Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout050519758 QTY COIJNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting May 5, 1975 ITEM Minutes of April 14, 1975 Oral Communications Consent Calendar - Action Items Underground Conversion of San Antonio Road Monroe Mini -Park CITY Or - DI LU ALTO PAGE 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 5 Waverley Street Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge: Preliminary Plans and Ordinance Permitting Uee in Dedicated Park Land 1 2 1 5 Consent Calendar -- Referral Items 1 2 1 5 Proposed Loan Guidelines for Palo Alto's Housing Rehab- ilitation 1 2 1 5 Task Force on Aging w Final Report 1 2 1 5 Recommendation of Policy and Procedures Committee re Long -Term Power Supply Proposals 1 2 1 6 Request of Planning Commission that Council Reconsider its Position re Purchase of Lytton Plaza Regional Water Quality Control Plant Modifications: Contract for Engineering Services Water Reclamation Pilot Project Stop Signs at Monroe Drive, Miller Avenue Intersection Community Housing: Condominium Primer Barron Park - Proposed Moratorium El Camino Park Improvements: Award of Consultant Contract Assembly Bill 664 (California Toll Bridge Authority Surplus Revenues Inquiry of Councilman terwald with Respect to Silva Ave/Silva Court Annexa t ion Request of Councilman Comstock for Council Support for Senate Bill 634 1 2 3 9 1 2 4 2 1 2 4 4 1 2 4 8 1 2 4 9 1 2 5 0 1 2 5 1 1 2 5 1 1 2 5 2 1 2 5 2 Request of Councilman Comstock for Council Support of AB1 and S82 1 2 5 3 1 2 1 2 5/5/75 ITEM (Cont.) Comments of Councilman Comstock re the Freezing of Assesmments Comments of Councilman Norton Regarding a Flyer from the Collect1';e Councilman Berwald re Concerns about Crime in Palo Alto Meeting of May 12, 1975 Cancelled Mayor Sher re hearing in Sacramento re AB -321 Adjournment 1 2 1 3 5/5/75 PAGE 1 2 5 3 1 2 5 3 1 2 5 4 1 2 5 4 1 2 5 4 1 2 5 5 May 5, 1975 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this ;late at 7:30 p.m, in a regular meeting with Mayor Sher presiding. Present: Beahrs, Serwald, Sher, Clay (arrived 7:45 p.m.), Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum Absent: None Vice :Mayor Henderson requested that the words "for the" in the seventh line of the second paragraph concerning Squire House be deleted, and the words "with a" be inserted. (Page 1126.) MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, seconded by Pearson, that the minutes of April 14, 1975 be approved as corrected. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. C 1 Ccmaaunicationa 1. Sandra Eakins, 3493 Greer Road, l;r.es:nted a petition signed by 269 persons protesting locating the proposed postal fecility in that neighborhood. 2. Tom Harrington, 2620 Emerson Street, complained about overhead wiring that had been installed in the ten -acre zoning area; and he asked Council to reconsider underground wring instead. Consent Calendar - Action Item ewe Mayor. Sher asked if Council were ready to vote on the Consent Calendar Items. Councilman Clay requested that Items 1, 2, and 3 be removed from the Consent Calendar, Councilwoman Pearson requested that Item 6 be removed from the Consent Calendar. Mayor Sher stated that Item 1, 2, 3, and 6 would appear at the end of Reports of City Manager as Items I4 -A, B, C, and D. Mayor Sher asked for the vote, on the remaining items on the Consent Calendar, Items 4, 5, and 7 were left for approval on the Consent Calendar. 1 2 1 4 5/5/75 (CMR:281:5) RESOLUTION NO. 5088 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO TO DETERMINE PROPERTIES ELECTING TO PAY COST OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS" ae 4f niaariz (CMR:245:5) ORDINANCE NO. 2851 entitled "OR1 INA e E OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO MENDING CHAPTER 22.08 (PARK DEDICATIONS) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING SECTION 22,08.185 (MONROE MINI -PARK) AND ADOPTING A PARK PLAN" ORDINANCE. OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING AND ADOPTING A PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND PLACEMENT OF A BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AND PATHWAY IN TIMOTHY :HOPKINS CREFKSIDE-PARK (First reading.) The consent calendar was adopted on a unanimous vote. Ref (CIS,: 285: 5) Council referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee the proposed guidelines for Palo Alto's Housing Rehabilitation Project. The referral item passed on a unanimous vote. NOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Comstock, that Item 11 concerning the presentation of the final report from the Task Force on Aging be moved forward on the agenda for consideration. The uotion passed on a unanimous vote. Task Force on (CHR:278:5) Dr. Walter Bortz, Chairman of the Task Force on Aging, stated his satisfaction with the report submitted to Council and, his anticipation for what would emerge from that report. Dr. Berta felt the Task Force served with distinction, energy and devotion over the past six months. The job had been a hard one because of the simplicity and complexity of the problem - the simplicity goes to the extent of how much money older people needed and from there, to the complexities of what the meaning of existence is for older persons. The Task 1 2 1 5 5/5/75 1 Force assessed the needs of the community, surveyed present community resources, and then made recommendations for action, Dr. Bartz thought the final report was something of tremendous import for everyone, and he looked at it as a model community program which could be emulated throughout the nation. The Task Force did not look upon the report as a final point at a11, but as a moment in an ongoing sequence of interest in the problems of the elderly in Palo Alto. Dr. Bortz pointed out that this is the time of the aged in our civilization and in our national awareness, and the members of the Task Force appreciated the opportunity they had to work in this area. Mayor Sher thanked Dr. Bortz and the members of the Task Force on Aging for the very impressive job they did, and he noted that staff intended to move forward expeditiously on this matter. The recommendation from staff was that the report be referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee for discussion this month with a report back to Council early in June. At that time, the subject would go to the Finance and Public Works Committee in connection with the budget. MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Berwaid, that the Final Report of the Task Force on Aging be accepted and referred to the Policy and Procedures Committee. The referral motion passed on a unanimous vote. ndat1on of Policy and 1'racedu Pro osa1e(CMR:288:5) Councilwoman Pearson, Chairwoman of the Policy and Procedures Committee, pointed out that this item had changed since it had been in Committee; and the recommendations made related to the report that had been bbtore Council on March 27th. at that time, the Committee had been given a choice of searching for a long-range source of power and one alternative that the Committee proposed on a two--to-one vote (Norton and Rosenbaum for, Pearson opposed, Clay absent) was to accept Alternative (A). This alternative involved participation in the development funds for searching for alternative sources, which would involve looking into the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District plans for a nuclear power plant, geothermal power, and any other possibilities. It was Councilwoman Pearson's int,;ention to put the recommendations on the floor reognizin.g that there would be amendments. Councilman Rosenbaum, the Northern California Power Agency representative, would have amendments; and Councilwoman Pearson ,planned to amend (c) of the recommendations, which had to do with Pala Alto holding public hearings on the city's participation in any nuclear power plants - such meetings to be held before July 1. The date has been changed, allowing more time, and Councilwoman Pearson's recommendation would be to appoint a committee of fifteen people who would research the question of whether Palo Alto should participate in the development of a nuclear power source for the city, such committee to have a six months' time constraint for reporting back. to Council with a recommendation, - MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson, on behalf of the Policy and Procedures Committee, moved that Council approve the following recommendations with regard to .tong -term power supply proposals: (a) Council to approve the recommendation of staff as stated on page 7 of the staff report (CMR:219:5)--that Council approve the proposed electric power development fund as a general 1. 2 1 6 5/5/75 participant subject to the condition that Section 11 of the agreement be modified to give veto power to the city or group of cities with a total participation percentage of more than 10 percent over any expenditure or contract pursuant to the development fungi agreement; (b) The City of Pala A1.to notify the NCPA that there is a current debate in the City of Palo Alto regarding participation in nuclear power and that NCPA ought to take steps to protect itself by amending the agreement so that the other cities could continue with the nuclear project if they wished to do so if Palo Alto were to drop out; (c) The Policy and Procedures Committee hold one or more public hearings to thoroughly discuss the subject of Palo Alto's participation in any nuclear power plants, and these ieetinge Le held before July 1; (d) Staff prepare a report which will include alternatives to nuclear power, conservation methcds and development of the kfnda of tactics that could be used to stay within a fixed level within which we would not be cut off and also report on any new information that they might have on the Price/Anderson Act within that time; further, that there be some report from the City Attorney's office regarding a vote of the people involving revenue bonds totaling $35 million; (e) $462,200 of the prcpoeod development fund be reassigned and include the balance of the $1,271,050 necessary in the appropriate year of the 1975-80 capital improvement fund. Mayor Sher commented that since the Committee action and after Council had this matter before it two weeks ago, there had been a meeting of NCPA at which certain changes in the proposed development fund were indicated. As a result of that meeting, Edward Aghjayan, Director of Utilities, gave Council a report dated May 1st including the staff recommendatien that Palo Alto participate in the development fund on a special participant basis for the geothermal source of power and reserve its position on the other sources of power, including nuclear power. Mayor Sher proposed that staff and Council make co menta so that the audience would know exactly what each peraon had in mind. The items would be taken up one at a time, the public would be invited to speak, and then Council would deal with (a) through (e) item by item and then with any amendments offered. Mr. Aghjayan noted that the May 1st report summarised the options available to the city at this time. Palo Alto could elect to be a general participant, or It could reject the agreement forthwith; but both of those decisions made an arbitrary assumption about the city's attitude toward investing in nuclear power, and Mr. Aghjayan did not think the city was ready to make that decision. At the same time, staff could no longer make the commitment to Council that with the exclusive veto power, Palo Alto could block any NCPA 1 2 1 7 5/5/75 action that might be deemed inappropriate or contrary to the intents of the city. For that reason, staff suggested that action be deferred on the nuclear option but the city proceed with geothermal power. Mayor Sher asked Council members to state amendments they were contemplating and to ask questioas, Councilman Rosenbaum planned to make amendments to (a), (b) and (e) of the Committee recommendations as listed on the agenda. He would emend (a) to read that Council approve the recommendation of staff as stated on page 4 of staff report (C 8:288:5); namely, that Council approve participation by the city in the NCPA Development Fend as a special participant for geothermal power, subject to the condition that the April 22nd draft of the agreement be modified to insure that payments end obligations by special participants be restricted exclusively to costs resulting from the project selected by the special participant. With regard to the last condition, Councilman Rosenbaum explained that as the development agreement is currently dratted, the provision is that general participants are able to recover any potential loss in a project in which they have participated by adding on to the amounts of bonds that would be sold for a successful project; whereas a special participant would not have this option. If, indeed, money werelost on one of the special projects, the special participant would not be able to recover the lose from one of the other projects. Councilman Rosenbaum added that, in parti_uia , if the city were to participate in a geothermal program and there would be some losses, Palo Alto would not be able to recover those lossaa from a successful nuclear project. If there were losses on a nuclear project, on the other hand, then Palo Alto might be responsible for them. That is obviously unfair, and a request has been made that the agreement be changed so that spedal participants will not be liable for losses in projects in which they elect not to participate. Tentative indication from :tC?A was that this idea would probably be acceptable to them. Referring to (b) of the Committee recocar encletion, Councilman Rosenbaum intended to amend it to read that the City of Palo Alto notify the NCPA that thtre is a current debate in the City of Palo Alto regarding participation in nuclear power and that a decision on nuclear power will be deferred until the issue has received a full public review in the city. In light of the time requirement to conduct this review, NCPA is requested to leave open to Palo Alto and other cities in siaai1er circumstances, a future opportunity to commit from special to general participation. Councilman Rosenbaum noted it needed to be recognized that the opportunity being left open to Palo Alto and other `itise would obviously have a time limit, but he hoped there would be enough time for the conducting of a public review and for NCPA to leave that option open. Concerning (e) of the recommendation, Councilman 1'.osenbaum commented that in light of the fact that Palo Alto is requesting only special participation, the cost pea down; therefore, the dollar figure should be changed from $1,271,050 to $584,683. Councilman Clay asked if the options listed by staff in their memo had been discussed with NCPA; and if so, what indications of acceptance there had been. Mr. Aghjayan responded that with respect to the modification to part (a) of the Policy and Procedures Committee recommendation, where it was suggested that costs and obligations by special participants be restricted exclusively to the project selected by the special participant, staff mentioned this to the Executive Director and the Vice Chairman of NCPA; and they both indicated a willingness to go along with the idea. However, Mr, Aghjayan noted that the subject could not be approaches formally until the next NCPA,meeting. 