Loading...
Minutes 2008/11/17 1 8969 CITY OF GILROY CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MONDAY. NOVEMBER 17. 2008 I. OPENING Mayor Pinheiro called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. The Invocation was given by Ryan Azad of the Bahi' Faith. City Clerk Freels announced that the agenda had been posted on November 12, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. Roll Call Present: Council Member Peter Arellano, Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Bob Dillon, Council Member Craig Gartman, Council Member Cat Tucker, Council Member Perry Woodward and Mayor AI Pinheiro. B. Orders of the Day There were no agenda changes. C. Introductions There were no introductions. D. Proclamations, Awards and Presentations Mayor Pinheiro presented a Proclamation Honoring St. Josephs Family Center for Services to the Community. Mayor Pinheiro presented a Proclamation Honoring November 23 through November 29,2008 as National Family Week. II. PRESENTATIONS TO COUNCIL A. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA, BUT WITHIM THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Police Chief Turner presented statistics and a response plan that had been put in place to address the recent gang activity in the community. She shared data on the number of gang members in the community, the number of arrests and the work the department was conducting with gang outreach and education in the community. Council Member Dillon asked what the weapons compliance check was. Officer Gallecinao explain~d that they were people who were prohibited from carrying fire arms in the community and the ACT team was proactive to be sure they were compliant with the law. Mayor Pinheiro thanked the Chief for the work her department was doing to make sure the community was safe. Council Member Woodward asked if the budget cuts would affect the ACT team or the ability to go out and suppress the graffiti. Chief Turner stated that there would be cuts that would affect the probation officer 1 8970 I position explaining that the employee was contractual. She explained that there were also cuts to the Neighborhood Resource Unit program explaining that the members of the unit tracked the graffiti and coordinated the volunteers and the wipe out watch committee and she would need to determine if the responsibilities would be reassigned or if the program would be eliminated. Council Member Woodward asked if the staff in the NRU were able to determine the type of tagging activity to help identify the tagger. Chief Turner explained that CSO Angela Lock-Padden was the person who worked with the tagging activity and was the expert on the force and her position was being eliminated. Council Member Woodward asked is CSO Lock Padden was the person working on the identification of the tags asking if as a part time staff member, she was slated to be layed off. Chief Turner agreed explaining that she brought the cases together and then worked directly with the ACT unit who investigated the tagging activity and arrested the offenders. Mayor Pinheiro announced that a community forum would take place the following Thursday night at 7:30 p.m. Jessica Kohl and Kathleen King spoke on the Silicon Valley Turkey Trot on Thanksgiving day stating that the event helped Santa Clara County agencies such as the Housing Trust. B. Annual Presentation of the Parks and Recreation Commission Kathleen Clarke the Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission presented the annual report. III. CONSENT CALENDAR Council Member Gartman requested that item III.B. be pulled from the consent calendar. A. Approval of Minutes of October 20,2008 Regular Meeting C. Claim of Raul Munoz (City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claims) D. Claim of Deborah Griffith (City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claims) Motion on Consent Items III.A. C and D Motion was made by Council Member Bob Dillon, seconded by Council Member Dion Bracco and carried to approve Consent Items A, C and D. B. Approval of Minutes of November 3, 2008 Regular Meeting It Council Member Gartman stated that he had not had an opportunity to review the minutes as they were emailed and he hadn't been able to get into his email so he would be abstaining from the vote on the item. Motion on Consent Item III.B. Motion was made by Council Member Dillon, seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried (Council Member Gartman abstaining) to approve Consent Item B. 8971 IV. BIDS AND PROPOSALS There were no bids or proposals. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Consideration of the Approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment for a Overlay Combining District, Modified Zoning Map and Design Policy in the Murray Avenue and Las Animas Avenue Vicinity from the North Edge of Cohansey Avenue, the South Edge of Leavsley Avenue, the West Edge of Monterey Road and the East Edge of South Valley Freeway, Z 08-03, City of Gilroy The staff report was presented by Planner II Mcintyre. Council Member Tucker asked about the design policy section asking if staff would be reviewing only the Murray Avenue facing. Planner II Mcintyre explained that it would depend on the zone the property was in explaining that some could go up to 75 and others would be 35. Council Member Tucker asked about the empty lots on the Forrest Street where it was mostly light industrial asking if the policy would address those areas. Planner II Mcintyre explained that it would depend on the zone that the building was in explaining that C3 and Highway Commercial would be higher. Council Member Tucker stated that there were empty lots on the Forrest side asking how it would be regulated. Planner II Mcintyre stated the policy addressed M1 and the M1 was 35 feet. City Attorney