shall be
designated by the golf professional.
Councilmember Carey said all his earlier arguments applied to his above
fit. He referred to a list maintained by PGA for golf superin-
tendents, as well as for golf professionals. He thought that bespoke
the fact that one could not operate without the other. A golf siperin-
tendent's pay might go up to $18,000 a year. If the amendment passed the
City eight be able to reduce expenses by perhaps cutting some employees.
Mayor Sher said he supposed Conncilmember Carey meant that the golf
superintendent would direct the City employees. He said he thought it
was not advisable_ to have other than the City Manager designate the golf
course superintendent, for the superintendent would be the intermediate
person, and would not be responsible.
Mr. Walker said one alternative would be to hire the golf pro as a City
employee, with the responsibility of supervision, which took away much
incentive for the golf pro so far as concessions were concerned; another
alternative would be to "cut loose' the ten City employees who were on
maintenance for the course, and ask the golf pro to hire them. That
might cause a setback on the major improvement in maintenance, which had
been accomrl i shed.
Councilmember Clay said it was not unusual for City employees to be
under the supery i s ion of the golf pro; also it was not urn for the
812
3/27/78
superintendent to be an employee of the governing body. The golf pro
was often given the authority to see that performance of duties was
satisfactory. He said he had observed "without exception, that the golf
pro who had authority, along with responsibility, to supervise directly
the people who maintain the grounds, kept a better -maintained golf
course." He related that result to the fact that the golf pro had
accountability. He acknowledged tnat there hod to be cooperation and
productivity among the employees. The City had put over $1 million into
the golf course and wanted the best possible operation. He thought the
motion was consistent with that wish.
Mr. Booth said the City Charter provides that the City ttanager shall appoint
all heads of depar.tiesnts under his control, remove the same for cause,
and have general supervision and control. over .the same --and so
legal problems could result if the motion before Council were to pass.
The City had negotiated a Memorandum of tinijerstanding with various
employee associations that provided for employer -employee relationships
deriving from the Manager's office. The Municipal Code had similar
language concerning accountability for expenditure of funds.
Councilmember Carey said his motion did not intend that the golf pro pay
the superintendent's salary: his motion intended that the City main-
tained the course with the golf pro selecting the superintendent. An
alternative would be to increase the golf pro's salary to include the
salary of the golf course superintendent so that he could hire the
superintendent, with the City supplying the maintenance personnel. It
was being done in numerous municipalities. One of the job specifica-
tions was that the golf pro was to point out to the superintendent any
movement of tees-- if there was disagreement between them the golf pro
E.^uld notify the City Manager, then he would make the decision --that had
happened. When the City Manager or other authority was out of town on
the weekend, and the golf pro did not have the a ithori ty to move a tee,
play was hampered in the heaviest time of the week. No one knew better
than the pro about placement and so on of roughs and tee placement.
Perhaps it would even be possible to give the golf pro veto power on
selection of the golf course superintendent. He thought also that
significant savings would result.
Jay Rounds, Director of Personnel, said he was concerned about having a
consultant supervise employees of the City. He feared problems on the
question of who was an employee and who a contractor, and also labor
relations questions. There would be problems on unemployment laws,
internal Revenue Service regulations. He agreed with the City Manager
that if Council wanted to handle the matter of hiring the golf course
superintendent in that fashion there were better organizational struc-
tures to accommodate such an arrangement. The golf pro could be disassoc-
iated from the City employment organization.
Councilmember Eyerly said he did not foresee that the City Manager woul#.i
lose any of his power, but he would have to work through tine self pra;
that s -erred the same as the City Manager working with any department
head.
Mayor Sher said he would like the meeting to move forward, but that the
seriousness of the question meant it had to be debated to the end.
Councilmember Clay said that looking at the list of applicants he saw
three whose facilities were already operated in the fashion proposed by
Councilmember Carey's motion. That meant they were under contract to
the governing body and employees whom they supervised were employees of
the governing body. How did they do it?
. 1 3
3/27/78
Mayor Sher said that being under contract to the City did not neces-
sarily mean being a non -City employee.
Mr. Walker said staff knew of no situation such as Councilmember Clay
described_• -none of the finalists in the candidacy for golf pro were so
placed.
Councilmember Carey said he did not suggest that the golf course super-
intendent be an independent contractor. Why could he not be hired as an
employee of the City? He was sure it could be worked out. Successful
operation of the course was critical, and, according to PGA, depended
upon having the golf pro in sole charge.
Mr. Walker said Councilmember Carey's suggestion had some possibilities.
The major problem lay with those.portions of the salary that represented
the incentive nature of the job, such as merchandise. If the golf pro . _
was to be an employee, an Executive Session would not be needed, for the
Council would have no say-so in who was hired.
Councilmember Carey explained that he had been talking about the golf
superintendent.
Mr. Walker said that there had not been a problem with City employees
being supervised by a non -City employee, in this case, the golf pro.
Councilmember Carey asked if the golf
supervised by the City, with the golf
superintendent were not doing his job
the ultimate say-so.
superintendent could perhaps be
pro to tell the City if the golf
Well. The golf pro should have
Mr. Walker said that staff thought that the contract had been worked out
so that that would be the case.
Mayor Sher explained that the motion before them said that the golf pro
shall maintain the golf course driving range, and thv1t clarified that
the golf pro should have the ultima a aut.hori ty; the second part of the
ration said that the golf course superintendent was to be designated by
the golf pro rather than by the City.
Councilmember Eyerly referred to paragraph 4 (b), the last sentence, "If
golf professional determines such mai4tenance practices are unsatisfac-
tory after consultation with the golf''coufse superintendent of the City
he shall notify the City Manager. . . ." He said that took away the
authority, if the golf pro had to go to the City Manager. He thought
the golf pro should be able to tell the superintendent directly if he
thought he was not doing a good job. eThen the City Manager would be
available for complaints by the golf superintendent, or the City Manager
could have consultations with the golf pro.
Mr. Walker, responding•to Councilmember E,yerly's comment, said that in
the contract "City Manager" was intended to be read 'Director of Recreation."
Both golf pro and golf course superintendent were responsible to the
Director of Recreation; in the past one had been responsible to the
Director of Recreation, t other had been responsible to the Director
of Parks. Mr. Catlett was the Director of Recreation.
Scott Catlett: Director of Recreation, said Councilors Carey and
Clay had said that they were accustomed to playing some courses where
the golf pro was in charge of the entire maintenances that had not been
consistent with what people whom they had interviewed had said. In
response to a direct question oe the topic, while interviewing, he had
heard golf pro candidates answer something in the nature of "Well, the
superintendent had been on the job for about fifteen years, and he kind
81 4
3/27/78
of does his thing." In most cases the pro knows %ery little about golf
course management and turf management, though he could tell if the grass
was cut properly and the tees had proper placement; he looked to the
golf course superintendent for turf management.