1 2 1 8 5/5/75, Councilman Norton understood that Councilman Rosenbaum, when speaking to part (b) of the recommendation, was prepared to ask NCPA to postpone the decisions on the effect or implication of being a general participant as compared to a special participant, and then indicated in an aside that there was some question about it. Councilman Norton thought this was important, and he wanted Councilman Rosenb :um's opinion as to the likelihood of this suggestion being accepted by NCPA. Councilman Rosenbaum was uncertain about this. He said it had been indicated informally that if the city were not ready to proceed according to the timetable and other cities were anxious to move forward, it would be appropriate to request that at some future time Palo Alto be allowed to convert from a special to a general participant, if it so desired. Councilman Rosenbaum remarked that there was no commitment on anybody's part to do that; but assuming no critical points had been passed, it was not unreasonable to think that if Palo Alto would be willing to put up its share of the money, other cities would accept that. Councilman Norton asked if the city held ite decision on that point in abeyance for a few weeks or months, there would be a possibility of other members pre-empting the power available so that Palo Alto would he disadvantaged at a later time in that all the power would have been sold to other cities. He also asked what overall impact Palo Alto had in the partnership. For instance, if Palo Alto declined to participate, would NCPA be dis uaded from moving forward. Councilman Rosenbaum responded that NCPA has requested a certain amount of power, something like 220 megawatts; and the other cities would be more than happy to have all of that power. If Palo Alto wanted to participate at a future date, the other cities would have to give: up some of the power they otherwise would have; so this does leave the possibility that they would not be willing to do that. Councilman Norton asked if he understood correctly that Councilman Rosenbaum felt that Palo Alto's not participating at this point would mean that other cities would be pleased to pre-empt this city's allocation, and that Palo Alto would find it difficult to get the power later. Councilman Rosenbaum stated that the other cities would be happy to pre-empt Palo Alto's power, and whether they would give it back is an open question. One other possibility was that the actual agreement to participate with SMUD will take a little longer to arrange than had been previously thought. If those agreements were delayed for three to six months, it could be that nothing final would have been decided; and Palo Alto would not face the problems under discussion. Councilman Norton asked what would happei if Palo Alto decided not to participate at all. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if Councilman Norton referred to juat the nuclear part or the total development. Councilman Norton assumed that rea].isticeily, if Palo Alto said it would not participate iu the nuclear part, there is nothing meaningful to participate in beyond that except, perhaps, the geyser project. He asked if there were other things done by NCPA that would warrant Palo Alto's continued participation. 3. 2 1 9 ?'`' 5/5/75 Councilman Rosenbaum responded affirmatively. He said the other major field of endeavor on the part of NCPA is the legal one; and Palo Alto, together with the other Bureau of Reclamation cities along with some support from the P G & E cities, was successful in its challenge of the rate increase by the Bureau of Reclamation. There was some sharing of tha legal costs through NCPA. On the other hand, Palo Alto shares in some of the legal costs when P G & E cities contest rate increases by that company; and there have been a number of those instances. Councilman Norton asked if this alone would warrant Palo Alto's continued involvement in NCPA. Councilman Rosenbaum responded affirmatively. Vice Mayor Henderson referred to the commitment on the geothermal project and asked why there was a need to commit $535,000. A fear months ago Council approved $462,000 for a specific proposed project, and that was something Council could look at and decide whether there were merits and possibilities. This commitment seemed to be an open ended one to Vice Mayor Henderson, where N PA could explore, find something, engage in the planning, seek construction activities, arrange for acquisition of land, etc., without any okay from the cities. He wanted to know why the Executive Director of NCPA could not be out searching for possibilities, come back with specific proposals, and then request funds. Councilman Rosenbaum said thin could not be done because the other NCPA cities are insistent that the development_ fund be set up so that money is available should a likely looking project be found. Palo Alto had been reluctant to give open ended authority to NCPA to spend its share of the money; however, the other cities felt squeezed. They look N:pon Palo Alto as a rich relative with no problems, and they want to be able to move quickly; however, a comapro;mive position has been reached. Councilman Rosenbaum thought this, was important; and he noted that in the agreement, there is a provision for a 25X veto. That is, any city or group of cities that uses 25% of the power can veto any expenditure by NCPA. There would be fewer cities participating in the geothermal program than in the nuclear one, and Palo Alto's pert enta►ge was on the borderline of 25%. Should the city of Redding decide to not participate in the geothermal program - and they are very dubious about it - then Palo Alto woul have more than 25: of the participation in the project and a veto power over any particular use of the stoney. In other words, before a specific project could be approved by NCPA, they would have to seek Council approval, Should the city of Redding decide to participate, then the combination of Redding and Palo Alto would exceed 23%. Councilman Rosenbaum found Redding to be extremely conservative in the geothermal area and reluctant to go forward with anything that did not appear prudent. Vice Mayor Henderson noted that Councilman Rosenbaum said not all the cities were interested in the geothermal project, and he asked if those cities were interested in just the nuclear part of the program. Councilman Rosenbaum explained that the City of Redding, for example., was dubious about geothermal power; and they think nuclear power is much more certain. They, by themuelvea, have nowhere near 25%; so they have less assurance that their money might not be spent in what they regard as a foolish manner for geothermal, power. 1 2 2 0 5/5/75 Vice Mayor Henderson was still concerned about the pressure on Palo Alto to make this step with regard to geothermal power. Councilman Rosenbaum considered the only pressure to be Palo Alto's desire to secure a long range power supply. If the city is not interested in that, there is no point in going ahead with the development fund. Vice Mayor Henderson asked if NCPA would go ahead with the geothermal exploration even if Palo Alto did not participate, rather than proceed as they had done previously - which was to seek proposal. and return to Council with specific ideas. Councilman Rosenbaum emphasized that not only would NCPA go ahead, but they would be happy not to have Palo Alto participate because there would be more power for the other cities. Councilwoman Pearson asked if NCPA had a fund for finding geothermal sites and why the Executive Director could not use whatever funds there were on hand to get a project started. Councilman Rosenbaum explained for the benefit of the audience that NCPA is a group of cities that foraged together approximately five years ago, and the organization has no money except that which the cities contribute. Each city currently pays an amount to ?CPA in proportion to the total power it uses, and the budget is on the order of $75,000 per year. This amount pays for an Executive Director and a part-time secretary, plus conaultant and attorney's fees. So the answer ie that there is no money in NCPA for any of this work, and all money has to be supplied by the cities. Councilman Rosenbaum reiterated that if Palo Alto contributed no coney, the other cities would be glad to; and the work would proceed. There has been a fair amount of difficulty finding a viable geothermal project. The oil companies have secured the leases on most of the likely looking land, and co'r.ing to a satisfactory agreement with any of them that would leave NCPA with a source of steam has proved to be very illusive. Mayor Sher added that with some front money, NCPA had a better chance of finding an oil company, lane owner, or someone who would allow NCPA to drill for steam. The risk Councilman Rosenbaum referred to earlier was that it is possible to drill for steam and not find it, and that is why Redding is uncertain about putting any coney into the project." They feel that nuclear energy is much less of a risk because SMtJD is far along in the planning process for a second unit in its nuclear facility and has made it clear it will accept proposals from other agencies to take r percentage of that power. Councilwoman Pearson asked if she understood correctly that the reason all the cities were contributing money was so that the money would be on hand when a site was found. Councilman Rosenbaum replied this was essentially the argument that was made. Councilwoman Pearson asked if the Executive Director, without having the back-up money, could find a company that was willing to drill. Councilman Rosenbaum commented that this had been diocuaaed at length, and NCPA was not willing to operate in that fashion. 1 2 2 1 5/5/75 Mr. Aghjayan pointed out that the people doing the negotiating argue that it is very difficult to appear serious if you have no money in the bank. They have tried this for two years; and every time they tried to negotiate a price for a lease or for developing a lease, they were immediately asked if they had any money. The answer has always been that they would have to go back to eleven cities and present the idea before eleven Councils and receive eleven approvals before an agreement could be signed. Mr. Aghjayan stated that the purpose behind this particular proposal is to show some earnest money to the people who have the leases, so that they will know NCPA is serious about developing geothermal power. Councilman Norton asked Councilman Rosenbaum if his contemplated motions would commit the city to in any way supporting, investing in, or getting involved in the nuclear source of electrical energy. Councilman Rosenbaum responded negatively. Councilman Norton expressed the hops that Council would not get into a debate at this seating on nuclear power; and if he understood the proceedings as auggeated by Mayor Sher, there could easily be two or acre hours of that kind of debate when it was not necessary. Councilman Norton thought it had been made clear by Councilwoman Pearson and the Policy and Procedures Committee that a special time will be set aside when the whole issue would be fully aired, and ell of the people of the community who with to speak to the issue of nuclear power would be welcome to participate. Councilman Norton pointed out that Council had heard et some length preliminary efforts at exploring the issue in the Policy and Procedures Committee, he had heard a debate at Stanford University by two sxpstts on opposing sides of the issue, the item would be heard at the Policy and Procedures Committee vesting at the time not by the Chairwomen, and it would undoubtedly be heard again when the Committee's reco=mendstion rsathe►s Council, Without wanting in any way to take a position on the merits of the iall40, Councilman Norton hoped the arguments would not be heard tonight since Councilman Rosenbaum's motion doss not even contemplate decisions on that issue. In order to allay the concerns of those in the audience, Councilman Norton expressed his interest in moving that Council is willing to indicate to the audience that the city Council tonight, or prior to the public hearing on nuclear energy in the Policy and Procedures Committee, will in no way commit Palo Alto to invest in or support nuclear sources of electrical energy. Mayor Sher ruled that such a motion would be out -of -order because he thought perhaps Councilman Norton misunderstood Councilwoman Pearson's intention, which is to offer an amendment that this shall not now go forward in the Policy and Procedures Committee. Rather, Councilwoman Pearson would be moving that a citizens' committee be set up to review the question; and it would be holding meetings and making recommendations to Council. If Councilman Norton made his motion now, Councilwoman Pearson would probably make her motion as a substituts. It seemed batter to Mayor Sher to proceed in the way that had been started, and there certainly were people in the audience who wanted to be heard. Mayor Sher emphasised that one May or another there would be a review in Palo Ai.to of the participation in nuclear energy question, and he hoped that those who vented to address Council would not feel constrained to make the full argument. Such arguments vouid'siaply have to be repeated at several other $essions. It was Mayor Shari opinion that the matter would move along expeditiously if the whole matter is gotten on the floor, the public heard from, and then have Council move through the items one at at time. 1 2 2 2 5/5/75 Councilman Norton stated he disagreed with the Mayor. MOTION: Councilman Norton moved, seconded by Beahrs, that Council is willing to indicate to the audience that the city Council tonight, or prior to the public hearing on nuclear energy in the Policy and Procedures Committee, will in no way chit Palo Alto to investing in or supporting nuclear sources of electrical energy. Mayor Sher said this motion was really on the floor as part (c) of the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee. Councilman Norton explained that be was moving that the motion be advanced and voted on at this time so ,that the audience would have no misapprehensions that the Council would vote on nuclear power at this meeting. Councilman Clay understood that whether or not part (c) was brought forward on the agenda, Councilman Norton's motion would commit the Coun- cil no scatter what action it took on (c) that there would be no commitment of the city to nuclear power until after there were public hearings. Whether the matter goes to a special committee or to the Policy and Procedures Committee, the point is it will go some place where there will be a public airing in which all of the discussion that would have been heard tonight will be,preeented there; and it will still come back to Council, and maybe then go to the Policy and Procedures Committee. Councilman Clay thought that neither proponents nor opponents of nuclear power would wnnt to see Council waste time, and that is what it is doing. Mayor Sher pointed out that the commitment to not take any action on the nuclear matte' until after a review is part of the amendment which Councilman Rosenbaum suggested he would make to part (b). Mayor Sher asked Councilman Norton if the exact nature of his motion was to move (c) forward or whether he wanted to change the wording of that section. Councilman Norton said this was not the point of his motion. His motion was to indicate to the public that Council would not at this meeting take action on the nuclear issue, and his motion had nothing to do with moving anything forward on the agenda. Mayor Sher asked if Councilman Norton's motion contemplated not setting up a committee to review the nuclear quesrion. Councilman Norton explained that his motion was intended to avoid a two hour discussion tonight on the merits of nuclear energy. He considered forming a committee an entirely separate matter. Councilwoman Pearson asked if Council voted for this motion that it would mean those persons who had turned in cards would be asked to not speak to the nuclear power issue. Mayor Sher thought they would speak and would have the opportunity to do so before action was taken on any motion. Councilwoman Pearson said she would support not taking any action on the nuclear power issue tonight and permitting the audience to speak. Councilman Beaters expressed concern about accepting arguments that were strictly emotional and not backed up by sae real credentials. Councilman Beehra recalled when a patent was granted for the first cast-iron plow, other farmers openly scoffed at this new tool saying that the iron would poison the soil and would result in bad effects 1 x 23 . 