Callon spoke on issues she had concern with regarding the zoning ordinance amendment stating that additional language was needed to explain that the arch and site would go to the Planning Commission for consideration. She then suggested that the ordinance also allow for an appeal process to the City Council explaining that the same time period of 15 days could be used. Mayor Pinheiro asked if the report was reviewed by the City Attorney's department prior to coming to the City Council. City Attorney Callon explained that once the item was approved by Council, then the City Attorney's Office would craft the ordinance. Council Member Woodward asked about exhibit 7 stating that the noticing requirements were the only enhancement. He then asked what more was included in the change. Planner II Mcintyre explained that there were three components to the recommendation explaining that the addition of the overlay combining district, the modification to the zoning map for the district and the addition of a new policy for the district. She agreed that there was a new noticing requirement for the residents in the area. City Attorney Callon explair;;led that the shift was made from the Planning Director to the Planning Commission. Council Member Woodward stated that the City Administrator had just shown him that attachment 7 was the design policy which was not well identified in the materials. He then explained that he was not prepared to modify the city zoning ordinance. City Attorney Callon explained that the ordinance was a combination of the first two items on the agenda. She explained that the Council could wait to adopt the third action, the design guidelines, at a following meeting after the ordinance had been adopted. 8972 The Public Hearing was opened. Hubie Honeck from Murray Avenue stated that he was confused about the restrictions that were being made. City Attorney Callon explained that it added a notification process for design review for every architectural and site application and there was a change for approval from the Planning Director to the Planning Commission. Mr. Honeck asked if M1 would have any additional restrictions. City Attorney Callon explained that there were no additional restrictions on MI, but the design guidelines could change the way the design features were looked at. Mr. Honeck stated that the road and traffic would change explaining that the additional traffic would impact the area. Planning Division Manager Faus explained that there were two process changes; the first being the change for the M1 approval process from staff approval to Planning Commission approval, which was one additional review/approval step with the noticing of all property owners. He explained that the second process change was the adoption of a policy to allow the City to look at something more closely such as height, driveway and landscaping. Transportation Engineer Dey spoke on the circulation system in the Murray Road area explaining that it would not change with the overlay. Thomas Muniz spoke in support of the proposal explaining that the neighborhood was aware that development would occur in the future, but it would need to be compatible with the neighborhood. He explained that the neighborhood needed to be protected as far as traffic. He spoke on the property use asking if the un-developed commercial zoning could be included in the overlay as it was directly adjacent to the neighborhood. He spoke on uses that generated additional truck traffic and the possibility of problematic businesses such as adult and alcohol related business. The Public Hearing was closed. Planning Director Faus spoke on the application of the policy to other uses in the area explaining that the C1 and M1 uses as well as C3 uses in the geographical area would be reviewed. He explained that the zoning was only one piece of the puzzle of the issues for the area. Council Member Woodward asked if the direction was to direct staff to craft an ordinance and the Council would have a comprehensive document. City Attorney Callon agreed stating that it would come back very similar to the material the council was reviewing with the additional items she had mentioned earlier. Motion on Item V.A. Motion was made by Council Member Tucker, seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried to direct staff to prepare and ordinance approving Z 08-03. It VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Establishing Regulations Governing Access to Public Meetings and Public Records, and Establishing an Open Government Commission ("Gilroy Open Government Ordinance") Motion on Item VI.A. 1 8973 Motion was made by Council Member Woodward, seconded by Council Member Tucker to Adopt Ordinance 2008-11 of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Establishing Regulations Governing Access to Public Meetings and Public Records, and Establishing an Open Government Commission ("Gilroy Open Government Ordinance") Council Member Bracco stated that the Council would need to review how closed sessions were conducted explaining that at times multiple items were addressed in closed session and the Council would need to make the decision whether or not to come out of closed session while staff was still available to continue to broadcast the item in open session. Mayor Pinheiro stated that the Council would need to make the decision at the beginning of the meeting to go into closed session and then come back into the regular meeting to identify for the public which items would be addressed in open session. He then asked the Council to provide him with any other suggestions on how to address the issue. Mayor Pinheiro then thanked the Council for all of their work on the ordinance stating that the Council had put a lot of time into it. Continued Motion on Item VI.A. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. B. Discussion of the Council Agenda Item Submittal Process Mayor Pinheiro suggested that the issue come back as a Council summit item stating that the Council was being asked to take action on items that one individual Council Member had placed on an agenda without having the time as a full Council to decide to look further into the item. He then stated that the Council should discuss items that were submitted by individual Council Members and then decide to move forward. Council Member Woodward asked if the Mayor and the City Administrator made those decisions all the time. He then asked who had put the overlay district on the agenda. Mayor Pinheiro explained that items were put on the agenda that were in process. Council Member Woodward asked what the Mayor was proposing. Mayor Pinheiro stated that the Council and staff had been working on those items to bring them before the Council. He then explained that there was no staff analysis of any Council presented item with no full description of so the public didn't have full disclosure from the City on such items. Council Member Tucker stated that she understood that a Council Member could put the item on an agenda and then four votes would place the item on a future agenda for action. Mayor Pinheiro stated that other Council Members were asking to place items on the agenda for action without the agreement of the Councilor any staff analysis of the item. He then suggested that the Council look at the City of Morgan Hill's process. Council Member Woodward asked if the Mayor was asking to change the policy or discuss it at a future meeting. Mayor Pinheiro explained that he was proposing that the Council give clarification to the process as he and some of the other Council Members understood it, that putting an item on the agenda could be done at any time, but action would not be expected until there was a majority of the Council that vote to put the item on a future agenda along with full analysis of the item. Council Member Woodward stated that the open government ordinance was an 1 8974 example of how an item was added to an agenda by a single Council Member, stating that the Council was able to vote on the item and he would not have been able to do so if the policy was changed. He then stated that if the Council wanted to vote on it they should be able to. Mayor Pinheiro stated that if one short line of description was given to the public without all of the necessary information to make a decision then the idea of transparency was not taking place. He suggested that the community be made fully aware of the actions the Council was taking. Council Member Gartman asked what the mayor was asking the Council to do. Mayor Pinheiro suggested that the City of Morgan Hill's policy be used as an example for the retreat to discuss the setting of items on Council agenda. He then asked for a clear direction from Council on the issue of putting an item on an agenda. Council Member Gartman stated that the Mayor was asking the Council to take action on an item that he had put on the agenda. Mayor Pinheiro stated that as Council Member Tucker had explained, items were coming to the City Clerk and himself for action without the okay of four Council Members to direct that the item come back at the next meeting. Council Member Bracco stated that he thought the full Council was following the process as Council Member Tucker had explained it and it sounded as though that some people would not follow the process. Mayor Pinheiro stated that he understood that any single Council Member could place an item on an agenda and it required a vote of 4 Council to add the item for action explaining that people were trying to add action items without a majority vote of council. Council Member Woodward spoke on the meeting in June stating that the direction had been that any person could add an item to an agenda. He then stated that the policy allowed for any member to place an item on the agenda as long as it didn't take any staff time and the item could be brought up for a vote. He then stated that he felt it was an erosion of the rights of each Council Member to not be able to place an item on an agenda for action. He explained that Mayor Pinheiro had placed the item on the agenda that was a discussion topic to modify the previous action that had been taken. Mayor Pinheiro explained that putting items on an agenda without any analysis and without giving the public the opportunity to read any background or report on the item. He then asked why the Council would want to allow a member to bring an item without a chance for analysis. Council Member Woodward stated that he would have been prevented from placing the open government ordinance on the agenda for a vote if he had followed the policy as the Mayor was suggesting. He stated that the notion that it was more transparent was misleading. Mayor Pinheiro stated that as Council Member Woodward was describing the process, it was more important for the Council Members to be able to place items on an agenda for action then it was for the public to have any information or analysis of the item. He then stated that he was merely asking for clarification of the process from the full Council. Council Member Gartman asked what the handout from Morgan Hill was for. Mayor Pinheiro stated that he was just asking the Council to take the handout home. Council Member Gartman asked if Mayor Pinheiro was asking the Council to utilize the Morgan Hill agenda item submittal process. 1 ! 