FIRST PART OF AMENDMENT FAILED: The first part of the motion, that
paragraph 4 subsection (a), read that the golf professional will main-
tain golf course and driving range, failed on the following vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino
NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon
ABSENT: Henderson
SECOND PART OF AMENDMENT FAILED: The second part of the ration, that
paragraph 4, subsection (b) cue modified so that the golf course superin-
tendent of the City will be designated by the golf professional, failed
on the following vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly
NOES: Brenner, Fazzino, Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon
ABSENT: Henderson
MAN MOTION AS AMENDED: The main motion, as amended, that Council
approve the contract for the golf professional, passed on the following
vote:
AYES: Brenner, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon
NOES: Carey
ABSENT: Henderson
Mayor Sher said that the other part of the matter before Council related
to the authority of the staff to negotiate the contract with a particular
individual. Council had a list of those candidates that ranked highest
in the screening process, along with a recommendation from staff for a
preferred candidate. A motion from a Council! ber that staff negotiate
the contract would be in order, with the proviso that the individuals be
discussed in Executive Session. Interviews would have to take place in
Council itself.
Council: ter Eyerly asked if the City Manager had named one person.
Mayor Sher replied that the City Maneger had named one person in a
confidential memorandum dated March 23, 1978.
Councilmember Eyerly said that on January 23 he had moved that the G 1f
Advisory Committee would screen a field Own to a selection of a few;
that list was to be submitted to the _City Manager, and the City Manager
in turn was to submit the names of those : whom he approved for the
consideration of Council for final selection. The motion had passed
unanimously.
Mayor Sher said the City Manager had submitted a list of three to
Council last week. Of those three one had withdrawn, new Council was -'to
give the City Manager authority to negotiate.
Councilor Eyerly said he was not willing to give the City Manager
the authority, for Council was to make the final selection -.-the letter
from the City Manager had been political, trying to gain approval for
one individual.
81 5
3/27/78
r
Mayor Sher challenged Councilmember Eyerly's statement --he thought the
City Manager had carried out Council instructions, while at the same
time giving the name of the one whom he preferred. Council still would
make the decision, though perhaps the City Manager could have withheld
his opinion.
Councilmember Carey said that regardless of who was selected it would be
important for him to be able to work with staff. He did not want to
have Council say things that would be prejudicial to that cooperative
relationship. Perhaps, when Council talked about individuals it would
be best to do so in Executive Session. Fie,said that some candidates had
felt somewhat troubled by not being -given the power to maintain the golf
course, saying they would rather "..:be fired for not maintaining it
than to have a four-year contract and not have the authority to maintain
He said he would be specific in Executive Session, but he asked publicly
if staff was willing to have the golf pro have control over maintenance.
If so it would be more possible to obtain the services of the number one
candidate, that person whom everyone had placed first on his list. He
himself would prefer to interview the -four or five candidates --it might
be a learning process.
Mayor Sher said that a motion would have to be made, then public inter-
views would take place.
Councilmember Clay said he had phoned and talked individually with
several candidates --he had found it "extremely helpful." Others might
also, but he would not move that public interviews take place.
Councilmember Carey said he thought it would be best to go into Executive
Session, and he would so move.
Mayor Sher said Councilmember Carey did not have to make a -motion; he
would himself call a recess, and he would restrict the length of time to
fifteen minutes for there were many in 'the Council Chambers waiting to
speak on the balance of the agenda. .
RECESS AND EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council recessed to Executive Session from 9:50 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
Mayor Sher acknowledged that people had waited both last meeting and
three hours of the present meeting to discuss the property at 1035
Forest. He did rot know if Council would be able to reach that item in
this meeting.
SAND HILL ROAD PROJECT —ALTERATION OF
•
Mayor Sher removed himself from discussion of the Sand Hill Road Project
since he was a Stanford employee. He turned the meeting over to Vice
Mayor Brenner.
Councilmember Witherspoon said she would not participate for the same
reason. Councilmember Carey said he would not participate for he was
owner in some property on Sand Hill Road.
Councilmember Eyerly asked if a simple majority of the five votes of the
remaining five Councilors was needed for ;°passage of a motion.
Mr. Booth, City Attorney, said that a total of five votes was needed for
passage.
816
3/27178
MOTION. Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Fazzino, that the
consideration of Sand Hill/Willow Road improvements be continued.
Vice Mayor Brenner said she opposed continuing the matter. She wanted
to permit the people who had attended the Council meeting to speak. She
thought Council could move through the item rather quickly, and that
would permit staff to go forward with their' associated work.
Councilmember Fazzino asked for more clarification.
Vice Mayor Brenner said the motion to continue had been made before the
item had been introduced. Two people wished to speak on the matter.
MOTION WITHDRAWN: Councilmember Eyerly said he would abide by the
chair's ruling, and he would withdraw his motion.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that after extensive review of pending liti-
gation of Carleton vs. the City of Palo Alto, staff and outside legal
counsel have concluded that it would be advantageous for the City to
prepare a supplemental revised Sand Hill (formerly Willow Road) Environ-
mental Impact Report so as to wholly or substantially eliminate the
alleged defects in the original EnvironTental Review Process. Staff
recommended that Council action inclucie the following: 1) Adopt the
resolution directing preparation of a supplemental revised environmental
impact report; 2) approve a standard form consultant contract with
Environmental Impact Planning Corporation for the Supplemental Revised
EIR; 3) adopt a motion rejecting the submitted construction bids; and 4)
approve the resolution directing reassessment proceedings.
Vice Mayor Brenner said Council's actions would be the formality that
permitted the City to respond to a suit which had been brought against
the process. She read "It is further ordered that the action herein
taken is not and shall not be considered as an approval on reassessment
of said process. Approval on reassessed process is reserved for future
action by this Council and shall be made, if at all, by resolution
adopted subsequent to the final approval of the Supplemental Revised
Environmental Impact Report for said project."
Vice Mayor Brenner said she had asked for an interpretation of the
reassessment. Her question to staff was "Is Council simply going
through the motions or does it mean that Council is indeed re-thinkjrg
the process as it goes along?" The answer she was given, she said, j ,s
that the project was being re -thought. In short, the City was back-
tracking T
and asking to have an environmental assessment completed, in
response to the suit. Though no public hearing was required, it had
been Council's custom to allow members of the public to speak. She
asked if, before the public spoke, there were questions from staff or
Council.
Councilmember Fazzino asked if it would be possible to have a time frame
for the undertaking before the! City.