5/5/75 on man and animals. He hoped that anyone who wanted to present arguments would be able to establish a degree of competence about them. Mayor Sher was somewhat uncomfortable with the motion since there already was a motion on the floor when the second one was made, but he ruled'that Councilman Norton's motion was in order. Councilman Comstock remarked that he would support the motion although he knew that many of the people in the audience were present to speak on the nuclear question. He wanted it clearly understood that his anticipation was that some forum or another will occur, whether it would be at a Policy and Procedures Committee meeting, an ad hoc committee, or whatever. Therefore, he was supporting the motion with the understanding that a committee would have one or more public meetings; and a mechanism would occur where anyone at all concerned about the issue would be heard. In due course, all of that information would be digested and transmitted to Council; and Council would in due course hear from some or all of those who wished to speak. Councilman Comstock was anxious for everyone to understand that he would not be interested in cutting anyone off from being heard on this subject. He wanted to hear from interested persons, and he wanted to have the widest possible input from the community. Councilman Comstock considered the motion appropriate =o members of the audience would not have to sit through the entire evening waiting to see where Council stood on nuclear power. Councilman Berwald said he would support the motion because he considered the intent a good one, but he was under no illusions that this would stop the debate on the nuclear question. Also, he did not want to discourage anyone in the audience from tacking about nuclear power at this meeting. When Council got to item (c), Councilman Berwald explained that Councilwoman Pearson would recommend that a citisen3 committee of fifteen people be formed to discuss nuclear power; and if he voted on any part of the motion (except the Norton motion), that is voting on a step in a process in a long series of events that will lead to the possibility of the city becoming involved in the development of nuclear power. Councilman Berwald thought most people knew he did not make up his mind in advance on matters, but there had been a lot of time for discuasion and consideration of nuclear power; and his guess was that he would vote against the city's participation in the development of nuclear power. However, he would vote for public hearings but against any kind of a committee to study the issue. If the committee were formed and came back with the recommendation that Palo Alto get involved in the development of nuclear power, Councilman Berwald would still vote against it. Councilman Clay asked if Council were going to vote on the Norton motion before going ahead with the declared procedure. Mayor Sher responded negatively. For instance, perhaps there were some people in the audience who thought Council should move forward on nuclear power tonight; and this is a motion that Palo Alto will aot go in as a special participant. He felt strongly that the public deserved an opportunity to be heard, and he did not think this motion would prevent that. Councilman Clay noted that the motion did not preclude the audience from speaking, but it does give them a commitment in advance of what Council intended to do. 1224 , ; ,. t 5/5/75 Mayor Sher thought this indicated that Councilman Clay assumed everyone in the audience was against nuclear power, and the Norton motion states that Council will not decide tonight to join as a general participant in the NCPA project which involves nuclear power. Councilman Clay felt that if this were the case, Councilman Norton might as well have added hisezotion as .beret to the c }ittee position. There is no Faison to have the motion at this point if it is not {nte ded to cc wince the audience that Council qaa not going to make a decision, no matter what. Mayor Sher commented that he tried to dissuade Councilman Norton from his motion. Councilman Norton explained that his intent is to convey to the audience in advance that Council would not tonight support in any manner a nuclear power project. If Mayor Sher interpreted that to require audience participation, before a vote on his motion, Councilman Norton would move to overrule that interpretation. Councilman Rosenbaum thought the question of joining in the NCPA Development Fund vas not a trivial ene, and he was basically in agreement with Councilman Norton that that was where Council should be putting its effort at this meeting. ,'Hide from the expense that was mentioned of belonging to the `:CPA, there are staff members and an attorney who spend a great deal of time ca this. Councilman Rosenbaum said none of this was really needed unless Palo Alto was interested in developing sane alternate sources of power. The city has a contract with P G 4 E right now that will supply Palo Alto with power should it be needed. The real question was whether or not Palo Alto wanted to take a risk in investing some money to secure a source of power so the city could be independent of P G & E in the future. That subject is worthy of some consideration, and Councilman Rosenbaum agreed that the nuclear issue would have full discussion in the future; therefore, it need not occupy Council meeting time tonight. Vice Mayor Henderson asked if public discussion at this time could be restricted to Councilman Norton's motion. Mayor Sher reiterated it had been his hope to get the entire matter out before the public so interested persons could speak once. He wanted to make it clear that he vas not trying to defeat the intent of Councilman Norton's motion. Not many cards requesting to speak had been as yet received from the audience, and Mayor Sher would vote in favor of the Norton motion. On the other hand, Mayor Sher thought it important before voting on any of the whole series of motions, that the public be given an opportunity to address Council. Vice Mayor Henderson expressed the desire to have the discussion limited to Councilman Norton's notion. If Council vent on into the body of the Jews, it could obviously be open to public participation. Vice Mayor Henderson would like to awl this one thing settled, so that everyone would understand that Council was not going to make any decision about nuclear power at this meeting. He supported the Norton motion to accomplish that; then as Council went into details, it would be open to input from the audience. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. 1 2 2 5 5/5/75 Mayor Sher stated that when Councilwoman Pearson made her motion recommending that a committee be formed, he would be making some suggestions about the charge to the committee, The suggestions would include looking at the city's long-term electrical power requirements and the feasibility of limiting consumption of Electrical power to the quantity available from the Bureau of Reclamation. A second charge to the committee would be in the event it is concluded that the supply requirements are likely to exceed the amount available from the Bureau, alternative sources of electrical power accessible to the city needed to be explored with cost implications of each source. Thirdly, the committee should investigate the safety and environmental issues involved in whether the city should participate in the development and ownership of a nuclear power source. Another point Mayor Sher would like to have the committee consider is the likelihood that power available from other alternative (non -ownership) sources will be generated in whole or in part by nuclear power facilities. Finally, the committee should, in the event that an alternative source of power will be needed by the city and that the least cost of electrical power would result from Palo Alto's participation in the development and ownership of a nuclear power source, determine by a sampling of public opinion or otherwise of whether Palo Alto citizens are willing to pay the higher coats rather than have the city participate in the development and ownership of the nuclear power source. Councilman Clay asked if the cost implications mentioned by Mayor Sher included getting the power from its source to its end use. Mayor Sher responded affirmatively. Mayor Sher invited the public to address Council on the recommendation from the Policy and Procedures Committee that vas before it. Knowing that Council, would not take any action at thin meeting to involve the city in a nuclear project, the audience was welcome to speak on the range of topics as listed under this item on the agenda and make comments regarding the amendments Council members planned to make. Don Lundgren, 196 Creeksids Drive, thought Councilman Norton had a good point, and he said he would wait for the future public hearing. Mr. Lundgren introduced Jim Harding, Energy Projects Director, Friends of the Earth, who has made a full economic review of the SMTJD project. Jim Harding, 529 Commercial Street, San Francisco, ,agreed to defer his remarks until the public hearing was held. Craig Ritchey, 1242 Greenwood Avenue, was also willing to defer his remarks, but he urged Council to not forget about (d) ender the recommendation regarding staff input. Further, Mr. Ritchey particularly supported Councilwoman Peterson's recommendation for a citizens' committee. Katherine Pering, 2377 Ramona Street, said she would speak at meetings held in the future. Ms. Pering commented that she would like to hear a lot more about the issue of conservation since there is a tremendous wealth of information as to how energy already available could be efficiently used. Joseph Carleton, 2350 Ross Road, addressed Council on behalf of the Loma l'rieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, and referred to the letter which Council members had from Allen Tucker, Chairman of the Energy Committee of the Sierra Club. Regardiug the concerns 1 2 2 6 5/5/75 of Councilman Beahrs, Mr. Carleton noted that Dr. Tucker had his doctorate in physics, is a Professor of Physics at San Jose State University, and has consulted for the Atomic Energy Commission for a number of summers. Mr. Carleton asked Council to consider very carefully the economic questions that were involved. On the subject of conservation he pointed out that traditionally, electric power use has doubled about every ten years in this country; and if the public went back to the level of 1950, it could get by with one quarter of the amount of electricity now being consumed. No one suffered in 1950, and Mr. Carleton thought it was important to distinguish between need for power and frivolous demand. Further, Mr. Carleton wondered if the need for more power had been really established. By more efficient use, the total electric power consumption could be reduced even with increased population; and he disagreed with the city's projection about excess demands in 1983. Mx. Carleton believed that if the same amount of money that had been spent, and probably would be spent, on nuclear energy had been used instead on solar energy, there would have been far greater gains. Though it is of ten claimed to be a new technology, Mr. Carleton noted that the technologically ignorant cave people managed to use solar energy to keep themselves warm, dry foods for future use, and so on. Surely, with modern technology, man could do as well today. Richard Amoroso, 575.Middlefield Road, was in favor of moving forward with nuclear power. He pointed out that there were several nuclear power plants already successfully operating in this country, and quite often nuclear bombs are exploded in the nidwestern states without catastrophe. With proper environmental controls, Mr. Amoroso thought a safe nuclear power plant could be introduced in this area; and that power source is the most economical. Since there may not be too many people in favor of moving ahead with nuclear power, Mr. Anoroao stated a desire to be on any committee formed in order to represent those persons. Mayor Sher stated that Council was ready to proceed with proposed amendments. AMENDMENT: Councilman Rosenbaum mimed, seconded by Buhr*, that (a) of the recommendation made by the Policy and Procedures Committee be replaced with the following: "Council is to approve the recommendation of staff that the city participate in the NCPA Deweelcpment bend as a special participant for geothermel power, subject to the condition that the April 22nd draft of the agreement be modified to insure that payments and obligations by special participants be restricted exclusively to costs resulting from the projects selected by the special participants". Councilman Berwald assumed that Councilman Rosenbaum did not .Imlievs it was necessary to add a stipulation that the funds for the special project be spent only for that special project. Councilman Rosenbaum said this concern $a8 specifically etsted in the agreement. Councilman Berwald asked Councilman Rosenbaum to go over his comments regarding repayment. Councilman Rosenbaum explained that if a project gets to the point where bonds needed to be sold to build a generating plant, for example, then the seed money would be repaid from the sale of the bonds. That is, the amount of the bonds would be sufficient to build the project plus make repayments. Earlier, Councilman Rosenbaum had been referring to the arrangement whereby if there should be any losses under the nuclear participation, Palo Alto would not be liable since it wea a special participant in tha geothermal project only, 1227 5/5/75 Vice Mayor Henderson clarified that the cities altogether would be putting up three million dollars in the fund that would be for the geothermal portion, and it would b: open to the Executive Director to go ahead and commit the funds as he saw fit. Councilman Rosenbaum said the NCPA, as an organization, would commit the funds. Vice Mayor Henderson understood then, that unless Palo Alto joined with this, it would not have veto power to stop the suggestion of a particular geothermal proposal; therefore, the money could be lost. In other words, Palo Alto would not have the opportunity to approve a specific exploration project; but NCPA would approve it without the city's involvement. Councilman Rosenbaum responded that Vice Mayor Henderson's understanding was correct except for the fact that there was the veto provision. If Redding chooses not to participate, Palo Alto has an absolute veto; if Redding stays in, the two cities together would have a veto. t?kvioualy, there are no guarantees as to what Reddings's future action might be; but up to the moment, they have been perhaps the most conservative of the cities with regard to geothermal power. Councilman Comstock commented that this subject had been calked about before and reviewed in committee as to some of the costs involved in this type of, an operation, assuming a site was found and a project started to produce power by this means. For the benefit of members of the audience, he said the question was raised during those discussions whether the cost included appropriate provisions for environmental measures related to this type of power production; and staff felt that some conservative financial allowances had been made. Therefore, the kind of costs being talked about in producing geothermal power had those provisions included, and it still appeared to be an attractive proposition. With those thoughts in mind, Councilman Comstock felt this was u appropriate direction to proceed even though there is some degree of risk. Mayor Sher commented that he had been Council's commissioner to NCPA before Councilman Rosenbaum, and he had followed with interest the course of deliberation. When Mayor Sher was serving in that position, the only type of energy considered viable was geothermal; and NCPA was set up, more or less, to explore that possibility. There was giowing optimism; but things got difficult, and it was hard to put together a project.