8975 Mayor Pinheiro stated that he was just providing the item as reference for the January policy summit. Council Member Gartman stated that he had requested for actionable items to allow the Council to vote to move forward with policy and procedure. He then stated that what he was asking for was the ability to give direction to staff to move forward. Mayor Pinheiro stated that the issue was placing an item on the agenda for a vote to approve an item without any background information. He then spoke on one of the items that had been proposed by Council Member Gartman stating that the City Attorney had noticed that the item was on the agenda and was not constitutional. Council Member Gartman stated that it was how you defined action explaining that the Council was taking an item and making a decision. He then stated that the public wouldn't know if the Council was going to talk about it or make a decision. Mayor Pinheiro stated that the action to be taken should be agendized stating that the type of action should be sent forward by the Council Member after it had gone through the process. Council Member Gartman stated that he saw an action as directing staff time to research an item. Mayor Pinheiro shared an item as an example stating that it was direction to staff that the item would come back to the Council for formal action. Council Member Woodward stated that the open government ordinance required that agenda specify the action to be proposed. Council Member Bracco asked if the Council Member needed to send the City Clerk the requested action. Mayor Pinheiro stated that a Council Member couldn't expect to submit an item at 5:00 p.m. and expect the Council to vote on the item without the direction of the majority of Council to entertain the topic. He explained that a description of the action the Council Member wanted the rest of the Council to agree to. He explained that anything could be put on an agenda but a vote would be taken whether or not to go forward with the idea. City Administrator Haglund stated that the section of the policy was that an item could be submitted by a member of the Council by 5:00 p.m. the Tuesday before the meeting or identified under future council initiated items would constitute that an action whether ,or not to move forward would need to take place and did not constitute that it was an approval of the item. Council Member Woodward stated that he would not have been able to put the open government ordinance item on the agenda. City Attorney Callon spoke on the difference between existing agenda items verses new items as existing items were fully briefed and reviewed by Council. Council Member Tucker stated that in general items could come forward as the City Administrator had described, but there were circumstances that would be different. It Mayor Pinheiro shared the difference between an item that had never been agendized and those items that had been in the queue. He then spoke on providing more information to the public explaining that it was a bit more work but things did happen. He then spoke on the ability to think further on items. Council Member Woodward suggested that a policy be put in place in writing. l 8976 Council Member Gartman stated that a final vote was when the ordinance was introduced or adopted. He then stated that a vote to direct staff was not a final vote and spoke on changes to a previous ordinance. City Attorney Callon explained that there was a difference in the action explaining that the Council had taken action to introduce the ordinance and then had voted not to adopt the ordinance. She then explained that there was a difference between a referral to staff under the Brown Act verses a motion to do something. Council Member Gartman stated that he had asked that his items be actionable items to allow the Council to take an action to direct staff to take the next steps. City Administrator Haglund stated that he understood the interpretation of the vote taken in July as Council Member Gartman had described it. He then explained that the sunshine ordinance was not applicable in the same way. Council Member Woodward stated that the system seemed to be working and he wanted a written clear policy in January. Mayor Pinheiro stated that Council Member Gartman's interpretation of "action" was clarifying that he meant he wanted the Council to decide to move forward or not. He then spoke on the need for clear information. Council Member Woodward stated that the vote would be to bring the item back. City Attorney Callon stated that the Council needed to decide if direction to staff held the same dignity as adopting an ordinance. She then shared the difference between the language to direct staff to prepare an ordinance which called for 4 affirmative votes of the Council. VII. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS A. Consideration of the Approval of a Downtown Small Project Exemption of Forty-five (45) Residential Units with Commercial Space Located at 7121 Monterey Street, APN 799-10-049, DSPE 08-02, Jose Montes c/o Pedro Guillen Applicant The staff report was presented by Planner II Mcintyre. Council Member Arellano stated that he thought he may have a conflict of interest as he was thinking of doing business with Mr. Montes, the applicant. He then left the Council chambers. Motion on Item VII.A. Motion was made by Council Member Tucker, seconded by Council Member Dillon and carried (Council Member Arellano absent) to direct Staff to prepare a Resolution Approving DSPE 08-02. Council Member Gartman spoke on total area footprint (FAR) in the staff report stating that he was troubled by the information in the staff report as there were no formulas to determine the FAR. Planner II Mcintyre stated that there was nothing in writing but typically the floor area ratio was determined with the exclusion of the parking areas. She explained that the total floor areas included all floors. B. Consideration of the Approval of a Downtown Small Project Exemption for Three (3) Additional Residential Units Located at 7700, 7760 and 7776 Monterey Street, APN 841-04-019, DSPE 06-04, Montes Plaza c/o Jose Montes Applicant l ~ - 8977 Council Member Gartman asked what the overall height was for the project. Planner II Mcintyre explained that it was much less than 50 feet. Council Member Tucker asked what would come back to the Council asking what the process was asking if the remodel would not be that dramatically different. Planner II Mcintyre explained that it would not return to the Council and would be reviewed by the T AC and the Planning Manager. Council Member Gartman asked if it was going to 4 floors. Planner II Mcintyre explained that it had always been 4 floors. Motion on item V.lI.B. Motion was made by Council Member Tucker, seconded by Council Member Bracco and carried (Council Member Arellano absent) to direct staff to prepare a Resolution approving DSPE 06-04 VIII. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT There was no report. IX. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT There was no report. X. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Mayor Pro Tempore Bracco Mayor Pro Tempore Bracco shared the new season membership pass from Gilroy Gardens and spoke on the appointment of Jane Howard to the Board of Directors. Council Member Tucker Council Member Tucker clarified that the plastic bag policy was not to ban plastic bags but to charge a fee. Council Member Arellano Council Member Arellano spoke on a community peace vigil being planned. Council Member Woodward Council Member Woodward spoke on the need to form an Open Government Commission and then spoke on the adoption of a Public Records Request Fee Schedule in concert with the open government ordinance going into effect. City Administrator Haglund stated that a fee schedule resolution would come back to the Council on December 15th with the needed changes. It Mayor Pinheiro suggested that the appointment to the Open Government Commission be agendized for the same night. He then stated that he would like to sit on the commission. Council Members Woodward, Arellano and Tucker also showed an interest in sitting on the commission. 8978 Council Member Gartman Council Member Gartman spoke on the article in the Morgan Hill times on stimulating the development of homes stating that for a time being the below market rate homes could be pushed out. He then spoke on development of an incentive program to cause for the stimulation the development suggesting that the City look at discounting impact fees. Mayor Pinheiro stated that he had recently had a discussion with a developer in town that had many developments going and there was no financing available. He explained that the market was not there and sooner or later the monies would need to be paid. Council Member Gartman stated that there were other communities doing similar programs. Council Member Arellano spoke on the RDA backfill. Council Member Dillon suggested that the City Administrator look into the item. The Council all agreed. Council Member Gartman suggested that all candidates for mayor or city council should disclose all campaign contributions stating that he would like to see the ordinance changed. Council Members Dillon and Tucker stated that they liked the process the way it was. Council Member Arellano stated that he thought it needed to be voluntary. Council Member Bracco stated that he agreed with the concept stating that everything should be clearly disclosed. Mayor Pinheiro agreed stating that everyone should be honest with contributions and expenses. Council Member Arellano stated that if developers were giving contributions it shouldn't make much of a difference as other members of the community could donate to campaigns for other wants such as neighborhood amenities. He then stated that the Council should be voting with integrity. City Attorney Callon shared a section from the FPPC campaign manual which defined the disclosure requirements all ready in place for contributions or expenditures whether in cash or by check. Council Member Gartman stated that he was just brining the item forward sharing other cities campaign expenditure and contribution ordinances. Council Member Woodward spoke on 100% disclosure of all receipts of money and all expenditures. He then spoke on contributions to candidates explaining that the City should err on the side of transparency for all contributions. Mayor Pinheiro suggested that the discussion be brought forward at the Council retreat stating that he was in support of Jull disclosure of all contributions. The Council agreed to add both campaign expenditure and campaign contributions to the Council summit in January. Council Member Gartman suggested that contribution limits for all mayoral and City Council candidates be set to $.25 per resident. City Attorney Callon reminded the Council that the limits were voluntary not mandatory. 1 8979 Mayor Pinheiro stated that what the City currently had worked well and he didn't think it should be changed. Council Member Bracco stated that it would only help the un-popular candidates to lower the contribution limits. The Council did not choose to go forward with the concept. Council Member Gartman stated that his item to amend the zoning ordinance for political signs for mayor and city council elections to not be allowed until 45 days before the election could not be addressed as the City Attorney had explained to him that it was a freedom of speech issue. Council Member Gartman then spoke on his suggested Charter Change (item for next Gilroy election) - Section 408 - Meetings of the Council. A special meeting may be ordered at any time by the Mayor or a councilmember whenever in their opinion the public business may require it or upon the written request of any three (3) members of the Council. Mayor Pinheiro spoke against the change stating that it was not