Mr. Schreiber said a work program was attached to the staff report after
the first resolution, labeled Exhibit A. Page 2 gave a schedule which
was a modification of the original schedule for the first Elk. The
supplemental revised EIR would take about nine weeks to prepare, print
and distribute to the Planning Commission. That would be followed by a
$-day review program, with Planning Commission action adding about six
weeks. About sixteen weeks would be taken before the item could be
acted upon by the Planning Commission --perhaps in 20 weeks the item
would come back to the City Council.
817
3/27/78
Councilmember Fazzino asked when the time schedule went into force.
Mr. Schreiber replied that if Council acted this evening the schedule
would begin the following day.
Councilmember Eyerly noted that the proposed action before them would
void the previous assessment actions and, if adopted, Council would be
directing staff to establish procedures for a new assessment process.
Mr. Booth answered that the reassessment process is the commencement of
an entirely new and different assessment district, the process being
somewhat shorter because one already existed, however. That would
follow, when the Environmental Impact work:was done.
Councilmen+ber Fletcher said she was curious how assessments could be set
before Council took final action on an alignment.
Mr. Booth said assessments would not be set until after all the decisions
had been made.
Vice Mayor Brenner confirmed that alignments had to be revoted, based
upon the EIR. She called upon the first speaker from the public.
Nancy Jewell Cross, 1902 Palo Alto Way, University Park, San Mateo
County, spoke for the Committee for Safe and Sensible San Francisquito
Creek Area Routing. She quoted from a decision of the California Court
of Appeals, Exhibit F, page 13: "The function of the EIR is not to
substantiate programs already decided upon. Post hoc evaluations are
not a valid substitute for full envi rem ental research as precedent to
program formulation. As our Supreme Court said, referring to a City
Council resolution declaring the intent of a previously taken action, at
the time of (such--and-such) resolution the Council had already approved
the project. No resolution adopted on that date can constitute that
determination of environmental impactprior to approval of a project
which the act required. The resolution adopted at that meeting repre-
sents simply an example of that post hoc rationalization of a decision
already made which the courts condemned and citizens to preserve Overton
Park vs. Volpe." She said the organization she represented arose in
1974 before Palo Alto's environmental impact report. It was concerned
with regional long range planning; Palo Alto's concern was to keep
options open, not to rationalize decisions already made. She said her
organization wanted to see those alignments dismissed, including Align-
ment I, which had -failed. Rather than saying that intersections con-
trolled rate of travel she asked that there be opened "...a real decision
for transportat5on--multi-mode transportation: buses, and bikes and
jogging...as well as cars...in a wider regional sense, from (Highway)
101 to (Highway) 280. . . ." She asked for diversity in routes, and not
just one road. She said that not an instructed, but an open, EIR was
needed. She asked for some fresh input. What, for example, might women
contribute as consultants to widening options? She asked that Council
consider a political reform act in relation to consultants and have the
consultants and attorneys who are involved file a statement of economic
interest, such as Councilmi ers do. In Menlo Park all employees were
advisors to its council so that the Co6ncil received non -financially
interested and independent advice. She approved point 3) on the motion
before Council, which called for rejection of submitted construction
bids.
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that Ms. Cross sum up since her time had
elapsed.
Ms. Cross asked for time to say "...about three sentences more." She
said that regarding Item 4), her organization did not want reassessment
proceedings that had already been set. She said her organization was
818
3/27/78
suing in U.S. District Court and in the
court in the land was the "Court of the
have "informed feedback from the people
that end anybody who wanted to read her
obtain a copy at The Copy Shop, Emerson
Superior Court, but the highest
People." She wanted Council to
of this community. . . ." To
organization's complaints could
and University, for $3.00.
David Stiles, 1931 Perry Avenue, Menlo Park, represented the University
Park Association. He said that Vice Mayor Brenner's opening comments
were heartening and somewhat allayed their fears; ne also was gratified
by Councilmember Fletcher's remarks, for his group shared her concerns.
He feared the new procedure now before Council "..cmight be just another
pro forma exercise in deadening paperwork." His group was concerned
with due process and the letter 4f the law. He alluded to an action of
the City of Menlo Park which he said -ignored due process. He remarked on
the comment that the suit's delaying action would increase costs of
building the road by $1000 a day. The Palo Alto City Attorney had
himself requested a 30 -day extension of time, thereby doing some delaying
of his own.
Councilmember Eyerly asked Mr. Booth if any Councilmember was free to
re-agendize any of the items, should they not all be passed that evening.
Mr. Booth replied that both Councilmembers and staff were free to do so.
Councilmember Eyerly said he was sympathetic to all four recommendations
by staff. The resolutions before Council would supplement the incomplete
Environmental Impact Report, Litigation was underway. He saw no alternative
other than to move ahead on the project and re -do the process and do
what is necessary. As he read the items, he said, he noted that the
resolution spoken of in point 1) had to be drawn; point 2), approving a
standard form consultant contract for such a report, was apparent; point
3) had an inherent requirement that the construction bids had to be
rejected; and point 4), undoing a previous assessment district and
establishing a new one, also seemed an apparent need. He asked if he
should move them one at a time or all at once.
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that Councilmember Eyerly move the recommenda-
tions all at one time; she would bring them to vote singly.
MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Fazzlno, that Council
adopt the recomendations of staff, along with the resolutions.
PART ONE OF MOTION PASSED: Part one of the motion that Council adopt
the resolution directing preparation of supplemental revised environ-
mental impact report, with the supplemental revised EIR to include the
original Willow Road EIR and added updated material, including an analysis
of alignment I and all design features incorporated into the previously
►pproved plans, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmembers Witherspoon
and Carey, and Mayor Sher, not participating; Councilmember Henderson
absent.
RrSOLUTION 5531 entitled "A RESOLUTION DIRECTING
PREPARATION N 6F SUPPLEMENTAL REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT."
PART NO OF MOTION PASSED: Part two of the motion that Council approve
a standard form consultant contract with Environmental Impact Planning
(E.I.P.) Corporation for the supplemental revised EIR, passed on a
unanimous vote, Councilmembers Witherspoon and Carey, and Mayor Sher,
not participating; Councilmember Henderson absent.
PART THREE OF MOTION PASSED: The motion that Council move to reject the
submitted construction bids, passed on a unanimous vote, Cow tl rs
819
3/27/78
Witherspoon and Carey, and Mayor Sher, not participating; Councilmember
Henderson absent.
PART FOUR OF MOTION PASSED: Part four of the motion, that Council
approve the resolution directing reassessment proceedings, with the
intent of the resolution being to void the previous assessment actions
taken by the Council and establish the procedures for a new assessment
process, passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmembers Witherspoon and
Carey, and Mayor Sher, not participating; Councilmember Henderson
absent.
RESOLUTION 5532 entitled "A RESOLUTION DIRECTING
REASStSSMERT PROCEEDINGS.'
Vice Mayor Brenner said that the procedure Council had gone through "is
simply to set us back on the right track and get the project moving
again."