- This past year the possibility of power from a nuclear source developed. Mayor Sher felt some concern that NCPA would now be pushing for the nuclear power since it is more certain. That facility will be built, subject to the people of the state passing the proposition that the nuclear initiative has placed can the ballot for next year. In any event, Mayor Sher hoped, and he thought it was Palo Alto's intention, through NCPA to press vigorously for a geothermal project that would help supplement the city's sources of electrical power. Councilman Clay stated he would probably vote against this particular action. Not too long ago Council voted to commit $462,000 for geothermal power. That was later escalated to include nuclear reactors as a power source, and now Council was coming back to geothermal power as being the only source it was interested in. Because it is likely that Council would hear more discussion on the whole subject of additional power sources, and Mayor Sher's intended motion would grave the committee evaluate the need and cost of power sources of all types it seemed to Councilman Clay that to make this move tonight would preclude or limit the number of options Palo Alto could exercise later. In effect, this was being taken out of cont4xt. Councilman 1 2 2 g 5/5/75 Clay stated that if the city is going to look at any kind of power sources, it should look at all of thew in context; otherwise, Council would be once again going in the wrong direction. Mayor Sher said, based on hia experience with NCPA and all he learned about a geothermal program, that if a viable geothermal project could be gotten, that would be the ?east costly of the alternative sources providing Palo Alto owns part of the source. Councilman Clay explained that has comments were also to the point that it could very well happen that the geothermal power source would provide the city with all the power it needed, in which case Palo Alto could have a valid conviction that it knew what it wanted and was pleased with what it would buy. Now, Councilman Clay did not think that was the case; and if for some reason there were to be other power sources, he did not feel sure that by the proposed action the city would be, limiting itself to not being able to enter into the in the fashion it would like. In Councilman Clay's opinion, this would be action taken precipitously if it were done now. Councilwoman Pearson assumed that if no geothermal project is forthcoming and no money was expended, then Palo Alto would get a refund of its money. Councilman Ftoaebaum explained that the agreement stated the money would stay with NCPA until 1985, whereupon it would be returned to the cities with eppropriate interest. 1The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Beehrs, Berwald, Comstock, 'Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay AMENDMENT: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Norton, that (b) of the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee be amended to read: "The City of Palo Alto notify the NCPA that there is a current debate in the City of Palo Alto regarding participation in nuclear power and that a decision on nuclear power will be deferred until the isoue has received a full public review in the city. In light of the time requirement to conduct this review, NCPA is requested to leave open to Palo Alto, and other cities in similar circumstances, a future opportunity to convert from special to general participation". The amendment Imaged on a unanimous vote. AMENDMENT; Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Norton, that the dollar figure of $1,271,050 in part (e) of the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee be changed to $584,683. The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Beehrs, Berweld, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay 1 2 2 9 5/5/75 Co.:ncilwonan Pearson noted that when there was the constraint of having to cake a decision before July 1st, the Policy and Procedures Committee felt that at least one or more public hearings should be held to discuss as thoroughly as possible the city's participation in a nuclear power plant. She said that ie was her opinion that was the minimum that should be done and she was not happy about it, but she voted for it to get some kind of public forum. After that, Councilwoman Pearson wrote a memorandum stating her feelings on this subject, and they were that Council should not participate in any search for nuclear power at least until after the results of the initiative are known and a study had been made by a committee appointed by Council. Council had voted that there would be no determination made at this meeting "egarding nuclear power, but it seemed to Councilwoman Pearson that formation of a committee ought to be approved. Also, it was her plan to make another motion later to the effect that Council make sure Palo Alto does not participate in the search for nuclear power _until after the results of the initiative are known. Expanding on her thoughts regarding a committee, Councilwoman Pearson said it should be composed of people who were both opponents and proponents of the issue and, hopefully, five people who were neutral. She commented that she had made a very broad motion regarding the nuclear power source, which Mayor Sher would amend. Also, Councilwoman Pearson had two amendments to add. These had to do with the question of eonaervation of energy meaeuree being added to the charge to the committee and that the committee should study any broad aaenues it mould think of which Council had not specifically included in the charge. Councilwoman Pearson put a time constraint of six months on the committee, and remarked on the good luck experienced in the pass with putting time constraints on committees. If the committee found it could not 'handle all the aspects of the problem in that amount of time, it could always come back and ask or an extension. AMENDMENT: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that part (c) of the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee be amended to read as follows: "Council appoint a committee of fifteen peor_141, five opponents, five proponents, and five neutral - to research the question of whether Palo Alto should participate in the development of a nuclear power source for Palo Alto, ,much committee to have a six months' time constraint within which time the committee should return a report and-recommendstion to the City Council". Councilman Comstock agreed with the idea of a committee of fifteen members, but chocaing five proponents, five opponents, and five neutral persons would be a monumental -task for Council. Personally, Councilman Comstock did not feel capable of filtering through all of the applications from persons who would want to be on the committee and deciding which ones fit the proper categories. He said he would move that the portion of the motion relating to the constituency of the committee be deleted. Councilwoman Pearson commented that she had reconsidered that portion of her amendment, and she was willing to restate it. AMENDMENT RESTATED: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that part (c) of the recommendation of the Policy and Procedures Committee be amended to read as follows: "Council appoint a committee of fifteen people to research the question of whether Palo Alto should participate in the development of a nuclear power source for Palo Alto, 'such co ittee to have a six months' time constraint within which time the committee should return a report and recommendation to the City Council". 1230 5/5/75 Councilman Berwald stated the chief reason he would vote against this was that he did not believe the city should even consider being in the nuclear power business.' Councilman Berwald did not think the city nor NCPA really has the capital or expertise to be in this particular business. Also, it was his opinion that aloe of institutions exhibit- ing interest in inventing capital in nuclear power would bring about some false sense of security on the part of the public that there would be very easy, safe, and unlimited supplies of energy; and that would probably defeat the efforts to conserve energy. As far as a committee is concerned, Councilman Berwald said this nuclear matter was one which Council Should squarely face. Council should hold hearings so that it could hear directly from as many people who wanted to address the issue. This is probably one of the most important issues that Council will face for many years; and although Councilman Berwald had no dcubts that the fifteen member committee would be able, dedicated, and sincere, and that they would listen to all segments of the community, he wanted to hear all of those segments pereana lily. His own opinion was that this was a job Council should do end not delegate to a committee. Vice Mayor Henderson felt the committee would have the ability to do a far greater in-depth study than Council since such a study will take many, many hours; and for that reason atone, he would support the committee. The public should know that this committee would be advertised, applications would be taken from members of the public, and Council would take a final selection of fifteen persons for the committee, Councilman Beahrs remarked that this was an extremely complicated problem from a scientific and engineering standpoint, and he would like to hear directly the input of competent persons whatever their stand on the issue. He pointed out that Council was elected, under the Charter, to make decisions of this nature; and he wanted to be a witness to the debates. Councilman Beahrs thought that when R highly technical subject such as this was under consideration, tech member of Council should hear the arguments firsthand. Councilman Norton expressed the thought that deleting the wording regarding the composition of the committee might be construed to be an attempt to stack the committee fourteen -to -one, for instance. Councilman Comstock explained that hie reason for deleting that wording was due to the fact that he did not feel confident that he could do that kind of a selection job promptly or even successfully. He thought there was enough talent and capability in the community so that such a group would hear from a lot of people and discuss among themselves their reaction, and then pass all the necessary information along to Council. Councilman Comstock saw this committee as a system to enable a lot of people to be heard, gather information, and convey that to Council while Council goes forward with its other affairs. Council would receive the minutes of the committee meetings, the report would be received, and Council members could also attend the meetings if they so desired. Councilman Comstock just did not feel it was necessary to start out by saying the committee was "balanced", as en article of constitution. That had never been done before when committees were formed to assure Council of getting information and recommendations which would be ultimately needed. Therefore, Councilman Comstock felt this would be an artificial constraint on the construction of the committee, one with which Council would have difficulty, and one that would increase the amount of time Council would have to spend choosing the coastttee. All of this would decrease the amount of time the committee would have to complete it. task. 1 2 3 1 5/5/75 Councilman Norton felt that getting involved in a debate on whether there ought to be a properly balanced committee was distracting to what he predicted would be the main problem, which was one he could foretell without having heard a committee but having heard some indepth debates on the merits of the issue. He said the main problem was whether it was appropriate at all for the City of Palo Alto Council to decide what is essentially a national or, at the minimum, a state issue. Councilman Norton's own leaning, in advance, was that it is inappropriate; and he would vote against the Pearson amendment. Councilman Rosenbaum, in speaking to Councilman Norton's point, thought that while he agreed the matter would to settled on a state or national level, there would be a lot of information provided that would be useful in making the decision as to whether or not Palo Alto wanted to invest in this. There is a question involved about which Council needed information and recommendations. Councilman Rovenbs°ic was not so sanguine as to think a committee would be gotten together whose members would be able to convince each other about this matter and come to a unanimous recommendation for Council. What he did think would be important in the committee was that there be representation from both sides, and he would expert a report thzt would outline the issues and present them for the layman as clearly and as simply as possible so that Council could attempt to take some judgment regarding the risk factor. Councilman Rosenbaum did thin=k that In the selection process, Council would have to he certain there was some expertise from both sides; but it was unreasonable to hope that the committee could be made up equally of opponents, proposenta, and neutraln. Councilman Clay stated he was not optimistic that a fifteen member committee would cope back with recoms*iende ions firm enough for Council to, be able to do a great deal with. Council will have to face the same tough decision whether or not there le a committee. His own idea had been to have a committee made up of five neutral persons on the issue, and that would be a better way of getting at what Council was looking for. Councilman Clay was opposed to entering into an agreement for power from nuclear reactors for the sagas reason that he voted against the geothermal power source, and that is there are too many unanswered questions. Council did not know how much it would coca to participate in the development of the reactor or how much it would cost to get the power from the reactor source to Palo Alto, and the same things are true for geothermal power. Those questions needed answering, and Councilman Clay thought they could be answered just as well by staff as by any committee that might be formed. He commented that a meeting was scheduled at the Univereity of Santa Clara to discuss nuclear power, and the city could get much information simply by having representatives attend that forum. For these reasons, Councilman Clay said he would vote against the establishment of a committee. George Sipel, City Manager, thought Council should have some general idea of the staff resources that would be required to work with such a committee Having worked with seven or eight committees over the last ten years, Mr. Sipel guessed that the city would he fortunate if it could manage this one for lees than fifteen or twenty thoueand dollars. He mentioned that the cost of the minutes along would be $2,000 to $2,500, and the coat of producing the report would be several thousand dollars. In staffing such a committee, there would be a tendency to use some of the city's more senior people ism the Utilities Department and the Electric 1 2 3 2 5/5/75 