something that would benefit the Council. He explained that the section was used for an emergency issue or to allow for the ability or 3 Council Members to convince at least 1 other Council Member to move forward on an item. Council Member Woodward stated that it would eliminate the ability for 3 Council to meet together outside of the Council dais. Mayor Pinheiro and Council Members Bracco, Tucker and Dillon disagreed with moving forward with the concept. Council Member Gartman shared his request for a GAAP Audit stating that with a new City Administrator it was necessary to have one conducted. He stated that the city did not currently conduct a GAAP audit which was in conflict with the City Charter. He said it would cost $10,000 to $20,000 to conduct the audit. City Administrator Haglund explained that GAAP stood for generally accepted accounting principles, which were the standards that the audit the City conducted each year. He explained that the audit was conducted by an outside firm during a 3 week process of review the city files and testing of the city policies. He explained that the audit presented to the Council was conducted following the GAAP. He then spoke on the single audit that was conducted on a single large project and each transaction of the project was looked at to ensure that the City financial rules were followed. Finance Director Turner explained that Meyer, Hoffman, McCain was the auditing firm used and was number 8 in the largest firms in the U.S. She read the audit letter from 2007 that detailed the GAAP audit process taken. She then spoke on the letter the Council received from the City Administrator that asked for additional areas of review that the Council Members would like to see focused on during the audit process. Council Member Tucker spoke on scope of the audit asking if there was a state mandated scope. Finance Director Turner stated that they determined the scope explaining that as an independent body they determined the scope testing that would take place. Council Member Woodward asked if they looked at line item by line item. Finance Director Turner explained that they did go by asset classification looking at the balances by year and they also tested items that were larger. 8980 City Administrator Haglund shared the peer review process the auditing firm was required to undertake explaining that it was a stringent testing process. Council Member Arellano asked if there was a more detailed audit that could take place asking what the costs would be to produce it. Finance Director Tuner explained that there could be a special area that could be added to an audit if it was in the realm of the auditing firm's expertise and there was a cost associated with it. Mayor Pinheiro asked how the firm was chosen. Finance Director Turner stated that a RFP would go out and the Council approved the firm. Mayor Pinheiro asked if the Charter section 1107 which stated that the council would employ at the beginning of each fiscal year the auditing firm was in compliance. Finance Director Turner stated that the City was in compliance. Council Member Woodward stated that the charter spelled out the exhaustive process that needed to be undertaken asking that the Finance Director provide a detailed report of all of the steps that had been taken. Council Member Dillon stated that he had been through 5 audits and he has never seen the RFP for an auditing firm. City Administrator Haglund stated that he wanted the Council to be comfortable with the auditing firm explaining that the current fiscal year audit was being completed and he would like to have the auditing firm come in to do a presentation before the Council. Mayor Pinheiro asked if the direction from the Council was that the date of the last RFP be brought back with the presentation of the audit by the firm. The Council agreed unanimously. Council Member Gartman asked when the next budget meeting would take place. City Administrator Haglund stated that he hoped to come back on December 1 st or possibly December 15th. Council Member Gartman asked if the records retention item would return. He then spoke on the City website stating that since it had been hosted in-house it was not always available suggesting that the city have an outside host for the website again. Council Member Tucker suggested that staff look into the issues with the site to see if there were any other solutions. The Council agreed to have staff come back with a report on the service at the next meeting. Council Member Dillon thankect everyone on the Council for their help with the library bond measure passing asking that certificates of appreciation be presented to the members of the committee. Mayor Pinheiro agreed. Council Member Bracco suggested that an item be placed on the agenda to identify the needs for the library so that the construction did not get out of control. 8981 XI. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Pinheiro invited everyone to the Camino Arroyo Bridge opening the following weekend. He then thanked Transportation Engineer Dey for his work on the grant for the bridge. He then spoke on the Ethics Program that the City of Santa Clara had created asking that the Council look into agendizing the Ethics Program for the summit. All of the Council Members agreed. He then spoke on the plastic bag ban in Santa Clara County and the Cities Association work on the project sharing other cities work on creating re-usable bags for their own communities. XII. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS Council Member Tucker suggested that the noticing item return at a future meeting. City Administrator Haglund stated that it was being worked on. XIII. ADJOURNMENT TO MEETING OF DECEMBER 1, 2008 The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. awna Freels, City Clerk