REQUEST OF COUNTY REGARDING REGIONAL
Mayor Sher said that Councilmember Carey had asked that the item concern-
ing the Criminal Justice Planning Board be removed from the Consent
Calendar of March 20, 1978. The matter had been put on the agenda at
the request of Santa Clara County, and would provide for interim situa-
tions; as he recalled the change had occurred because San Jose had
withdrawn from the Board.
Councilmember Carey said he was opposed to the proposed resolution, "at
least temporarily." He wanted questions about the reasons for San
Jose's withdrawal from the program to be answered. He thought Palo Alto
should write to the City of San Jose and ask its reasons for withdrawal,
those questions to be answered prior to Palo Alto's vote on the motion.
MOTION: Councilmember Carey moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that
Council authorize staff to write the City of San Jose to ask them to
give reasons for their withdrawal from the Regional Criminal Justice
Planning Board,
Mayor Sher said he thought the City of San Jose had withdrawn from the
program because it was in a position to become a board unto itself,
because of its size, "and they want to go it alone."
Councilmember Carey said he had heard a portion of the debate; it seemed
that San Jose was "extremely unhappy with the Regional Criminal Justice
Board (RCJB)." He said he did not hear enough to decide whether or not
he agreed with San Jose, and his motion spoke to his wish to hear more
about the reasons for withdrawal.
Mr. Walker said he thought that the reasons for San Jose's withdrawal
would be reasons for Palo Alto's entrance into the program. He thought
it would be well to hear San Jose's reasons, however.
MOTION PASSED: The motion, that Council authorize staff to write the
City of San Jose to ask them to give reasons for their withdrawal from
the Regional Criminal Justice Planning Board passed on the following
vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Witherspoon
NOES: Brenner, Fletcher, Sher
ABSENT: Henderson
8. 2 0
3/27/78
RE'UEST OF COUNCIOEMBER WITHERSPOON RE
FR(14 PRIVATE NON-PROFIT CWORATIONT (CMR:201:8)
con nue rom
Councilmember Witherspoon said the March 1§ staff report in Councilmembers'
packets was an outgrowth of her motion, subsequently continued, made at
the February 21, 1978 meeting. She said she thought private, non-profit
groups could perhaps submit proposals in a form satisfactory to staff.
The burden of compiling information then rested on the applying organi-
zation. The Finance and Public Works Conic ittee mould review all such
proposals in late fall, making selection Of those organizations it
thought the Council might be interested in contracting with and sub-
mitting it to Council; if approved, the proposal would go into the
regular budget process.
Mayor Sher advised Councilmember Witherspoon that her motion was still
on the floor. He read, "It shall be the policy of the Council that all
private, non-profit organizations wishing to be considered as contrac-
tors to the City, shall submit a proposal following guidelines and
supplying such information as staff shall require, for consideration
during the budget hearing, when the Finance and Public Works Committee
will consider all present and potential contractors in the social
services area at one time, and make a recor endation to Council as to
which shall be contracted with during the coming fiscal year. Staff
will not spend time analyzing each proposal in depth until the Council
determines if it wishes to contract for the service offered." He
observed that there was a difference between .the motion and tine current memo:
the motion said the initial application should come in the fall, not
during the budget process, with Council to look at them, giving prelimi-
nary indication of which interested Council, with those to be considered
during tree budget process.
Councilmember Witherspoon said she thought the motion still stood, her
current memo did not change it substantially. She said she was trying
to take the burden off the Finance and Public Works Committee, for it
could do a preliminary screening of such organizations in the fill.
Councilmember Carey said he thought it woul:J be best to do that, for
without considering such applications a budget could not be recommended.
Carleen Bedwell, Director of Community and Social Services, said that
she thought the procedure was a workable system; her department would
be requesting proposals by agencies to be submitted in October and early
November, and such proposals would be sent on to the Finance and Public
Works Ch i ttee by late November -early December. The timing was similar
to that used by United Way. After screening by the Committee the
Council would recommend exploration and development of the proposal to
return in time for consideration at budget hearings, with detailed staff
analysis to take place at that time.
Mayor Sher asked if the motion addressed non-profit corporations to
which the City already contributed some funds.
Councilmember Witherspoon answered that they roulu not have to have
screening, and her motion addressed potential contractors. She reworded
the motion, as stated in her most recent memo.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoon moved, seconded by Fazzino,
that the preliminary review of all human services funding. proposals be
before the Finance and Public Works Committee on a date in late fall;
that the ei ttee's recommendation on those services they think the
Council should consider would go to the Council for "ratification" soon
afterward, thus giving staff some four months to analyze in depth the
to -be -considered proposals and make concrete recomnendattons as to the
appropriateness of each proposal, the funding level, etc., at the budget
hearing at which all the social services contracts are considered.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION PASSED: The motion passed on a unanimous vote,
Councilmember Henderson absent.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ON BINDING
ARBI`f1UATIUf MIT IATTV t. ai
aan nu r'o1n
Mayor Sher said the City Attorney's report had been requested by Council
at an earlier meeting. It outlined the activities which staff intended
to pursue on the ballot initiative on compulsory arbitration, the City
Attorney having indicated that such proposed activities were permissible
under existing law. The City Attorney had given Council a memorandum
dated March 16 in which existing law was reviewed. Mayor Sher asked if
in item 2, concerning distribution of information to media and civic
groups, and item 4, responding to requests for information by civic
groups and media, the City Attorney's interpretation of the lay was that
any information to be supplied had to be impartial.
Mr. Booth answered that the City staff could present the view of the
City, and City personnel could present their own views --they did not.
have to be impartial. The rule of thumb would to that if information
was to be sent out it had to be at least factual, and not with a bias of
persuading a vote to be cast one way or another.
Mayor Sher concluded that the staff could present its own material which
might lean toward a "no" or "yes" vote.
Mr. Booth said that some might, read the material as having bias; the
court objected to blatant bias, incomplete material such as bumper
stickers. The Court encouraged sending out factual analyses "on a matter
involved in an issue of this magnitude."
Mayor Sher said he saw that as a hard
the court thought it was all right to
the views of both staff and Council.
Council action was required.
line to draw, but he inferred that
send out factual material, giving
He did not see that any specific
MOTION: Mr. Walker informed Mayor Sher that Countilmember Eyerly had
moved at an earlier meeting that staff should do everything legally
possible to defeat the binding arbitration initiative --that motion was
still on the floor.
MOTION PASSED: The motions that staff should do everything legally
possible to defeat the Binding Arbitration initiative, passed on the
fol l owi ng vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Sher, Witherspoon
IBS: None
ABSTAIN: Brenner, Fletcher
ABSENT: Henderson
Mayor Sher said that his vote in favor of the motion was made with an
underscoring of the word "legally."
