A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Ramon was called to order on October 22, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 2222 Camino Ramon, Mayor Tatarka presiding.

PRESENT: Councilmembers Cambra, Dickey, Hudson, Wilson and Mayor Tatarka

ABSENT: None

STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Jim Randall, City Attorney Tom Curry, Police Chief Brian Lindblom, Parks and Community Services Director Jeff Eorio, Development Services Director Joye Fukuda, Interim Public Services Director Douglas Udell, Division Manager – Recreation Services, Esther Lucas and City Clerk Judy Macfarlane

* * * *

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Cub Scout Den 4, Pack 201 led Council, staff and those present in the audience in the pledge of allegiance.

Mayor Tatarka read the names of the scouts that had participated in the pledge: Graham Harper, Dylan Biondo, Cole Alsup, Jesse Erven, Drew Alsup, Jonathan Chan, Brandon Ash, Spencer Carter and Jared Sawdey.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka announced the Council had met in closed session pursuant to Government Code 54956.9 (c) to meet with the City Attorney regarding potential litigation and this meeting was for information only.

* * * *

The City Manager called to the audience’s attention the special meetings to be held October 29 and November 2, noting both have to do with the recruitment of the new City Manager. He said Bob Murray, the City’s consultant for the recruitment, indicated over 50 applications had been received. On October 29 Mr. Murray will be meeting with the Council to make a recommendation for the initial round of interviews that will be held on November 2 and he anticipated there would be between six and eight candidates interviewed at that time. Council has set November 14 aside for a second round of interviews which will probably be the top three finalists and tentatively the appointment of the new City Manager will be on November 26.

Mayor Tatarka said also on October 29 at 7:00 p.m. there would be a neighborhood City Council meeting, which will be held at Neil Armstrong Elementary School.

The Interim Public Services Director introduced Lionel McNeeley, the new Maintenance Technician II in the Public Services Department.

Mayor Tatarka welcomed Mr. McNeeley and gave him a City pin.

Mayor Tatarka presented a Smart Permitting – Contra Costa 2002 Award to Cindy Yee, Planning Services and Deanna Lee, Building Services.

Don Manning, Contra Costa Economic Partnership, told about the program and congratulated the City of San Ramon for receiving the award.

Mayor Tatarka presented a proclamation to Stephen Ferguson, California High School, and congratulated him for receiving a perfect SAT score.

Mayor Tatarka presented a proclamation to Ryan Moon, California High School, and congratulated him for receiving The O’Neill Festival Award.

Mayor Tatarka presented a proclamation to three members of the award-winning Odyssey of the Mind team congratulating them on their success this past year.

Robin Snyder, Commuter Choice Manager, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, presented to plaque to Mayor Tatarka recognizing the City of San Ramon for participating in the Commuter Choice Leadership Initiative (CCLI).

Mayor Tatarka presented a proclamation to Joanne Larson, representative from STAND! Against Domestic Violence, declaring October 2002 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

* * * *

The Division Manager said the Parks and Community Services Commission recommended the Council appoint Carol Kisling to serve on the Arts Advisory Committee with a term expiring March 2004.

Cm. Dickey’s motion to appoint Carol Kisling to the Arts Advisory Committee was seconded by Cm. Hudson and passed 5-0.

Cm. Wilson said he would like to let everyone know the quality of the applicants that apply for City committees. He said Ms. Kisling has expertise in theater issues and is a consultant for several theaters in the area. He thanked her for taking the time to serve on the committee.

* * * *

Carol Rowley: I would like to encourage you to schedule regular meetings for the Forest Home Farms Committee. Our staff has been hearing about it. One of our staff members wrote a grant for classroom visitations and I know they want to present it to the committee. The City staff has been having regular events around Forest Home Farms, the wonderful Victorian Tea and the Ice Cream Social. They have been doing just a wonderful job keeping the momentum going forward. But we really need to establish and calendar regular meetings for the Forest Home Farms Committee.

