Loading...
Minutes 2008/07/07 8876 City of Gilroy City Council Meetina Minutes Monday, July 7,2008 I. OPENING Mayor Pinheiro called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Pinheiro led the Pledge of Allegiance. City Clerk Freels report that the agenda had been posted on July 2, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. Roll Call Present: Council Member Peter Arellano, Council Dion Bracco, Council Member Bob Dillon, Council Member Craig Gartman, Council Member Cat Tucker, Council Member Perry Woodward, Mayor AI Pinheiro There were no changes under Orders of the Day There were no Introductions. D. Presentations & Proclamations Mayor Pinheiro read a Proclamation to the 4th Infantry Division, 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry, Company C of the U. S. Army Naming July 10, 2008 as C Day in the City of Gilroy. II. PRESENTATIONS A. BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA, BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL. There were no public comments on items not on the agenda. III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minutes of the June 16, 2008 Regular Meeting and June 24,2008 Special Meeting C. Resolution 2008-32 Releasing Unclaimed Checks to the City of Gilroy General Fund in the total amount of $151.77 D. Approval of the PERS Employer Contribution Prepayment for Fiscal Year 2008/2009 Motion on consent calendar Items A, C & 0 Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried to approve Consent Items A, C & D. B. Approval of Budget Amendments and Transfers Council Member Woodward asked if the budget amendment was to pay for the consultant who was working on the library bond measure. City Administrator Haglund stated that it was. Council Member Woodward stated that the item was not unanimous and should not be on the consent calendar explaining that he could not approve the spending of $58,000 on the advocacy of the library. City Administrator Haglund stated that the item should be pulled and voted on separately. 8877 Motion on Consent Item B Motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried (Council Members Gartman and Woodward voting no) to approve item III.B. Mayor Pinheiro asked if staff could be sure to place items that were not a unanimous vote in an area other than the consent agenda. City Administrator Haglund stated that staff would do their best to place such items on the regular agenda if it was obvious that it was not a unanimous vote item. IV. BIDS AND PROPOSALS A. Approval of Agreement for Emergency Medical Training and Quality Assurance Review Consultant Services with Ted Farr in the amount of $39,178.00 Fire Chief Foster presented the staff report. Motion on Item IV.A. Motion was made by Council Member Dillon and seconded by Council Member Tucker to approve the agreement for emergency medical training and quality assurance review consultant services with Ted Farr in the amount of $39,178.00. Mayor Pinheiro spoke on his discussions with staff regarding the personal liability coverage and the need for an additionally insured clause. He asked for a friendly amendment to the motion to request the additionally insured clause and personal liability coverage be provided. City Administrator Haglund stated that the agreement did have the appropriate language which required both the additionally insured clause and the professional liability coverage agreeing that an amendment could be made to the motion. He explained that staff would go back and ensure that both insurance documents were corrected. Mayor Pinheiro asked that the caveat be made that those documents be provided. Council Members Bracco and Tucker agreed to the amendment to the motion. Continued Motion on Item IV.A. The motion was approved with the addition of the requirement that both the additionally insured clause and the liability coverage documents be provided. B. Approval of the Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for the 2008/2009 Chip Seal Program in the amount of $184,925.74 The staff report was presented by Engineer Ii Dey. Motion on Item IV.B. Motion was made by Council Member Arellano, seconded by Council Member Woodward and carried to approve the Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for the 2008/2009 Chip Seal Program in the amount of $184, 925.74 C. Approval of the Selection of Dowling Associates, Inc., Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Higgins Associates, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., and T JKM Transportation Consultants to Perform on Call Engineering and Transportation Planning for a Period of three (3) years The item was presented by Engineer II Dey. Motion on Item IV.C. 8878 Motion was made by Council Member Woodward, seconded by Council Member Gartman and carried to approve he Selection of Dowling Associates, Inc., Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Higgins Associates, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., and T JKM Transportation Consultants to Perform on Call Engineering and Transportation Planning for a Period of three (3) years. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearing items. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There were no unfinished business items. VII. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of the Sale of a 188 Square Foot Easement at 332 Lewis Street to Martin F. Schlapfer in the Amount of $800.00 The staff report was presented by Engineer II Krueger. Council Member Woodward asked if it was a separate parcel and if the entire parcel was owned by the City. Engineer Krueger explained that the City was maintaining the easement rights as a portion of the bridge extended slightly into the property. Motion on Item VitA. Motion was made by Council Member Arellano, seconded by Council Member Woodward and carried to approve the sale of an easement at 332 Lewis Street to Martin F. Schlapfer in the Amount of $800.00. B. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approval of the Construction and Design for the Chestnut Street Bicycle Pedestrian Bridge Project The staff report was presented by Engineer II Dey. Mayor Pinheiro spoke on the work done by Mayor Hughan to develop a bridge in the location in the 1980's. Council Member Arellano spoke on the lighting on the bridge and need for safety in the area. Engineer Dey stated that the entire area would be lighted across the area of the path and explained that they would be pedestrian level lights. Motions on Item VII.B. Motion was made by Council Member Arellano, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that, on the basis of the whole record before the City Council, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis, and that the City Council has reviewed and considered the documents along with any comments made during the public review process prior to .proving the project. City Attorney Callon suggested that a second motion take place to approve the construction of the bridge. Second Motion on Item VII.B. 8879 Motion was made by Council Member Arellano, seconded by Council Member Tucker and carried to approve the construction and design of the Chestnut Street Bicycle Pedestrian Bridge Project, and to adopt the associated Mitigation Measures and the Mitigation/Monitoring Program set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS City Administrator Haglund provided the Council with a handout with the schedule of the upcoming meetings on the top 10 priority items developed at the May City Council Summit detailing the expectation of each presentation. Council Member Woodward asked if it would take 4 % more months to discuss the In- house City Attorney services item. City Administrator Haglund explained that it would as there would be a well rounded review of all of the challenges and various aspects of both in-house and contract City Attorney services and expense differences. Council Member Woodward stated that he expected the analysis to be thorough and complete. Council Member Arellano spoke on the various greening programs throughout the County and the State and work ABAG had been going forwarded with. He asked if such material would be provided during the study session on the programs of the various agencies. City Administrator Haglund stated that sustainability was a component of the issue explaining that a whole menu of options would be provided. Council Member Gartman stated that September 15th would be a busy meeting. City Administrator Haglund explained that it would be a busy meeting explaining that the discussion topics may be incorporated into the regular meeting. Council Member Gartman asked if prior to the RDO session, a brain storming session of the City Council could be scheduled to get everything in a list format. Council Member Gartman then asked if the schedule of the top ten meeting dates could be posted on the City website. City Administrator Haglund stated that it could. Mayor Pinheiro asked what the City Administrator would be presented during the ROO study session. City Administrator Haglund explained that staff wanted to bring forward the issues that staff had been identified to scope out the course for the following months prior to implementation for the next round. Mayor Pinheiro explained that he understood that the study sessions were intended to give staff direction on the goals of the Council asking if the study sessions would be held in such a manner. City Administrator Haglund explained that each study session would be of its own based on the item explaining the steps he foresaw for the open government ordinance as the flushing out of each item to get to the refining and direction to move forward with each item. Council Member Arellano asked if Council Member Gartman's suggestion to have the lead meeting before the RDO study session. Council Member Gartman suggested holding a study session on August 4th to provide 8880 staff with the Council's list prior to the ROO study session. City Administrator Haglund spoke on cancelling the September 29th meeting as there would be back to back meetings due to the rescheduling for the Labor Day holiday. Council Member Woodward asked why the Council would not be meeting on the 1 st and 3rd Mondays. City Administrator Haglund explained that the rescheduling took place due to the holiday and the planned remodel of the Council chambers. Council Member Woodward asked why the Council would not be meeting on the 8th and the 22nd. Mayor Pinheiro explained that it would be the 8th as a meeting would be rescheduled to the following Monday if it fell on a holiday. City Administrator Haglund stated that he did not believe that 2 back to back meetings would need to take place in late September and early October. Council Member Tucker suggested that the September 29th meeting be cancelled and if needed, the Council could hold the September 8th meeting. The Council agreed. IX. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS There were no City Attorney comments. X. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Bracco spoke on the Historical Heritage Committee request that the City Council recognized the importance of the downtown design guidelines. Council Member Tucker stated that the Gilroy Visitor's Bureau would be presenting the City branding study at the next Council meeting. She then spoke on the Habitat Conservation Plan meeting she had attended as Alternate to Council Member Woodward explaining that the Water District Staff was coming along fine with their goals. She then spoke on the Historic Heritage Committee request for the downtown design guidelines stating that Mayor Pinheiro stated that there was a cost study coming forward for the Council to review. Council Member Tucker stated that she did not understand why it would take so long to get the report back. City Administrator Haglund explained that it would time in concert with the mid-year budget review so that the leg work would be done for the RFP and design guidelines. Council Member Tucker stated that she was concerned with the costs for the guidelines and suggested staff look at the old guidelines also. She then spoke on the cut for funding of the fireworks show at the High School and asked that the item come back on the agenda for further review. Council Member Arellano stated that the music in the park event had been a good event. Council Member Woodward stated that the Council had voted at the previous meeting to have a motion on the agenda for a Council Member to be able to put an item on the agenda, asking if the item under the Mayor's Comments would allow the Council to take action on the item. 8881 City Attorney Callon stated that it would. A. Request to Review a 9-80 Work Schedule or a 4-10 Work Schedule Council Member Gartman spoke on his suggestion to look into alternate work schedules explaining that there could be savings to the City utility charges and there could be savings for the individual staff members traveling to and from work. He asked that staff be allowed to pursue the discussions with the various bargaining groups to see if a proposal could be made in their MOU's. Council Member Tucker stated that she believed that budget needed to be balanced and she would want to see City Hall shut down every other Friday without pay. She explained that 4 1 O-hour days were tough on an employee and she believed the costs should be cut. Council Member Woodward stated that he was willing to hear out the proposals without imposing a lot of staff work on the issue. Council Member Arellano stated that he would prefer to do other things to make cuts explaining that he would like to see other expense savings but was willing to listen to the proposal. Mayor Pinheiro stated that different options should be provided to Council sharing the actual cost savings and input from staff should be provided on the implications of such changes. He explained that he was also willing to listen to the proposals with additional information. Council Member Gartman spoke on the timing to return to the Council with the additional information. City Administrator Haglund stated that raw information from other cities could be provided by July 21 st , but details of the operational cost savings and Council direction would be needed to give a detailed analysis. He then agreed that staff could come back by the beginning of August. Mayor Pinheiro stated that he wanted information with a full report of the options would take time and he wanted to be sure the Council gave staff enough time to get a thorough analysis. Council Member Gartman stated that the City Administrator had stated that he could return by the beginning of August Mayor Pinheiro stated that he was providing his opinion that he would like to have enough time to get a thorough review of the item. Council Member Woodward stated that he wanted to hear from the rest of the Council and wanted staff to do some analysis but he would like to have Council provide their direction before too much staff time was devoted to the item. Council Member Bracco agreed stating that he didn't need to have an in-depth report, just a short report to see if the majority of the Council was interested in pursuing the item further. City Administrator Haglund explained that staff would be able to return with sufficient information to allow the Council to see if they wanted to pursue the item further. B. Request to Revisit the PUD Amenity Policy Process and Receive Status of Re- writing the Document Council Member Gartman spoke on the discussion of the item and issues that arose at the policy summit on the process. He asked that Council get an update on the status of the re-write of the policy. City Administrator Haglund explained that the draft document that was reviewed by 8882 Council in January and he understood that staff was to work on identifying amenities and how they would be judged in the process. He explained that his understanding was that at the Council summit, the Council was agreeable to where the policy stood and wanted additional work done to it to have the document used as a template for PUD projects up to the formal adoption of the policy. He explained that he was brining the item forward as a regular session item on August 4th for Council to provide additional direction and the item would return for final adoption. Council Member Woodward stated that at the recent Planning Commission meeting, staff had explained that they were using the draft policy with the guidance of the Council and he was surprised that it was being used. He explained that he believed that this PUD policy needed to be resolved. Mayor Pinheiro asked if the draft could be brought to Council prior to August 4th. City Administrator Haglund stated that he was concerned with using the policy for a project that was already in the pipeline. He then said that staff was telling him that the City could use the policy. He then explained that he would prefer to bring the item back on August 4th to become up to speed on the item. Council Member Tucker suggested that if the Old Las Animas School project was going before the Council, she would like to see the PUD analysis and options for the project. City Attorney Callon asked Planner II Durkin if the Old Las Animas School project was a subdivision map. Planner II Durkin stated that it was a subdivision map. City Attorney Callon explained that she would need to confer with Staff as if it was deemed complete, it was subject to the policy in affect at the time it was deemed complete. Council Member Gartman spoke on the tentative map. Council Member Woodward asked if it was going before the Council in July. Planner II Durkin stated that it was going before the Council on July 21st. Council Member Gartman asked for a copy of the policy in its current form. City Administrator Haglund