822
3/27/78
RE VEST OF MAYOR SHER
XE MEMORIAL TO LUCY EVANS
MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Brenner, that the matter
naming the duck pond at the Baylands, or other appropriate City
in the honor of Lucy Evans, be referred to the Finance and Publi
Committee. *The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember
Henderson absent.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Corrected
see page
901
of
facility,
c Works
1. Hal Hudson, 535 Everett, president of the Palo Alto Housing
Corporation (PAHC), spoke of PAHC having run, into a problem on
Webster Wood which he felt "PAHC was obligated to discuss with
Council. Councilmember Carey, head of the liaison committee,
had suggested he (Mr. Hudson) speak at Oral Communications on
the topic. The first units at Webster Wood would be completed
sometime in June. The City, by its referendum and Article 34
and the Council by providing land subsidy had made the project
possible. To get the equivalent from the California Housing
Finance Agency (CHFA), PAHC had to have an Affirmative Action
program, and it did so provide. He felt PAHC had an obliga-
tion to reduce both traffic and pollution and provide housing
as well. A study by Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had
shown a housing shortage in Palo Alto of over 1000 units.
CHFA had to approve PAHC rental procedures, which meant that
first units had to go to people who had been displaced by
Webster Wood or other government projects and second to those
who were wheelchair handicapped; the third was to the elderly,
and they had priority for the one -bedroom e pits. Beyond that
PAHC suggested that there be a preference group--PAHC defined
that group as persons who lived or worked in Palo Alto,
or had definite assurance of a job in Palo Alto. CHFA had
said the preference group would not be acceptable because
HUD would not approve it. Cherie Charlton, who had been
a member of the Palo Alto Planning Commission for several
years, and who was now with HUD in Washington, said that
HUD would not necessarily reject the idea --"apparently only
by an oversight was it not included in the understanding
between HUD and CHFA (HUD being involved because Section 8
supplements were involved)." PAHC had then been told that
the concern of the Affirmative Action officer with CHFA was
that if the preference group were included PAHC might not
be able. to provide rental units to a sufficient number of
minorities. PAHC had estimated that about 25 percent of
the units would go to minorities. CHFA was not satisfied
that that percentage would necessarily apply, PAHC thought
CHFA was saying "We feel you should drop this preference
group in order to be more certain that you would have at
least that percentage." CHFA was not specifically requesting
the 25 percent, they had talked about 30 percent, but CHFA
was asking how PAHC proposed to handle the matter "so that
there will be a proper percentage of minorities represented.";
PAHC held that neither it, nor anyone, could assure CHFA
of that, but PAHC's procedure would provide at least that
25 percent. It had surveyed the eight leading employers
in the city and found that they had 24 percent mi nori t$'
employees and so PAHC felt that was a "reasonable assurance"
that that would give the 25 percent minorities. Most of the
developments so far approved by CHFA and that were underway
are for the elderly. PAHC's development was one of the few
823
3/27/78
where there would be family housing, That meant there was
more likelihood that there would be more minorities among
families than among elderly. Palo Alto had 12.6 percent
minorities, and so it was t rqught not to be "in keeping with
their (CHFA's) philosophy as to the proper use of the
public funds that were being provided by it to construct the
project." PAHC felt strongly that the preference group
was logical and argued with CHFA that if it wanted to encourage
housing in cities like Palo Alto for low and moderate income
groups, maximum consideration for those who lived and worked
in such cities should be encouraged. PAHC had received
over 500 names of people indicating an'interest in the 68
units under construction, and it had done no advertising,
though it would be advertising in publications for minorities
"tall up and down the Peninsula --Chicano, Blacks, Asians,
Indians --all that we can find." Mr. Hudson said he had made
this appearance €fore Council to inform it that PAHC might
be required to drop the preference group, for it could not
assure CHFA that the percentage of housing for minorities
contidered desirable by CHFA would be available if the preference
group were in effect. The drawing for housing was scheduled
for the middle of April. Everyone qualified according to the
income limits would make application; PAHC would list the
names according to preference, that is, the handicapped,
elderly, then if PAHC's wishes came true, the preference group
of those. eithee' employed in Palo Alto or living in Palo Alto.
He said that if Council shared PAHC's conviction that it was
fitting to have such a preference group, PAHC would welcome
its support; he suggested a letter expressing Council's
belief, written tten to CHFA--and the stronger the letter, the
better.
Mayor Sher said that discussion by Council of the matter could not be
entered into under Oral Communications.
Mr. Hudson replied that the matter had become critical only that after-
noon. He had wanted to report on it to Council as soon as possible, and
so he had taken the opportunity of Oral Communications,
Mayor Sher suggested that Mr. Hudson work with staff to get on Council's
next agenda.
Councilmember Carey asked if the state had talked about quota systems to
PAC.
Mr. Hudson replied 'That's a word ; they carefully avoid.' The state
asked only v.hat PAHC proposed to 0o --the percentage PAHC had heard would
be acceptable to the state was 25 percent and 30 percent.
Counctlmember Fletcher asked if the drawing could be held, and if about
25 percent or 30 percent minorities applications were reached, appli-
cation could then be made to CHFA.
Mr. Hudson explained that before PAHC proceeded it had to satisfy CHFA
that it was following a satisfactory approach. When PAHC sent out
application forms it had to be very clear about what the procedure was,
or it would lead to complications- later on.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Councilmemrber^ Carey moved, seconded by Fatzino, that the
adjourned meeting of March 20, 19780 be adjourned. The motion passed on
a unanimous vote, Councilor Henderson absent.
Council adjourned the adjourned meeting of March 20, 1978, it 11:30 p.m.
824
3/27/78
Regular Meeting of March 27, 1978
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date at 11:30 p.m.
in a regular meeting, with h'ayor Sher presiding.
PRESENT: Brenner, Carey, Clay, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher,
Sher, Witherspoon
ABSENT: Henderson
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 6, 1978
Councilmember Fletcher asked that on page 9, eleventh line, the word
"broiler" be changed to "broader.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 631, first paragraph, fifth
line, the line read, "In looking at most of the areas that are on El
Camino, the lot behind the neighborhood commercial lot is going to be
residential."
She asked that on page 633, the second line read "Councilmember Witherspoon
asked if that were the only zone in which that was allowed in the City."
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that on page 630, last paragraph, fifth line,
it read instead, "It is designed to provide a neighborhood with good
frontage."
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that on page 631, seventh paragraph, the fifth
line, read instead "Councilmember Henderson stated that any animal care
facility now existing in CH Neighborhood ConI7 rcial. . . „
MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that the
minutes of February 6, 1978, be approved as corrected. The motion
passed on a unanimous voice vote, Councflmenber Henderson absent.