Michelle Cowles: Quality of life. The opposition to Measure H would have you believe that the majority on Council is responsible for high-density housing. Well I would like to congratulate you on approving and building all those homes on San Ramon Valley Boulevard, all within 10 months. In fact, the same individuals whose names are on the flyer are blaming this Council for their own actions. This Council had not approved one unit or one development. I would like to remind the residents of how this majority has improved our quality of life. They listened to concerned residents of Royal Vista Pool and saved 10 years worth of our tax dollars. They upheld the appeal with Pine Valley neighbors. And they stopped the heliport that would have increased risks to our families. Measure H is about even year elections. This switch would save a minimum of $50,000 each election and increase voter turnout. Fellow residents please vote yes on Measure H.

Scott Miller: I am here with the No on H Committee but I just want to reiterate a few things that we have actually discussed in the past and I don’t feel that the message has gotten through. I direct this primarily to you Mayor and to Mr. Cambra and Ms. Dickey. The City Council, you are at the top of the organization. Your place is basically to make policy level decisions, high-level decisions. I don’t feel that it is the place of the City Council or any type of elected board to micro manage the city and that appears to be what is happening with the appointments on the Forest Home Farms oversight committee. That is, we can’t get the people we want on the committee to make sure that it gets micro managed properly, then we just won’t make the appointments and the committee will grind to a halt and the work won’t get done. That is rather frustrating. I am just suggesting here that this isn’t the place for political meddling. this the place to let the committee do its work. Second item – when citizens are elected in a public office such you are, there is a certain level of accountability and ethical conduct that the citizens expect of you. We expect you to know the rules and procedures you need to follow. By your actions, and I think I am particularly addressing this to you Mayor Tatarka, the attitude here seems to be that anything is okay as long as you don’t get caught. And if you get caught, we just blame it on city staff and don’t worry about it. Well, then you wonder why we get upset about those kinds of things and form committees like No on Measure H. Well, stop wondering. Third item – earlier this year I asked for the City Council to explain to the City, not just to me, your goals and the direction that you were going to take. And we keep hearing your supporters talk about this new direction, whatever it is. And on Channel 30 you said lots of nice things generically about the city but nothing that specifically explained what it was that you were doing and then in the meantime city staffing fired, reorganizations, all kinds of interesting things have happened. And all I know is I moved here seven years ago. This place was a really nice place to live and now it looks like some kind of change in direction is happening but we don’t know what the change in direction is. But all we know is that you are just changing everything. And so at some point, in the near future, if you wouldn’t mind please just telling the citizens what it is you are trying to accomplish. Maybe we would be more understanding. But it is difficult. That is pretty much all I have to say. Thank you very much.