Division; and that would necessitate some changes in priority within the department. Mr. Sipel explained he was not making these statements to discourage Council from establishing a committee, but to make known some of the implications that are not usually seen directly when such a committee is formed. Councilman Norton suggested that Council members who had not listened to some of the arguments or studied the general question on their own would not get a neat answer from such a committee. Highly qualified experts would be involved who were very strong in their position on nuclear energy, whether it be for or against. The realistic question was whether a fifteen member citizens' committee, however composed, can do a better job of filtering the information for Council -- which would have to wake the ultimate decision - than could be done by a public hearing at the Policy and Procedures Committee level. In trying to be as fair as possible with both sides of the question, Councilman Norton did not honestly think Council would feel helped by a citizens' committee which would be interposed in the middle of the debate. Re had the feeling that Council would want to hear everything firsthand, in any event. With respect to Councilman kos.nbaum' a point that it would be well to have a dispassionate economic decision as to whether Palo Alto should continue to join ;CPA in a nuclear effort, Councilman Norton did not think the committee would address that issue; rather, the committee -- particularly the people who feel strongly against the nuclear effort -- would use the committee, and eventually the City of Palo Alto, as a staging ground for the California Nuclear Initiative. And that has nothing to do with Councilman Rosenbaum's concern about getting some helpful information on the economic decision that Counei'_ would have to :sake. Having set up a committee, having it meet for six months, and having finally received a majority and eight or carer minority reports, Council still had to make a decision. Also, the recommendations would probably cone far too late to be helpful, Councilwoman Pearson stated that the decision was not a totally economic one in that a moral issue was involved as well as others. It should be noted that when important issues came up, they were usually salt to a Council es=tablished committee; and the committees over the last four years or so had done outstanding jobs in coming to Council with recommendations, It was Councilwoman Pearson's hope that this committee would Lave as many public hearings as they deemed necessary, and she would consider this to be an educational forum for the public and Council. She pointed out that if Council members chose to do ac,, they could attend the debates held by the committee; furthermore, the committees should condense its recommendations into terms that Councilman Beabrs and the rest of Council could understand and study at leisure, Councilwoman Pearson stated that Council was talking about the expenditure of a minimum of thirty- five million dollars; and when that kind of money is being talked about, the citizens should surely be involved. One way of accotsplishi,j that is to have a citizens' committee that would hold as many public hearings as possible. It is true that this will cost money as far as staff is concerned, but the committee would be quite capable of getting outside help and sources of information. Councilwoman Pearson reminded everyone that wen Palo Alto was going to build a new city hall and when the old one was going to be converted into a cultural center, the expenditure was supposedly four and one-half rillion dollars but eventually went to seven million dollars. The cost of converting the old city hall to a cultural center cost $500,000 as a result of the woke done by a committee that came to Council with recommendations; but Councilwoman Pearson recognized that was minute compared to the consideration of nuclear power. 1 2 3 3 5/5/75 Nuclear power involves a moral issue which requires great input from the citizens. It is true that Council would make the final decision, and Councilwoman Pearson stated she would not shy away from that. She believed there would be majority and minority reports on recournerdatione, and there certainly would now be a single recommendation. Lastly, Councilwoman Pearson hoped the opponents of nuclear power would find it within their area to make presentations to the other twelve cities because she thought they were certainly ignorant. Denny Petrosian, 443 Ventura Avenue, felt that Palo Alto and the surrounding areas had a wealth of e-pertise upon which Council could draw; and using that expertise could save Council a lot of time, Ma. Petrosian recommended to Council a provision of the Nuclear Initiative Measure which had to do with the selection of an advisory committee. The recommendation was that such a committee be made up of at least fifteen persons and be comprised of distinguished experts in the fields of nuclear engineering, nuclear weaponry, land use planning, cancer research, sabotage technique security systems, public health, geology, seismology, energy resources, liability insurance, transportation, environmental sciences, and of concerned citizens. The committee should represent the full range of opinion on the relevant question. Another provision which Ms. Petrosian was particularly interested in recommending was that no more than one-third of the r e::.bera of the advisory group shall have, during the two years prior to their appointment to the group, received any substantial portion of their income directly or indirectly from any individual, association, corporation, or governmental agency engaged in the research, development, promotion, manufacture, construction, sale, utilization, o: regulation of nuclear fission power plants or their components. Councilman Clay asked staff to respond to how much it would cost in time and money for it to develop the needed information relative to the points in the charge to the committee. Mayor Sher commented that a number of these items were contemplated in the committee motion and appear as part (d) of that recommendation suggesting that much of the information would be generated by staff, but there it was contemplated that the findings would be brought back to the Policy and Procedures Committee rather than to the proposed committee. Mr. Aghjayan estimated that the charges to the committee over a six month period would probably take one full time person involved with the committee researching questions and writing staff reports. It would also require some of his own time, some of Mr. Bosza'e time, and perhaps chat of a third person. Mr. Aghjayan guessed the project would require the equivalent of a man year. Councilman Clay said his real interest was in knowing the cost and time estimates if the charge were given to staff rather than to a committee. flr. Aghjayan thought the cost and time estimates would be about the ate ae they would be if staff were workir:g with a committee. He stated that a committee probably would generate some work on its own; but in answering some of these kinds of questions and bringing them to Council, a number of other questions may be raised which may require additional work. Mr. Aghjayan said to do a good job of researching this question would take at least two-thirds of a person year. Councilman Clay asked if that would involve more than $15,000. 1 2 3 4 5/5/75 Mr. Sipel commented that a full person year would cost somewhere between twenty and twenty-five thousand dollars. The cost would be approximately five thousand dollars less if staff aid the job without a committee since minutes would not have to be reproduced, night meetings would not have to be staffed, etc. Mr. Sipel thought the basic research would be about the same, although there might be some directions committee members would suggest that staff would also have to research. How much of the work could be done by a committee was very hard to determine, so Mr. Sipel did not know what the balancing factors -eight be. If staff did the work without a committee, Y ?r. Sipel thought the cost would be $5,000 to $7,500 leas; and a few months less time would be needed. Councilman Clay remarked that since four or five of the charges were properly addressed to staff, that was one more reason why he would not be in favor of the formation of a committee. The Pearson amendient passed on the following vote: AYES: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Eosenbaula, Sher NOES: I3eahre, Serwald, Clay, Norton AMENDMENT: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Pearson, that the motion be amended to add that the charge_ to the committee should include, among other }pings, the following matters to be studied and reported on: (1) The long-term electrical power supply regvire!nents of the city end the feasibility (by conservation me*sureu or otherwise) of limiting coneumption of electrical power to no more than the amount available from the Bureau of Reclamation; (2) In the event it is concluded that the city's supply requirements are likely to exceed tha amount available from the Hursau$ the alterna- tive sources of electrical power to which the city might have access and the cost implications of each; (3) The safety and environmental issues involved in the question of whether the city should partici- pate in the development and ovnerahip of a nuclear power source; (4) The likelihood that power available from other alternative (:non -ownership) sources will be generated in whole or in part by a nuclear power facility; (5) in the event that au alternative source of power will be needed and that the least costly electrical power would result from the city's participation in the development sod ownership of a nuclear power source, determination (by sampling of public opinion or otherwise) of whether Palo Alto citizens are willing to pay the higher coats rather than have the city participate in the development and ownership of the nuclear power source. 1235 5/5/75 Councilwoman Pearson asked if it woriid be a good idea to add (6) and (7) to the list which would state at least two public hearings would be held and more if the committee decided they were necessary, and that any areas not in the charge should be addressed by the committee if it felt they were necessary. Mayor Sher did not think the latter euggenition would be required because of the wording "among other things" At the beginning of his amendment; however, he agreed that (6) should be added to the charge as follows: (6) Committee to hold at least two public hearings and more if it deemed them to be necessary. Tory Seedman, 975 El Cajon, representing the Youth Advisory Council, noted there had been a lot of talk in the charge about the technological aepacts of a possible nuclear power plant; but there was also another concern that would have an effect after the establishment of a nuclear power plant, and that would be the sociological impact as compared to the environmental impact. There would obviously be a great need for security due to the possible actions of terrorist groups or undesirable persons acquiring the raw materials to make potentially dangerous weapons. Great security created the need to investigate personas backgrounds, to establish very strong controls over those who are involved in the plant, and to possibly require a loyalty oath to the United States. Mr. Seedman thought that if theme were possibilities, then it was important that the committee be charged with investigating the sociological impacts of a nuclear power plant. This is something that might not be seen immediately; but if the program is established, this area could create a great amount of tension in the present rather divisive times. Councilwoman Pearson agreed with Mr. Seedman that the sociological aspects should be investigated. Mayor Sher and his seconder, Councilwoman Pearson, agreed that charge (3) to the committee would read as follows: (3) The safety, environmental and sociological issues involved in the question of whether the city should participate in the development and ownership of a nuclear power source. Councilman Clay said he could not resist commenting that at the University,/Crasceut Park meeting, Councilman Rosenbaum said that Council would be eatablishiag a committee to investigate this matter. Councilman, Clay asked hiss then how he knew; and sure enough, here it was. Mayor Sher did not think Councilman Clay't comments were in order because the committee had been established, and Council was discussing at this point the charge to the committee; but he thought Councilman Rosenbaum should have the opportunity to respond. Councilman Rosenbaum stated his wording was: "1 expect a committee to be eetebii;thed to study the matter and to give the public a ch,nce to express itself as to whether the city should engage in nuclear poker". C'uncil.man Rosenbaum said he would depart from his usual style and point out that had Councilman Clay been present at the Policy and Procedures Committee meeting at which this subject was discussed, he would have been fully in recognition of the fact that something of this aort was going to be necessary if the city were going to look rationally et whether or not to participate in nuclear power. 1 2 3 6 5/5/75 The amendment passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahr©, Clay, Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Sher, Rosenbaum NOES: Berwald, Norton Part (d) of the motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Clay, Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Beahrs Councilman Berwald asked if the contract with NCPA would be coming back to Council for another vote since the motion did not actually authorize the Mayor to sign the contract. He thought Council should see the agreement after it is modified. Mayor Sher explained that the motion approved participation in the development fund, and he asked what staff's understanding was as to whether the contract would come back to the cities for further review. Mr. Aghjayan understood that the agreement was approved by Council subject to the modification. Assuming that the modification is voted by the NCPA Commission, there would be no need to come back to Council for further approval - Councilman Berwald atated there were a few things in the contract that bothered him. One of these was the matter of the expenditures being made by four members of the NCPA Executive Committee, and that really disturbed him especially because of the question of whether or not Palo Alto would have veto power. Councilman Berwald said that when he votes for this, he thought he would be seeing the agreement with the incorporated changes. Mayor Sher responded that from Palo Alto's point of view, the city had made a condition on its involvement as a special participant. If other conditions were to be added, this would be the appropriate time for that. The final meeting of the NCPA on this matter would be on June 5th. Councilman Berwale asked someone to enlighten him with regard to the fact that four members of the NCPA Executive Committee can approve expenditures and allocations of funds up to the total amount involved. Councilman Rosenbaum replied that as a further safety feature in this process, expenditures required approval of four out of the five members of the Executive Committee; and Palo Alto is cue of the members of that committee. If there is a failure to secure four votes out of five, an appeal can be made to the full commission; and a two-thirds vote of the full commission would then be required to overrule a failure to get four votes out of five on the ELecutive Committee. Councilman Berwald asked if it took a mejority of the members of NCPA to approve an expenditure of two million dollars and it it would be possible for four out of the five members of the Executive Committee to spend the entire fund (for instance, the geothermal fund). 