MINOTES_OF FEBRUARY 7 1978
Councilmember Fletcher asked that on page 642, tenth paragraph, sixth
sine, the sentence read "He liked the City's plain bicycle rack which
required only a padlock."
Councilmember Witherspoon asked that on page 648, ninth paragraph, the
sentence read, "Councilmember Witherspoon said the motion did not limit
the length of time for which an extension. could be granted," with
a..ea:wd she thought that safe,"
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that on page 638, fourth paragraph, the fifth
line have Inserted "She felt that R-5 density gave an incentive." In
the tenth line she asked that the phrase read ...that a reference to
usable open space."
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that in the same paragraph on page 638 the last
line, "...distinguished -from commercial." be deleted, with "...attractive
living with safety, whether or not they are coined with commercial,"
to be added.
Vice Mayor Brenner asked that on page 638, last paragraph, the first
line read ".,.if the same lot were used for residential and commercial.,."
Mayor Sher asked that on page 638, sixth paragraph, the sentence read
instead, "Mayor Sher asked if that meant that a vacant lot used exclusively
for residential in a commercial zone would have an open space requirement."
825
3/27/78
MOTION: Cound1me ber Eyerly moved, seconded by Brenner, that the
minutes of February 7, 1978, be approved as corrected. The motion
passed on a unanimous voice vote, Councilmember Henderson absent.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Referral Items
DOWNTOWN PARKING FEASIBILITY STUDY
(Referral
' lb : 7
Planning Commission)
Staff recommends that Council, in accord with part (g) of the motion of
May 10, 1976, refer the staff report to the Planning Commission for
review, followed by a Commission report and recommendation to the
Council.
Action Items
ORDINANCE CONCERNING POSTING OF
ORDINANCE 3049 entitled ''ORDINANCE OF THE
COUNCIL OFTNE C1TY OF PALI) ALTO ADDING
SECTION 4.04.210 TO THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL
CODE TO REQUIRE POSTIN3 OF NAME, ADDRESS, AND
TELEPHONE NUMBER OF LAUNDROMAT OWNERS."
(First reading 3/13/78)
ANIMAL DISPOSAL CONTRACT (C :188:8)
Staff recommends that the Council approve the new method of animal
disposal and authorize the Mayor to execute the agree ent with D and D
Disposal, Inc.,. Berkeley, California, for pick-up and disposal of
animals from the Palo Alto Animal Shelter it the rate of $200 per worth
for four years. Funds for 1977 -Wand 1978.79 will be made available in
the animl services budget.
MOTION: Councilmerber Carey moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that
Council approvethe Consent Calendar by approving the ordinance, authorize
the execution of the contract, and make the referral. The motion passed
on a unanimous vote, Council rber Henderson absent,
1 055 FOREST AVENUE: APPEAL FROM
/coatinuea from 3,20/78)
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 4-0, one not participating,
recommends denial of the appeal of Elizabeth Landes from the decision of
the Department of Planning and Community Environment to dear a Prelimi-
nary Parcel Map for property located at 1055 Forest Avenue.
Councilmember Carey said he had revved the matter of 1055 Forest Avenue
from the Consent Calendar of March 20, 1978, to bring to a vote by
Council and uphold the Planning Commission recommendation.
MOTION: Councilmrber Carey moved, seconded by Fletcher, that the
Planning Commission recommendation be upheld by Council, and that the
appeal be denied.
826
3/27/78
2
Counciimember Carey said he wanted the applicant to understand that she
had put the Council in the position of granting either all or nothing.
The applicant had refused to discuss anything other than four units. He
would vote for no partitioning at all, since no other choice had been
afforded by the applicant.
Ben F. Ivy, 1130 Hamilton Avenue, said that in view of the lateness of
the hour and Councilmernber Carey's comments he would let his letters and
a document carrying over 90 signatures speak for him. He opposed the
preliminary parcel map.
Monroe Dawes, 3886 Mumford, Palo Alto, represented the applicant,
Elizabeth Dawes. He referred to a map to give a history of the property.
Mrs, Landes had submitted a plan for a five -lot subdivision in 1967;
the Planning staff had worked out a four -lot The
subdivision. applicant
_ .+
had spent about $10,000 on engineering and so on, and the big lot, as
approved by Council of that time, was subdivided into four smaller lots.
Shortly after that the applicant had moved to Seattle, Washington, with
the understanding that she had a four --lot subdivision, and that all she
had to do further was build a carport adjacent to the main house on the
lot facing Forest Avenue, and also to file a bond for completion of the
street.
Upon her return she found that the process had to be gone through again.
Staff had approved the subdivision, and she showed on the _map that staff
had asked for a four -foot planting area, and a five-foot dedicated
section for utilities. Several of the neighbors and Mr. Ivy had ob-
jected to the proposed subdivision. The Planning Commission had requested
that staff try to work with the applicant, with w variances or exceptions
to codes being granted. Staff had submitted four alternatives! one was
a two -lot subdivision, the other three were three -lot subdivisions.
Item D, in Councilmembers' packets, had been recommended by staff.
Mayor Sher pointed out that the only matter before Council was a pro-
posed subdivision of four lots.
Mr. Dawes agreed; item 0, recommended by staff, created too fifteen -
foot wide driveways running back to two very deep lots in the back; they
gave no access for police or fire vehicles. He exhibited a drawing of
the proposed subdivision, showing the four -lots and the surrounding
property. Staff recommended a 26 -foot strip of paving, with the five-
foot public utilities easement (PUE) beyond that. Mr. Dawes thought
staff had overlooked the fact that there was good access for police and
ftrc protection. The applicant asked that two exceptions to the code be
granted: allowance for the fact that the property at one point in the
rear of the lot ties not sixty feet wide, thoigh the lot itself was 19
percent larger than required by code; the other exception she asked was
allowance that although one lot was 78 feet wide at one point it was
not 100 feet deep on the average, the depth being only 89 feet. Because
of the configuration of the particular lot, demonstrated areas were the
building pad area. A small house and garden shed already on the property
were to be torn down. He thought the four -lot plan was very desirable.
Mr. Ivy referred to the January 20, 1978 document written by Lynnie
Helena of the Planning Department, page 5, which delineated twelve
variances or exceptions to the code.
Councilmember Clay asked if staff had any comments.
Ken Schreiber, Assistant Director of;`?lanning and Community Environment,
said he thought the staff report indicated exceptions, on the required
street width of 50 feet for a cul-de-sac, and the narrowness of one.of
the proposed sed f Bent yards. If the applicant had been willing to work
827
1/27/78
with the Planning Commission there probably would have been a satis-
factory conclusion, he said. The Planning Department could have worked
out acceptable plans on either three or four.
Robert Booth, City Attorney, said the applicant could file a different
application at any time.