Sam Lemon: Madam Mayor on February 7 of this year I wrote you a letter – two pages. And it was mostly directed to the way business was conducted in this part of the Council’s agenda, Public Comment. And if you recall I took serious exception to allowing this part of the agenda to be transformed into a forum for political campaigning. I think that is dead wrong. I will not read the entire letter but to refresh your memory, I would like to read just a few sentences if I may. To put it concisely I do not believe that is the business of the city to allow the public comment portion of the agenda to be transformed into a political campaign forum. That is exactly what these two men did some months past. And the current rules either permit or encourage that kind of behavior. If they want to communicate partisan preferences by distributing leaflets, that is fine. If they want to put signs in yards, that is okay. If they want to address private groups, that is fine also. But I do not believe that distorting the purpose of the public comments portion of the agenda to achieve obviously partisan or biased political goals is in the best interests of the city or taxpayers or others. I continue a paragraph later saying, undoubtedly there are nuisances to be considered but I feel very strongly that the status quo is not acceptable. After watching the performances of these two clearly biased gentlemen the obvious partisan response will be, two can play that game. I am not sure that that is the result you seek in conducting civil business meetings. Nobody wins from those kinds of exchanges. Happy to discuss. I didn’t ask you for a response, didn’t expect one, but I wanted you to think about it at any rate. Now you know if you just think about things for a moment we think city employees in city owned vehicles running around the neighborhood to confiscate political banners and signs located in the public domain. It is forbidden. Yet we come to this public domain with public provided television and allowed it to be transformed into a political campaign forum. And I say to you, you just can’t have it both ways. That is not the purpose of this forum. If you want to talk about matters before City Council or coming before the City Council, that is okay. But if it is a political campaign forum, I say it is highly inappropriate. There aren’t many occasions when the Council nowadays votes 5-0. This really ought to be a no brainer for you on a 5-0 vote. One other matter, I will make it brief. And that pertains to an action taken by the Council this past July 23 when you approved the ballot statement for Measure H. Mr. Curry has said it was completely legal or perfectly legal or words to that effect. But it is legally misleading, it is legally deceptive, it is legally deceitful, it is legally improper, and it is legally incomplete. After reading that, I called a half a dozen or so of my compatriots in former cities where I lived and was active in politics and I asked some simple questions. Considering the controversy over extended terms, wouldn’t it have been appropriate at the end of the ballot statement to add a very simple phase saying, and on a one time basis extend the terms of City Councilmembers for one year. And without exception they said yes, unanimously. If you want to be honest, forthright, clear, and unambiguous to voters so that they clearly understand what they are voting for or against, that phrase should have been there. It wasn’t there. And where I come from, it is not a trifling matter to deliberately to mislead the voters of this city. It is hard to tell what will happen from here, but somehow I just have the idea that you folks have not heard the last of that issue. That is all I have. Thank you for your attention.

Yvonne Kimber: I speak tonight in support of the work the City Council has done in the last year and to correct the deliberate misrepresentations being made by former Councilmembers and their supporters. This Council has not squandered your tax dollars. The fall in the City’s reserves is because there has been a drop in revenues. The Council has not wasted your money on the Civic Center. Former Councils authorized $1.2 million over a three year period to produce awful plans and accomplish nothing. Former City Councils wasted money. This Council cancelled the Turner contract following reports of unsatisfactory work performance. They paid for the work done and saved over $434,000 of your money. This Council is doing its job looking after the interests of the City. Former Councilmembers speak untruths when they say this Council is anti-business. I defy the former Councilmembers to show that this Council has voted a single anti business act. Some members of our Chamber of Commerce have also joined the old guard’s court. They are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy to the detriment of small business, which they are proposed to support. Former Councilmembers misrepresent this Council when they say it is anti- growth. How can it be anti-growth when it supports affordable housing in San Ramon. The Council majority wants teachers, policemen, firemen, nurses, and City staff to afford to live here. This Council listened to residents and upheld their appeal against a heliport. It listened and responded to residents concerns in new neighborhoods and to those homeowners by the Pine Valley gymnasium. Our Council is doing what elected officials are supposed to do. This Council listened to residents and avoided the expenditure of some $300,000 of your tax money on a private swimming facility. And a committee was formed to look into aquatic needs for our town. This Council voted to approve the conceptual design for the San Ramon Senior Center phase two expansion project. This Council put Measure P, for the new General Plan for San Ramon, on the ballot and 72% of the residents who voted, voted yes. This Council is in step with its residents. Your City Council has held three neighborhood meetings, one in Dougherty Valley, one in Bollinger Canyon School and a third in Neil Armstrong School. Your Council listens to residents and not special interests. No previous Council has ever been able to get its collective act together to make even year elections happen. Now former Councilmembers are saying they are in favor. They had their chance and failed to act for the residents in the 18 years they were the majority. This Council did not vote to extend terms even though they could have done so. First of all, it is the residents that vote. So the residents should decide when they want to vote. Secondly, by having the residents approve even year elections no future Council can change it back without voter approval. It is not about extending terms, it is about increasing voter turnout and saving your tax money on future elections. In an attempt to counter the work of the resident friendly new majority, the old guard with active support from Mr. Hudson have worked ruthlessly to slam the new majority by repeating again and again things they know are untrue. Our Mayor has been subjected to harassment of the vilest kind. Many Council meetings read like a gothic novel. Based on a comment by Roz Rogoff and some newspapers views of former Councilmembers there can be little doubt to initiate the Grand Jury. It is all so unseemly and so uncivil. It is an insult to every resident of San Ramon and a disgraceful blot on our history. Do not believe the slander and untruth. Please vote yes on Measure H. Save tax dollars and share your concern for residents' rights in San Ramon. I would also like to say that those who are supporting the majority are receiving some retaliation. We have had Royal Vista golf balls in our garden earlier this year and I have received an unsigned unpleasant letter in the mail regarding my position on Measure H. The person obviously doesn’t have the courage of their convictions and I think this is a very sad unfortunate state of affairs in a civilized society.