12 3 7 5/5/75 - Councilman Rosenbaum explained that if four members of the Executive Committee approve of the expenditure, approval would not be required by the full commission. He thought it was important to remember that in terms of power received and in terms of percentage interest in MCPA, the Executive Committee has something over eighty percent of the total. Mr. Aghjayan added that even if two-thirds of the commission approved an expenditure, any system or group of systems having more than a ten percent participation percentage could veto that. Palo Alto has that veto power, but it could be overridden by a total of seventy- five percent participation percentage; and that is why the city was discussing joining with Redding in looking at the proposed expenditures. Mr. Aghjayan noted that Redding had the same conservative attitude Palo A/to has in viewing some of the proposals. MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council not participate in a search for a nuclear power source until the results of the initiative on the lune 1976 ballot are known. Councilman Rosenbaum wondered if this might be premature. A report would be received from the committee that was being formed; and in any event, Council at that time wound be free to do what it pleased. Councilman Rosenbaum was not inclined to take this kind of action. Councilman Beahrs agreed that no one would make a move until the smatter had been voted upon. Mayor Sher thought it was possible that the citizens' committee would come back and unanimously advise Council to go forward with nuclear power. He did not think that would necessarily happen, but this kind of action would tie Council's hands in advance. Mayor Sher suggested that Council wait until it receives the report from the committee; and in the interim, Council assured the public that no action would be taken on nuclear power. Councilwoman Pearson mentioned that three weeks ago, it appeared Council was ready to go out immediately and search for nuclear power; and it was only because certain citizens found out about it that such action was turned around. The motion failed on the following vote: AYES: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson NOES: Beahrs, Clay, Norton, Sher, Rosenbaum ABSTAIN: Berwald Mayor Sher apologized to Councilman Norton for resisting so strongly his suggestion as to how the meeting should proceed, and he thought Councilman Norton had been a better prophet than he. Mayor Sher also thanked the audience for reserviag their statements until the committee held its hearings. 1 2 3 S 5/5/75 Resuest of P1 er ite Position re Emily Renzel, Planning Commissioner, atated that the Planning Commission unanimously forwarded to Council a request to coee ider Lytton Plaza as a valuable piece of open space. Ms. Renzel pointed out that until the recent beautification of downtown Palo Alto, Lytton Plaza had offered one of the few places for citizens to sit down; and now the plaza complements what has been done in the downtown area. She said that the plaza has come to be valued by Palo Alto, and some citizens believe it is already a city park. Councilman Beahre understood the background of Lytton Plaza, but he believed that Council - no less than the individual taxpayer - had to look carefully at its priorities in these difficult times. He was not sure purchase of Lytton Plaza was justifiable when compared to some of the other needs such as the senior citizens' center, Greer Park, and some of the social concerns in the community. For this reason, Councilman Beahre would not be able to support purchase of Lytton Plaza. Councilwoman Pearson agreed with the Planning Commission recommendation that Lytton Plaza was very important to downtown Palo Alto and that the possibility of its purchase should be investigated. In Councilwoman Pearson's opinion, the plaza added to the beautification of downtown Palo Alto; and it would be a tragedy to have a building cot:structed on that site. MOTION: Councilwoman Pearsou moved, seconded by Henderson, that staff be directed to negotiate acquiring the site of Lytton Plaza for a public park. Councilman Berwald commented that he had a little trouble with this item because of the way it came about. He recalled that this subject was considered by Council at an earlier date, and the decision was to not purchase the plaza. Mayor Sher said that at the earlier time, the majority c+f Council voted to negotiate with the owner for the purchase of the open •pace and the building next to it; but a tam --thirds vote was needed for the necessary money, and that failed. Councilman Rerwald explained that the part that bothered him was that ou April 7th, staff was informed by Grubb and Ellis Company that it wished to construct a building on this site. The Architectural Review Board considered this on April 17th; and the Planning Commission, on April 23rd. Councilman Eerwald's preference would be to let the application proceed, have a full Environmental Impact Report, and look at the facts at that time. If after due procees, the public body decided that this site should remain as open space, the position of Council could be reconsidered. In view of the fact that the owner has been paying taxes on this property and had made the site available to the city at no coat, Councilman 8erwald did not like to see Council wait until someone applied for a development on the property before it took a position. He noted that the applicant, in good faith and under present zoning, applied to construct a building on the property, and that ahouid be looked at on its own merits. Councilman .Berwald asked if Council could require a full EIR. 1 2 3 9 5/5/75 Naphtali Krox, Director of planning, responded that the normal process would be to have an environmental assessment prepared to indicate whether an EIR is required. He said there had been very few projects in the city where Mrs. Crowder of his department had stated that an EIR was required; and in most cases, a negative declaration was warranted. Mr. Knox commented there had been two or three cases where the environmental aeseesraent had indicated that if certain things were taken into consideration, a negative declaration could be warranted; but otherwise, a full report should be prepared. He added that an assessment would have to be written before the ARB could look at the formal application. Councilman Berweld felt that the circumstances surrounding this particular piece of property were unusual enough to permit the requiring of a full EIR. Vice Mayor Henderson assumed the project had been brought forth in such a way that it could be developed within the present zoning. ;fr. Knox stated it was correct that the application would have to go through the ARB only, but any citizen had the right to appeal. The zoning would require no change. Vice Mayor Henderson considered that since the zoning was already established, it would be more fair for Council to make a cc.r. itment now. He recalled the dollar figure to be in terms of approximately $100,000. Mr. Sipe' said the cost had been $250,000 for the building and the adjacent lot, and the vacant land t1orie was $100,000 to $125,000. If Council were really interested in purchasing the property, it should be aware that the sooner it took action the less costly the land would be. Mr. Sipel explained that if the developer is investing in plans and they are moving toward c pietion, the city would have to pay for the plans as it had to do in at 1eaet one other case. Vice Mayor Henderson stated he was ready to make this kind of a commitment now. Councilman Clay asked if the property werefor sale at the present time. Mr. Sipel replied that it vas in escrow. Councilman Comstock suggested there would be no interruption in due process if matters continued as they were. The city could interfere only by eminent domain or by producing an offer in the market place, and that would be all the City Manager could do. Councilman Comstock could see no harm in having staff find out if an interest existed in selling the property. He said he would prefer to do that directly rather then rely on a little bit of help from an EIR. If Council wants to buy the land, it should say so. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if the owner would consider selling the empty lot separately from the building. Mr. Knox commented that the indication was that the purchatie is for five parcels of land which include the plaza and the building. The purchaaer intends to build a new one-story building on the plaza site and a project in mind for upgrading the existing building. At this point the parcels have nut been separated, and the same conditions apply. 1 2 4 0 5/5/75 Mr. Sipel thought the only way the city could purchase the vacant parcels would be to start an eminent domain procedure; and when Council talked about this subject earlier, it was not ready to do that. This would be a way for Council to get just the vacant parcel and leave the building. There would have to be some discussion es to whether there had been any deterioration of the building because the city bought the vacant parcel. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if staff had come procedure in mind for doing this, because he was still not interested in the building. Assuming Council were of a mind to obtain the plaza site, Councilman Rosenbaum wanted to know if thnr+e were a procedure for accomplishing that. Mr. Sipel responded that the proper procedure would be for Council to ask staff to come back with an eminent domain resolution to acquire the property. Mayor Sher pointed out that the motion on the floor is to approach the new owner to find out if he would be interested in selling the plaza. Councilman Rosenbaum aeked if staff would be able to come back with in answer in two weeks. Mr. Sipel replied that could be done: Councilman Berwald asked the City Attorney if while the City Maanager talked to the owner, the owner could proceed in the usual manner with the fi)i.ng of his plan, etc. Robert Booth, City Attorney, responded affirmatively. Councilman Berwald aasumed that if the owner refused to sell the land to the city, that the A.R3 and the Planning Commission would proceed to consider his application without having the owner's decision affect their consideration. Mr. booth said this was correct. Councilman Clay asked if there were still a single owner of the plaza and the building. Mr. Sigel responded affirmatively. Councilman Clay asked if the city, through eminent domain, could take part of the property and not all of it. Mr. Sipel replied that the city could do that. However, it would be up to staff to negotiate as to whether there is any value remaining in the building as it relates to the vacant parcel. If the matter went to court, perhaps the court would have to determine if there were severance damage the city would have to pay. Vice Mayor Henderson pointed out that the fourth paragraph on page two of the Alm minutes indicated that Mrs. Crowder asked whether the Lytton Plaza property was subdivided from the Peadragon building, and the applicant replied affirmatively. It sounded to Vice Mayor Henderson as though there might be a little better chance of separating it then in the earlier situation. 2 4 1 5/5/75 Mr. Knox said his understanding was that parcel and subdivision lines had been in existence on the maps, but the four or five parcels are under a single ownership. The purchaser, who has deposited :coney in escrow, is purchasing the entire plaza plug the building. Mr. Knox added that Mss. Crowder's statement referred to the fact that there is a subdivision line which separates the open plaza from the building, but that does not necessarily change the owner's view of selling the building and parcel es one unit. Vice Mayor Henderson added that the owner planned to keep the present building and build another building; therefore, there was ac least a separation in usage. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Reahrs, Clay Re lanai. Water ual{t ' Control t Me, caton : on r n neerinn Services CMR:283:5) Vice Mayor Henderson was concerned about what appeared to be a pre- setting of a contract and fees for three phases without a decision having been made yet as to which of the three approaches would be followed, as listed on page one of the staff report. He asked if it were good practice for the consultant to have a major say in determining which of the three approaches would be taken when he might get a higher fee depending upon which method was chosen. For example, approach No. i would obviously have a higher fee than approaches Nc. 2 and No. 3. Hr. Aghjayan responded that Phase I of the engineering services contract would call for a pilot study to evaluate these three alternative methods of meeting the water quality objectives, and that study would ba conducted aver a four -month period. Obviously, the engineer would help staff in evaluating the results of that study; but at that stags, a decision would be made as to which of these throe methods would best meet the city's water quality objectives and still result in the most economical investment procedure. Ray Rommel, Chief Enginner of the Utilities Department, added that the project report had to be dons; and this was stgted in state and federal revenue guidelines. Once the project report is done, then an evaluation can be made with regard tr the next step. Vice Mayor Henderson asked if, after the Phase I evaluation, this matter would come back to Council for approval of the next phase. Mr. Aghjayan replied this was correct. In the Engineering Services contract, there is a two-part remuneration contract which calls for a lower fee percentage for any contract in excess of six million dollars. Staff tried to design into the contract less incentive for the contract to cost more. Vice Mayor Henderson asked why it was necessary to make the decision now as to who the consulting people would be for steps two and three if just phase one were being done. It seemed to him there could be a contract for ,just phase one, since there was the possibility the city would went to use some other consultant for phase two. 1 2 4 2 5/5/75 Mr. Aghjayan said utaff would come back to Council prior to authorizing the engineer to proceed with the next phase; and at that time, if Council wanted to change consultants, it would have that opportunity. Mr. Sipe]. thought there would be a lot of start-up coots that would be spent twice if Council were tochaage consultants at the various phases. Vice Mayor Henderson thought he understood that, but he was not clear why Council had to make commitments for phases two and three at this time. He asked if there were a time constraint involved. Mr. Remmel stated that the project report had to be completed by September and then move into the final design phases. The city had a program schedule before the State Regioaal Quality Control Board that indicated final completion by June, 1979; and that date would have to be net. MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded. by Beehrs, that the Mayor be authorized to execute the contract with Jenks and Adamson in connection with advanced wastewater treatment facilities with the stipulation that future Council approval will be required when maximum fees are established for Phase II -A - Preparation of Construction Drawings, Specifications, and Operations and Maintenance Manual, and for Phase III - Field Engineering and Construction Contract Administration; and add the word "sox" after "ancestry" in the discrim- ination clause on page :en of the contract. Councilwoman Pearson asked staff if it felt comfortable in this position since Jenks and Adamson may be held responsible for part of the failure of the influent pipe with regard to their design, and that might meen a suit. It seemed to Councilwoman Pearson somewhat unusual that at the same time the city might sue Jenks and Adamson for poor engineering in the peat, it was hiring them to design the addition to treatment facilities. Mr. Booth explained that Mr. Jenks' firm was likely to be just one party in that particular litigation which determines the liability for the collapse of the original influent pipe. In all other respects, as far as he had been able to ascertain, the Sewage Treatment Plant is operating as well or better than it was designed. It was producing the quality of effluent for which it wee originally designed, and Mr. Booth had bean informed that it was probably of a better quality than had been required. Hs added that Mr. Jenks is an engineer of a very good reputation and was one of the foremost experts in bay arse sud. Staff's opinion was that the two matters were unrelated, and they had no reservations at all about Mr. Jenks' employment on this new design project. Mt. Aghjayan pointed out that this matter vas brought before Council after nine months of evaluating eight engineers who were considered for this project, and staff was convinced its recommendation was the correct one. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahre, Berveld, Clay, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson 1 2 4 3 5/5/75 1 Water Reclamation Pilot Pro ect Mayor Sher asked if two actions were necessary on the project at this meeting. Mr. Aghjayan responded that a contract and an ordinance slere both presented for action tonight. Mfr. Sigel noted that staff's suggestion was that Council take both actions tonight, but that the second action on the agreement itself would not be effective -until the ordinance is effective. Mayor Sher recalled an earlier conversation on this subject when it was suggested the ordinance would not be effective: immediately. There is in the contract a provision for the cost for the water from the Water Reclamation Project at the basic user charge, the water being for irrigation purposes. Mayor Sher assumed that irrigation includes mitigation for flood basin purposes, and he had expressed concern to the staff there is the possibility that the Corps of f±ngineers in granting the permit for the Refuse Disposal Site may require the city to enlarge the fresh water marsh area. There had been discussion about using water from this reclamation project, and Mayor Sher was concerned that the cost of the water right be tremendous in order to provide the necessary fresh water level. It seemed to him Council ought not to authorize this contract to be executed until that question was settled, Mayor She thought it had been the decision to go ahead with the ordinance; and in the meantime, the question of the cost of the water could be pursued. Mr. Sigel felt there were two things Council could do. One would be to accept the wording that is in the agreement as the best that can be done in dealing with the Water District. The other would be to take that section out of the agreement and not act on it at this time; and if at a future time the condition is imposed by the Corps of Engineers and if the city had a desire to buy fresh water, it could then reinstitute discussions with the District. The cost of the water will be approximately seventy to seventy-five dollars, and the city would get it for thirty dollars. If Palo Alto were to sink its own well end get its own water, the city would still be paying an acre foot tax of thirty dollars. On the other hand, if the city used fetch-Hetchy water, it would be paying adore like ninety dollars. Staff was suggesting to Council that it thought this was Oa best dei1 that could be gotten. Mr. Sigel believed the Water District representative would like to make some comments on this particular matter. Mayor Sher understood that ninety dollars woould be for new water and seventy-five dollars would be for reclaimed water to other users. Mr. Sipel explained that ninety dollars was correct for Hetch-Hetchy water; but seventy-five dollars would be their cost for producing the: water, and the city would get it for thirty dollars. Mayor Sher asked if that was what was meant by basic user charge applicable in Zone W meant. Mr. Sigel responded negatively and said that was what Palo Alto would pay if it were to sink its own well, but that is the basic charge.( Mayor Sher asked if that cost were thirty dollars. Mr. Sipel responded affirmatively. 1244 5/5/:5 Mayor Sher asked for an explanation of the seventy to seventy -fire dollar figure. Mr. Sipel explained that was what it will cost the District to produce the water with their new plant. Mayor Sher asked if this would be what the District would charge other users and whether the city would get a price less than that charged to other. users. Mr. Aghjayan understood that the thirty dollar charge would be for all users of the water, and that is equal to the basic groundwater charge. If the city sunk its own well, the thirty dollars would have to be paid as groundwater tax; and the city would have to pay for the amortization and operating costs of the well. Therefore, the net cost of drilling a hole in the ground and providing water that way would cost about fifty to fifty-five dollars per acre foot. The cot of processing the water is approximately seventy-four dollars per acre foot, and the Water District was selling it for less than half the coat of processing it. Mayor Sher asked at the cost of thirty dollars per acre foot, how much it would cost to use this water to provide the mitigation feature that ia, fresh water marsh area in the flood basin. Mr. Sipe'. replied that a very rough guess would be approximately ten thousand dollars annually. Mayor Sher thought perhaps hie question should be raised at the time staff talked to the Corps of Engineers about the condition regarding the fresh water. Air.-. Sipel stated that staff was hoping to not have that condition imposed. Mayor Sher said that after hearing the explanations, he saw no reason to remove the clause under discussion, He assumed that whet the time carne and the city thought it cost too much, it would not buy it. Mir. Sipsl agreed there was no obligation to buy it. There could be a chance that in later years, possibly 1979, that the city would have a by-product of its own Water Quality Control Plant that might be appropriate for this kind of use. MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Umbra:, that Council approve the proposed contract with the Valley Water District., and introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by *abs,B r its approval for first reading: ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY 07 PALO ALTO APPROVING AND ADOPTING A PLAN FOR TIIE CONSTRUCTION AND PLACEKENT OF A GROUNDWATER RECHARGE SYSTEM IN BYMBEE PARE AND THE CITY -OWNED 3AYTLA DS (AKA JOHN PLEtCHER EMU RECREATION AREA) Councilwoman Pearson understood that the District was going to build the reclamation facilities, end she asked if that were correct. 1 2 h 5 515175 Mr. Aehjayan responded affirmatively. Councilwoman Pearson wanted to know if they would use Palo Alto's sewage. Mr. Aghjayan said this was correct, and the District would get four million gallons per day of Palo Alto's outfall. Councilwoman Pearson asked what the $5,000 was for that the District would be paying to the city. Mr. Aghjayan explained there were some facilities not being used at the Sewage Treatment Plant now that will, be in use with this Water Reclamation Plant, so part of the payment was for that. Also, it would cover the cost of handling the District's lime sludge. The $5,000 was a flat annual payment. The general operating and maintenance costs and the overhead costs of the plant would be borne by the District. Councilwoman Pearson asked if the District would compensate Palo Alto for the use of the flood basin for putting in the pipelines and the wells. Mr. Aghjayan replied that the District was not compensating the city beyond the $5,000 payment annually. Councilwoman Pearson thought that payment was just for the facilities they would be using. Mr. Aghjayan responded that the figuee was an all-inclusive one. Councilwoman Pearson stated she did not believe it. She said she did not think the District vas compensating the city for the land, and they should be. Also, Councilwoman Pearson thought it strange that this pilot program being funded by the federal government, and using Palo Alto's sewage would require payment from the city for the water as it is reclaimed. It was Councilwoman Pearson's opinion that the fee for the groundwater should be much less than thirty dollars. Mr. Aghjayan said another part of the contract states that ten percent of the output of the plant be used at no charge, so Palo Alto would be getting 400,000 gallons of the processed water without any charge at all. Councilwoman Pearson asked if the city would be paying for the watering of the golf course. Mr. Aghjayan indicated that Palo Alto would be paying thirty dollars per acre foot for water used at the golf course, or for whatever use the city deemed appropriate. That can be (:ompered to the present c.at of ninety dollars per acre foot for Hetch-Hetchy waters John O'Halloran, General Manager of the Santa Clara Valley Water District, stated the District has been working on this project for approximately three years on the basis that it should look into all the possible methods of providing water for the county. He thought thst reclamation would be a viable project sometime, and he saw this matter as a first ctep. The District planned to do s lot of monitoring and research on the water, which will give Palo Alto en excellent opportunity to find out exactly what is in that 1 2 4 6 5/5/75 effluent. Mr. O'Halloran was pleased to present a project that basically had the approval of every agency in the county, and the EIR is complete. He felt Palo Alto staff did an outstanding job of negotiating this project. The District was paying the full cost of the operation which is about $150,000 per year; and in addition, the District etas paying the I A% of the grant funds that this local area has to pay. About $500,000 from the District had already gone into this project, and there really was no cost to the City of Palo Alto. At the end of ten years, Palo Alto would own the plant; and the District would be investing much more than a million dollars during that period of time. Councilwoman Pearson referred to that part of the project description which said the effluent would be a quality equivalent to the U. S. Public Health Services drinking water standards. She commented that all she had heard from the Water District about reclaimed water was there was no possibility that you could get reclaimed waters up to the drinking standards because of the trace organics that it contained. Councilwoman Pearson asked what new methods were being used and why it was the District could now get reclaimed water up to those standards when in the past, it persisted in saying that could not be done. Mr. Roman, Resources Engineer with the Water District, said that when the report waa originally published, the Public Health Services did not address the question of trace organics. At the time the report was done, the published standards were met. In the interim, new standards were yet which were considerably more strict and required that levels of trace organics be closely monitored. Whether or not the new standards can be met is the veal question of this pilot facility. Councilwoman Pearson asked Mr. Roman if he were saying the statement made in the report was wrong. Ni. Roman stated that it was correct when the report was published in March, 1973. Councilwoman Pearson asked if the District would be doing any comparisons with delta water, for instance, that may be imported. Mr. Roman explained that currently, the District has a monitoring program underway with Stanford University to ascertain the present level of eater quality in the gsoundwstsr basin and the effluent froe the existing process at the Palo Alto facility. Also, there were standard requirements to run these same kinds of analyses on drinking water. The delta water is being treated at the Water Treatment Plant in San Jose, and it will also be checked. Councilwoman Pearson referred to page three of the SIR which addresses the energy use, and she was appalled that it said producing osons for disinfection requires a relatively high electrical output; and the demand would be 35X of the present electrical consumption of the total Water Quality Plant. In view of :he concern for energy conservation, Councilwoman Pearson wondered if any thought had been given to how to reduce that amount of electrical consumption. Mr, Roman responded that there was a potentially serious problem in the use of chlorins for disinfection. Chlorinated by-products are being produced which may have adverse long-term health effects. The District was proposing the use of osonization as a substitute process. for chlorination; and as far as is nov known, there gars 1247 515175 no adverse effects from ozonization. Unfortunately, there is a significant consumption of power associated with producing ozone. This process was being included as one more element of complete evaluation of water reclamation technology at this level. Hopefully, the amount or ozonization could be minimized; but obviously, the Public Health standards had to be protected. Councilwoman Pearson asked if chlorine would be used at all. Mr. Roman reaportded that chlorine could not be completely eliminated at this point. Councilwoman Pearson asked if there would be some experimenting done with the reduction of ozone and the increase of chlorine, etc. Mr. Roman responded affirmatively. He said the full range of processes that could be applied would be exercised. Councilman Beahrs asked how much life the plant had and how much it would cost Palo Alto to operate it after the experiments are concluded. If Council did not wish to continue tht operation, Council- man Peahre wondered who would bear the burden of removing it from the landscape. Mr. O'Halloran commented that staff had in the contract that -if the city did not choose to corstin'ie the operation, it would be the District's responsibility to n,,,move it. The motion passed and the ordinance was approved for first reading on a unanimous vote. to. Suns at Monrl' tion (C 4R 297:5) MOTION: Councilwoman Pearson introduced the fallowing resolution and moved, seconded by Barweld, its adoption: RESOLUTION SO. 5089 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING RESOLUTION 'r 231 CHANGING THE CITYWIDE STOP INTERSECTION SYSTEM AND HAP" and declared a negative declaration. Councilman Rosenbaum asked if staff had some indication that the stop sign meets with the approval of a number of residents in the area rather than just the one person who made the request. Mr. Knox responded that staff had not yet had any other indication. Councilman Rosenbaum mentioned that Mr. Noguchi stated he had not made a study; and that was all right since if a number of people vacated a stop sign, it was installed without a study. He had just been wondering if, after the stop sign goes in, a number of people would come to Council complaining about it. Hr. Sipel concluded from discussions with Mrs. Miley that there were a number of residents interested in having the stop sign installed, and he would be surprised if there were more against it than there were for it. i 2 4 8 5/5/75 The resolution was adopted on a unanimous vote. .oaaraunity Housing: Comdominium s r MOTION: Mayor Sher introduced the following ordinance and moved, seconded by Comstock, its approval for first reading: ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING SECTION 16.38.060(f)(2) OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO A PRIMER FOR PROSPECTIVE PURCHASERS OF COMMUNITY HOUSING Councilwoman Pearson expressed disappointment in the booklet. It was difficult to read, complicated, and probably someone shopping for an apartment or a condominium would not get as much out of it as he would have if the city had published its own primer. Councilwoman Pearson had not envisioned such a big book; and even et that, it did not address any of the questions Council had concerned itself with when the matter was discussed. Some of these were storage space, sound insulation, separation of utilities, shock -mounting of equipment, property report, whether a prospective buyer knew there was a sinking fund for the maintenance of the property, whether there would be a Home Owners' Association, probable increase in taxes and fees, aid the manager could be fired after ninety days. Councilwoman Pearson thought staff could put out an eight or ten page booklet that would cover all the things that the Council of the City of Palo Alto required in their original idea for the condominium housing primer. She felt it would be all right for this book to be given to the prospective buyer, but Palo Alto ought to produce its own. Councilwoman Pearson thought there ought to be a motion to the effect that staff be directed to make a ten page primer and acquire the HUD pamphlet to be given out along with the Palo Alto one. Mayor Sher noted that the ordinance stated the primer should be prepared and distributed by the City of Palo Alto, so it appeared Councilwoman Pearson would want to have the wording remain as it appears in the ordinance. Councilwoman Pearson was anxious to get the point across to staff that she was not happy with the book; and during this time, staf! could have produced a much better book that would not have been this large. Councilman Clay asked how one would determine a prospective purthaaer, which vas wording that had been used; and he wanted to offer the following amendment: AM t NT: Councilman Clay moved, seconded by Bervald, the following language: "Regarding the property report and primer relating to comity housing for prospective purchasers of community houses approved by the Director of Planning, the developer shall inform each prospective purchaser of the availability of said primer". Councilman Comstock asked his colleagues to vote against the amendment. The developer is going to have a lot of literature available for anyone who might look like a customer, so there would be an exchange of materials and information. Councilman Comstock thought it vas clear-cut to ask a developer to have the book on hand and ask him to praaent it to each customer. This would preclude any arguments ti to whether the book vas made available and whether the purchaser bad bean properly informed. 1 2 4 9 3/3/75 Councilman Clay stated that if there is .a requirement in the ordinance that the primer be presented, then there would have to be some evidence of receipt of the primer by the prospective purchaser, without which it would be very difficult to enforce the ordinance. On the other hand, it would be very simple to determine whether or not the information had been made available. The amendment failed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clay, Norton NOES: Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher V ice Mayor Henderson also expressed concern that the book did not cover the items that Council had presented at the meeting when the direction was given. He thought the city could produce a pamphlet, rather than s. book, that would cover briefly the points made by Council. If the only way to accomplish that would be to vote "no" on this ordinance, Vice Mayor Henderson said that was what he would do. Councilman Comstock suggested that although Council may not be satisfied with the booklet, it be put forward; and at the same time, Council could ask staff and the Housing Corporation to review its and reflect on comments made at this meeting. Then they could cote back anu make some specifid recommendations as to what should be done about it. Councili;oaan Pearson said she would support the HUD booklet providing the Housing Corporation reviews it and comes back with a recommendation for a flyer to go along with it. The ordinance was approved for first reading on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Clay, Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Berwald MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Pearson, that the HUD booklet be referred to staff and the Housing Corporation for review and comment and suggestions back to the Council for supplemental material or replacement material to meet some of the concerns Council had expressed in the past concerning these types of booklets and information. Tte emotion passed on the following vote: AYES: Beahrs, Berwald, Clams, Comstock, Henderson, Pearson, ?iosenbaum, Sher NOES: Norton ark •- Pro osed Moratortusm (CMR:291:5) Mayor Sher said this item reflected the fact that three words wore added to previous action that Council took on this matter, and they were indicated on the second page of the staff report. Mayor Sher had sent a letter to the Board of Supervisors indicating the action that had been taken, and he thought it appropriatua to include the suggested wording. 7.250 5/5/75 MOTION: Mayor Sher moved, seconded by Henderson, that the motion adopted by Council on April 21, 1975, be modified to read as follows: "The Council of the City of Palo Alto requests that the Board of Supervisors enact a moratorium on (1) the issuance of building permits on any land currently zoned non-single-famil;-residential, (2) zone: changes, and (3) subdivisions and lot splits in Barron Park until the annexation election has been held and certified". Councilman Comstock wanted to be certain that the letter which would go to the Board of Supervisors would indicate that Palo Alto considered this tatter to be one of urgency and emergency and would like to have it appear on an early agenda. Mayor Sher responded that this had already been Mayor Sher noted that the changes in the motion would be inserted in place of "declare" and the would be added. The motion passed on the following vote: done. For clarification, were that "enact" words "single --family" AYES: Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay ABSTAIN: Berwald (Beahrs absent.) (CXR: 29'2 : 5) MOTION: Vice Mayor Henderson moved, on behalf of the Finance and Public Works Committee, that Council approve the contract with Arbegast and Newton to provide architectural services for E1 Camino Park Improvements, and that "sex" be added to the non-discriminatory clause. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. (Beahrs absent.) es 4201 ' 21111§61 (Calf ! if Toll Bridst rit Surplus Rsvenuas (*x:286:5) MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council endorse Assembly Bill 664 and authorise the Mayor to writs to state and local officials to seek their support in peseage of the bill. Councilwoman Pearson asked that licycle and pedestrian routes, access, and separation be added. Councilman Bervalcfi referred to page three of the bill, Section 308878, and read: "Secure an approval from the State Transportation Board that the proposed toll schedule .:ill not result in an insufficient amount of funds necessary for the operation of the Toll Bridge". Politicians could i.aterpret that with a minimum amount of money so that the bridge that is already. there is perhaps existing in in unsafe wanner. The word "maintenance" is used, but it reads a little like housekeeping maintenance. Councilman Berwald thought Council should insist that the operation of the bridge be designated "safe *perdition of the bridge", - 1251 5/5/75 MOTION RESTATED: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Henderson, that Council endorse Assembly Bill 664 and authorize the Mayor to write to state and local officials to seek their support in passage of the bill, and that the bill also include the application of the funds to bicycle and pedestrian lanes, and that references to maintenance is presumed to mean proper and safe maintenance of the bridge. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. (Beahrs absent.) In uir of Councilman. Berwald with es ect to . va ve va t. exation Councilman Berwald said he put this item on the agenda at the request of some of the residents of the Silva Avenue/Silva Court area, which consists of thirty-seven single family residences. On March 4th of this year there was an election held in Mountain View to astnex this area. The election was defeated by a vote of thirty --six to thirteen; and as a result of that, a majority of the residents requested that the Mountain View City Council release area into the Palo Alto sphere of influence. Those citizens requeeted that the item be placed on the Mountain View Council agenda for March 31st, 1975. At that meeting, there was an action adverse to the residents. Since then, in discussions with the residents and with some of the Council members, the City Manager of Mountain View, and Palo Alto's staff, Councilman Berwald concluded that if the Council of the City of Palo Alto were to indicate to Mountain View's Council and City Manager that it would favorably look upon the residents' desire, they would then consider it. The people in that area have great regard for Palo Alto and would sincerely like to be a part of it. Councilman Berwald wanted to help them, and he was sure other Council members would. MOTION: Councilman Berwald moved, seconded by Comstock, that the City of Palo Alto indicate to the City of Mountain View its willingness to consider the desires of the majority of the residents in the Silva Avenue/Silva Court area to be annexed to the City of Palo Alto and that the Palo Alto City Staff be directed to discuss the matter with the City of Mountain View and the residents, concurrently providing to the residents and to the Council an economic analysis of the cost to the city and to the residents resulting frail► such annexation. Councilwoman Pearson said she looked upon this favorably, and she agreed that this first step should be taken. Barbara G. Heick, 4380 Silva Court, stated for the residents of that area that they agreed completely with Councilman Berwald's motion. The motion passed on 1 unanimous vote. (Beahrs absent.) of c► ^. s Comazo4 enate Bill 63 MOTION: Councilman Coraatock moved, seconded by Pearson, that the Mayor be authorized to send a letter on behalf of the City Council supporting Senate Bill 634. Councilman Comstock said that this bill would hopefully eliminate no --return containers. 1252 5/5/75 The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher ABSTAIN: Clay (Beahrs absent.) nest of Councilsuetx Co ock for Council r o and SB 2 Councilman Comstock said he was not aware of whether these bills had been amended appreciably, and the copies of the bills which Council had showed them as they were in February of this year. He asked if staff had any further information on the bills. Mr. Knox stated that staff knew there had been some changes; but they had not been able to get the latest revisions. MOTION: Councilman Comstock moved, seconded by Henderson, that the Mayor be authorized to write a letter to the legislature supporting; AB -1 and SB-2 in the concept as introduced. Councilman Corgi-toc'k commented that during discussions of Comprehensive Plan options, there had been saxe talk of Councii's frustration with the housing problems in the community and the lack of funds. It would be very helpful. to Palo Alto if there were more state and federal participation so the problem could be solved on an area - wide basis- It seemed to Councilman Comstock that this bill goes in that direction and meets some of the concerns Council had in trying to come to grips with the broader housing needs of the community. The motion passed on a unanimous vote. (Beahrs absent.) Councilman Comstock said he was not calling for action tonight, best he would be agetsdizing the concept of freezing .isseasments. Personally, he thought that anything dons along that line would be terribly wrong and mischievous on the part of the legislature. At the next Council meeting, Councilman Comstock would egendize this matter and request that Council take a very strong position in opposing such a concept. Councilmen Norton said that each member of Council had a copy of a letter from .lack Unger, dated April 25, 1975, wherein he takes offense et certain statements it a flyer circulated by The Collective staff, dated April 13, 1975. Mr. Zenger's points were well taken, end the statements made were susceptible to the interpretation that The Collective favors or disfavors one or the other of the slates or of individual candidates running in the upcoming City Council election. MOTION: Councilman Norton moved, seconded by Comstock, that Council request PACDAB to tame steps to assure that: (1) Henceforth The Collective collectively not take positions which appear to favor 1x53 3/5/75 or disfavor particular candidates or slates of candidates, or measures, in Palo Alto municipal elections; and (2) That the document called "Retrospective" be removed from circulation unless and until it has been revised to omit the passages referred to in Mr. Zenger's letter of April 25, 1975. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Clay, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Pearson (Beahrs absent.) Councilman Berwald re Co to Councilman Berwald stated that he planned to send his colleagues a memorandum about some of his concerns regarding the high rate of crime in certain areas, and he thought it would be very helpful if Council received once a month a personal type of report about some of the human: incidents of crime - not just a statistical record. Counci174ar1 Berwald said he would put an item on the agenda concerning this matter. Heetins of MAyl MOTION: Councilman Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Comstock, that the Council meeting of Hay 12th, 1975, be cancelled. Councilman Clay commented that he had received two calls asking whether or not there would be a meeting on the 12th, and he assumed there would have been one held. One of the persons was especially interested because his concern was one of construction where delay meant money, and Councilmen Clay hoped there would be a meeting. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES: Berwald, Comstock, Henderson, Norton, Pearson, Rosenbaum, Sher NOES: Clay (Beahrs absent.) Sac'in + "Sher r tieal i ento re L - Mayor Sher reported that he had received notification that Assemblyman Vesconcello's bill on the Rumba::ton Bridge is beginning to move the legislative process. There is a hearing on May 14th; and if anyone wiehed to attend that hearing, he should make it known. A The meeting of Kay 5, 1975, adjourned at 11:55 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVE: 7-) / City Clerk 1 2 5 5 5/5/75 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITY. w. This is to certify that the microphotographs appearing on this microform, starting with Q , t� c2 3 and ending with 1/0 de- are accurate and complete reproductions . of ( `fL 6)F/ C' ` --- fr Cy, 1.,Li, (' as delivered to`t e undersigned in the regular course of business, for microfilming. It: is further certified that the micrographic processe .used were accomplished In a manner, and on =microfilm.which meets the requirements of the .Americanational Standards Institute (MMSI) and the Association for Information and Image Management (AM. Da to produced: / , ^19 9/ By : Place: Sunnyvale, Calif. 94©86 City State Zip HI 10 11 4,4; Liss Liss5a �� 3� 22 11 3.b C6 1.25 I.4 tb 400 APPLIED IVAGE Ina AiSS3 Sett Merl Street PeaNewer, New Yoilc i 4We