Mr. Schreiber said that the matter of saving time for the applicant had
been in the minds of the Planning Commission members when they tried for
a compromise.
Mayor Sher noted that the Planning Department had denied the appeal.
Mr. Schreiber replied that the Planning Department could approve only
maps which were consistent with subdivision maps not requiring atiy
variances.
Councilmember Witherspoon asked when the other two subdivisions in the
cul-de-sacs on the street had been approved.' She thought they had been
there at least fifteen years. She thought 'the back was "terrifically
impacted."
Mr. Schreiber said he did not know when the others were approved.
Anne Steinberg, Chairwoman of the Planning Commission, said that the new
houses on hami l ton had been built to the maximum of the lots --it made
neighborhoods seem crowded.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that impaction having taken place elsewhere made
neighbors wary; she thought to grant the variance on Forest would invite
further applications for variances. She approved the °'
•
Commission denial.
Councilmember Fletcher said other concerned neighbors had left Council
owing to the late hour.
MOTIOA PASSED: The motion, that Council uphold the Planning Commission
recommendation for denial, passed on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Carey, Eyerly, Fazzino, Fletcher, Sher, Witherspoon
NOES: Clay
ABSENT; Henderson
EST OF COUNCIar.�ER EVE LY
Councilmember Eyerly said several Palo Altans had contacted him with
concern as to what had happened to the City's flower beds, since the
drought had ended.
MOTION: Councilmember Eyerly moved, seconded by Brenner, that staff
provide cost information during budget hearings for the various levels
of flower -bed planting.
Councilmember Witherspoon said that a letter from Lawrence White had
said the City would plant African daisies instead of ivy this year --it
was a perennial that "...doesn't even like water."
MOTION .PAS ED; The motion passed on a unanimous vote, Councilmember
Henderson absent.
828
3/27/78
REQUEST OF COUNCILMEMBER EYERLY RE
Councilmember Eyerly said funds for landbanking which Council had
approved earlier were still open for redistribution. It had come to his
attention that some organizations had not applied for the Community
Development funds, not realizing they might be eligible. He thought the
funds would best come from the Housing rorporation, from the $380,000
Council had allocated to them for rental housing acquisition. Lytton
Gardens h 4 an opportunity, owing to a death of a neighbor, to purchase
an adjoining property on Lytton. That piece of property would afford
parking for visitors and also access to Lytton Gardens kitchen. At the
present time all fordstuffs had to go through the lobby. The piece of
property would also connect with the piece which was now being developed
by them. Along with the opportunity of the lot, the Senior Center had
had some increases in costs on their projects due to inflation Council
had agreed earlier to use Community Block Development Grant (CBDG) funds
of $100,000. Costs had risen from an estimated $100,000 to $138,000.
He proposed that Council allocate an addditional $38,000 from next
year's CBDG funds. The Mid -Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing (MPCFH)
had written Council a letter which opposed the transfer of funds.
Councilmember Eyeriy thought the Housing Corporation would like to speak
to that letter. The Housing Corporation, Councilmember Eyerly said,
would still have over $250,000, even if the $38,000 were transferred. He
thought that amount of ,.*money "very viable."
MOTION: Councilmember Eyeriy moved, seconded by Witherspoon, that a
public hearing be set for two weeks from larch 27, 1978 and request that
applications for CGSG funds be submitted before that date.
Mayor Sher asked if it were necessary to have a public hearing on the
transfer of the amounts, along with other staff comments.
Mr. Schreiber said a review of HUD regulations showed that a public
hearing was in order for the proposed type "of application amendment.
Applications to HUD for CGBG funds were due April'15. If a decision had
not come from HUD before that, an amendment could be made "during" the
HUD review process --nevertheless a public hearing was needed to give
other organizations and the public in general time to comment on pro-
posed changes. Also, staff would like time for more analysis; there
might be some problemt with part of the Senior. Center request. About
$15,000 of the requested money was for an ineligible proposal --$22,000
was for an eligible proposal. With more analysis staff might find some
more proposals for which funds would be available., Some additional
funds had to be "cranked into the process" such as appraisal and re-
location processes.
Mayor Sher asked if Mr. Schreiber thought the public hearing was merely
"in order' or necessary.
Mr. Schreiber said a public hearing was necessary. Actioe by Council
should be planned . for two weeks from tonight in order to give staff time
to get notice in, in time.
Councilmember Eyerly said: he intended with his motion to request the two
parties to submit their applications to staff initially. Staff would
return to Council with t-i ir'com nts, at the time of the public'
hearing.
Mr. Schreiber said that would be possible.
Vice Mayor Brennen asked if timeProposed parking lot would not require
an aaernd nt to the P -C wwsich would require Planning Commission '
829
3/27/78
hearings, such hearings to consider even the necessity for adding the
parking.
Mr. Schreiber said a distinction would be made between the purchase of
the propertyand then the subsequent use of the -property. The land
would first have to be purchased for housing; parking and driveway could
be a temporary use. If it were not purchased for housing,it would not
be eligible for CDBG funding, according to staff's interpretation of the
regulations. Vice Mayor Brenner was right -=the purchase would have to go
through the P -C zone amendment process.
Vice Mayor Brenner asked if, were the land to be considered for housing,
and she had detected in reading the staff report that the price of the
land and its configuration might make it suitable far housing, would it
not have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission?
Mr. Schreiber said the adopted Comprehensive Plan showed that parcel as
multi -family residential. The zoning itself would have to go back to
the Planning Commission. If Council wished;' the entire matter could be
referred tc the Commission; during the past number of years, however,
matters concerning CDBG funds had not gone to the Planning Commission
for review.
Council or Eyerly said he thought -that were the parcel earmarked for
landbanking the P -C prcbl'-is would be clarified.
Mayor Sher said he would vote against the motion reluctantly; he had
supported Lytton Gardens and its. expansion, but he-did.not think the
single lot- whose purchase was proposed, was appropriate for. landbanking.
About the Senior Center, of which he had been a strong supporter, he
thought the $190,000 of CDBG funds had been a fair -allocation in view of
the fact that the Senior Council had maintained they would raise the
balance of the ne ed funds. He further understood the Senior Center
Council would come to Council for funds for the operation of the Center
next year. He did not favor placing any more funds into renovation.
Councilmember Fletcher said that Council had just passed a motion on how
spot applications for funds should be processed, and she was disturbed
about the way the present application before them deviated from that
process.
Vice Mayor Brenner said that when the Lytton Gardens application had
come before the Planning Commission, tho partingquestion had teen
raised; the Commission had been assured that the parkingwas. ample for
housing for the elderly. New members of Council, upon the occasion of a
visit to iytton Gardens, had been told the parking . arrangements were
completely satisfactory. Therefore she'was surprised that the letter to
Council on the topic said adeitionai parking was "urgently needed." If
parkin was indeed inadequate, parking needs should be locked at very
carefully on the next -project. She would not support the motion.