stated that he would get it out to Council. XI. MAYOR'S REPORT A. ~uncil Agenda Item Submittal Process Mayor Pinheiro stated that he had been portrayed in the local newspaper as a dictator Mayor who was not allowing other members of the Council to place items on the Council's agenda and he felt he was being put in a bad position. He explained that members of the Council could have contacted the City Administrator to ask why items were not being placed on the agenda, but instead they had petitioned to hold a special meeting to agendize an item. He explained he had followed the same process as the Mayors before him and he was taken back by how he had ,been treated on the issue. He asked that the Council consider the item as one of fairness and suggested that the Dispatch contact him directly to find out how the agenda process truly took place. Council Member Tucker stated that there were different approaches and she believed that deadlines did need to be given to staff to get items addressed. She stated that the Mayor didn't set such deadlines for staff so items did not get addressed right away, which was why Council Members were upset with the process. She stated that it wasn't personal. Mayor Pinheiro stated that staff had provided various dates for the council priority items 8883 and he did not set deadlines for staff as he believed the whole Council set the deadlines. He explained that he worked with staff to bring items to the Council as soon as possible and the City Administrator was the person to set the deadlines for the prioritization of items that came before the Council. He suggested that the Council have more trust in the system in place. Council Member Bracco stated that if any Council member wanted an item on the agenda, they should be able to do so by emailing the Mayor and the City Administrator. He then explained that it shouldn't necessarily generate staff time as that was a decision for the majority of the Council to decide. Council Member Woodward agreed and suggested the City of Morgan Hill's agenda submittal process be followed for Council initiated agenda items explaining that no staff time was spent on an individual Council Member's item. He explained that once a majority of Council was in agreement with pursuing an item, then staff time could be expended. He then showed his appreciation for the City Administrator's report of the upcoming study session items sharing a past removal of the Open Government Ordinance study session item from the calendar of study session items without any explanation. He then reiterated his interest in following the City of Morgan Hill's process was to resolve the issue. Mayor Pinheiro explained that it didn't resolve the issue of the timing of the work items. Council Member Woodward stated that there could be a discussion somewhere during the Council reports section of the agenda on the work plan. Council Member Gartman explained that the Charter allowed for any Council person to add an item to the agenda. He agreed with the use of the City of Morgan Hill's process. Mayor Pinheiro asked when any item that was suggested for a future agenda did not get placed on it. Council Member Woodward stated that there were two issues; Council Meetings and study sessions. He stated that in the past, he had asked for an item to be placed on an agenda regarding release of police information to the newspaper and the item had been agendized under his report. He stated that if a Council Member was asking for an item to be placed on an agenda, it should not be pushed off to the report under the Mayor's discretion. He stated that the study session dates had not been provided to Council when he had requested them at the previous summit. Council Member Arellano spoke on the past process of bringing up items under the Council Members reports and if no one was interested then the item died. He stated that the submittal process that the City of Morgan Hill followed was a good process and he felt the public could come in and discuss the items because they were on the agenda. He then spoke on the need for time-lines and dates to follow-up after items were discussed. He stated that he didn't rank the other cities processes but he felt that anyone should be able to place an item on the agenda. Motion on Item XI.A. Motion was made by Mayor Pinheiro, seconded by Council Member Woodward and carried that any Council Member may submit an item onto the agenda by submitting the materials to the City Clerk by 5:00 p.m. the Tuesday prior to the meeting and at that meeting, the Council will vote whether to go forward with the item if the item warrants any staff time, and that an email is sent to the entire Council of the request and an additional agenda section that is titled "Future Council Initiated Agenda Items" be added to the Council agenda. City Administrator Haglund reminded the Council that no staff time would be spent on the initial request of placing the item on the agenda. B. Appointment of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the Annual League of California Cities Conference, September 24th through September 27th, 2008 8884 None of the Council Members planned to attend the conference. Council Member Woodward recused himself from the Closed Session due to the ownership of a property within 500 feet of the closed session site. He then left the Council Chambers. The Council adjourned to Closed Session at 8:50 p.m. XII. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: Assessor's Parcel Number 799-07-074, Along Eigleberry Street in Gilroy, California (between 5th and 6th Street) along Gourmet Alley. Agency Negotiators: Tom Haglund, Bill Headley Negotiating Parties: Charlotte Cimino Under Negotiation: Price, Terms of Payment There were no closed session announcements. XIII. ADJOURNMENT TO THE MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 2008 \ '. .. .,' 1 \~l/l ; : '/"'-....0 Shawna Free s, City Clerk 4