Councilor Clay said that when the Finance. Committee was looking at
CDG funds, it had been told that - Lytton Gardens -would not qualify,
Councilsember Eyerly said that staff had said very-fesr.projects would
qualify. Both Council and the Finance -Committee had been distressed
that there had not been more applicants for those -funds. These two
organizations, Senior Center and Lytton -Gardens, had not applied, though
"it does turn out, in the long run, that these its that have surfaced
are fundable." The Senior Center was in -trouble --it was no secret. The
more funding it could obtain from -sources like this, the -less it would
have to put on its operating budget; So far as parker.parkepg needs were
concerned for Lytton Garden, it was not reasonable to ignore the exist-
ing problem just because it had not been taken care of in the first
830
3/27/78
place. Lytton Gardens convalescent hospital had, he believed, moved
into the number one position for the authority for funding with the
state. In view of that, the idea of landbaeking-even one lot seemed a
good idea.
MOTION PASSEL: The motion that a public hearing be set for two weeks
from that evening (March 27, 1978), and that requests for applications
for Community Development Block Grant funds be submitted before that
date, passed on the following vote:
AYES: Carey, Clay, Eyerly; Fazzino, Witherspoon
WiES ,
Brtn er, Fletcher, Sher
ABSENT: Henderson
RE t EST OF CODNCILMEMBER CAREY RE
MOTION: Council tuber Carey moved. seconded by Witherspoon, that both
City staff and City Attorney's office be directed to.write a letter to
support the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PARC) in its request to the
state, that after meeting initial quota -with respect to Webster Wood,
preference be given to Palo Alto residents.
Mayo. Sher said that since the motion spoxe to an already existing
policy a motion might not be needed:
Cciuncilmember Carey said his motion was intended to eke clear that
since Palo Alto was providing the funds, -Palo. Alto residents should have
preference.
Mayor Sher recapitulated: Mr. Hudson of PAHC had said PANIC might not be
able, under HUD restrictions, to pursue its proposed pollee of having a
preference list for available housing at Webster Wood made up for Palo
Alto residents or for people employed in Palo Alto, after offering
housing to those who were displaced by government projects and wheel-
chair handicapped. Councilmember Carey's motion, then. said that
Council did not want PARC to forego that -preference list.
Mr. Hudson. of PARC said he had appeared before Council to inform them of
the situation, and to ask Council support for the proposed preferred
list.
Mayor Sher asked if the preference list were not already in the PARC
policy.
Mr. Hudson replied that he did not know if it wee formulated in the
policy. The .Below -Market -Rate (MR) program had a preference list, but
that program was quite different. He thought that if Council was
definitely in favc►, of what PAHC was advocating. a statement to that
effect would be very helpful. Mr. Carey's motion was helpful. He asked
that the word "quota" not appear in the motion.
Councilmiber.Clay asked if California Housing Finance Agency (MA).
had said it would withhold funds if there was to be a preference list.
Mr. Hudson replied that CHEA was "being very * adroi t in the way they
handle it. but they are saying, in effect, "we feel, in order to make
sure land; to satisfy us, that there is going to be a proper mix, that
preference category should be eliminated'. Sci d in another way they
831
3/27/78
were saying, "If you maintain this preference group, how can you assure
us that there's going to be a sufficient minority mix?"
Councilmember Clay asked if Mr. Hudson would eliminate the prefarence
list if there were not sufficient minorities.
Mr. Hudson replied that PAHC thought there would he -no conflict. PAHC
agreed there should be a reasonable mix: it also thought that there was
. a sufficient number of minorities employed in.Palo-Alto that the mix
could be achieved. He asked if Mr. Clay would be comfortable if the
preference group were eliminated.
Councilmember Clay replied that he did not think anything had to be
done.
Mayor. Sher said he thought Councilmember Clay was saying "Forget what
they say --go ahead and do it the way -you were'going to do it." It did
not need to be submitted to CHFA for Its. approval.
Mr. Hudson said that the method PAHC was going to follow to fill the
housing units at Webster Wood did have to be submitted.to CHFA, and it
was in a position to deny the next application.
Maycr,Sher said that if CHFA did_that, then Mr. Hudson would have to
return to Council.
Mayor Sher asked Mr. Booth if it would be correct to treat the notion as
if it were a reaffi ovation of a previous Council policy.
Mr. -Booth answered that in .that context that would be all right --otherwise,
it would take a vote to treat it as an'emergency.
Councilmember Fazzino said he was not so certain the motion was nece-
ssary. He was. not. clear on the extent of the problem; he would assume
that if there were a stated policy in effect, and- a problem arose, the
Housing Corporation would work with staff and develop a letter 4tating
Palo Alto's policy and have the letter sent to the state. Ho favored
sending a letter.
Mayor Sher .said . it would be no problem to write a leLrr supporting
PAHC's preference list.
Councilmember Witherspoon said 5iea_ did . not think the.motton would hurt,
and it might help. She favored it. She recalled a similar problem in
connection with Lytton Gardens rentals. She thought that in that case
since there wart federal funds involved there could be no preference
list.
Vice Mayror. Brenner said that three Counci l rs had "had the pleasure
of voting on th It recommendation, and it is- a- matter of reaffirming rg it,
re -sanctioning it, for the problem of housing people who work in Palo
Alto is perhaps our number one policy. I wool d be , happy to vote on it,
in my case, for the first time."
MOTION PASSED: The motion, that the staff a .Ci y.Attorr y be directed
to support the housing Corporation in'its request to the State, after
meeting initial requirements with respect to applicants for housing in
Webster Wood, to give preference to Palo Alto residents .and employ es
who worked in Palo Alto, passed on the following vote:
AYES: Brenner, Carey, Eytrly, ,Fazzino, .Fletcher, Sher,
Witherspoon
NOES: Clay
ABSENT: Henderson
832
3/27/78
2,
Mayor Sher said that the motion.as.passed reaffirmed a previous Council
policy.
CANCELLAI ION OF COUNCIL MEETING OF :APRIL 3, 1978
Mayor Sher said that Mr. Walker had said that the calendar was short for
the following week and a cancellation of the scheduled meeting would
give staff and.Councilmembers an opportunity'to catch up.on some work.
MOTION: Councilmember Careymoved, seconded by Fletcher, that Council
cancel the meeting of . Apri 1.3, 1978. The motion passed -one unanimous
voice vote, rounc1lt,e^ber Henderson absent. .
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Councilmember Witherspoonmoved, seconded by Brenner, that
Council adjourn the meeting of March' 27, 1978. 'The motio,i passed on a
unanimous vaice.vote. Councilmember Henderson absent.
Council adjourned at 12:35 a.rn.
833
3/27/78.