Mayor Tatarka: Brian Lindblom is timing everyone tonight because the equipment can not fit over by where Judy is and so we are having Brian do it. Brian is having a little of a struggle and he is a little stressed, so he might tap you on the shoulder and say it time is almost up. So don’t be alarmed if the police taps you on the shoulder. So I just wanted to let you know that before we continue.

Melody Lundgren: I would first like to make a quick response to Mr. Lemon’s information speaking under public comment. According to the Brown Act it does not address political signs in medians and other places therefore it is the right of the City to decide where those could be placed. The Brown Act however does address what people can say at public comment. And pretty much it is, they may criticize, they may vilify, they may do almost anything that they want to do and that is the public’s right and I don’t see that that should be taken away. Further I support Measure H and once again I would like to cite some facts. 1) The California Department of Elections states that the cost difference between an odd year and an even year election is over $2.00 per registered voter. Right now that is an excess cost of $50,000 for San Ramon. However with any population growth, especially when San Ramon annexes Dougherty Valley. This additional cost could grow to $100,000 or more for every odd year election. 2) Originally in this country white male property owners could vote. Since that time people have stood up and demanded the ability to cast their vote. Even in the last few years Congress had passed legislation to make the process easier and encourage more people to get to the polls. This is what democracy is all about. Odd year elections have a voter turnout of about 20%. Even year elections can go as high as 80%. The greater the voter turnout on candidates and issues, the more representative our government and laws will be. And I do firmly believe that the voters of San Ramon can handle voting for more than one issue at a time. 3) All other districts and cities that have changed from odd to even elections in this area did so by extending terms and did so without any voter input. This Council is doing them one better. They are letting the voters decide this issue. The opposition to Measure H started by complaining about term extensions. Since none of these people were upset about the Fire District extending their terms in 1999 we must assume it is not the principle but the politics that they are upset about. Many weeks later they up with "quality of life issues". If this Council is given one more year will support high density housing and increase traffic congestion and, if they thought of it, probably global warming. This Council and every Council thereafter must abide the General Plan. The General Plan was well developed before this Council was seated and it was approved by the voters. The General Plan safeguards San Ramon from any errant Council. I received a flyer that headed "Protect Our Quality of Life" and was signed by a group of past politicians and "community leaders". I truly believe that it is their quality of life that they are worried about. Not the residents and voters and taxpayers of San Ramon. Please support Measure H on November 5.

Lucy Voorhees: First can I say a couple of positive things. To those two kids at Cal High, Steve and Ryan, congratulations also cheer Moms and Dads. You know I am sure that they helped along there too. I have got a sophomore daughter. It would be really nice if they came to my house to take her out on a date. Mr. Lemon, do I have your name right, please don’t take away my right under the Fifth Amendment to freedom of speech during public comment under the constitution of the United States. First Amendment, excuse me. I don’t want you or anybody else to do that . Public comment is for us to speak, our right. Now what I would like to talk about. I want to address another account by previous San Ramon City Councilmembers to misrepresent in favor of distortion and half-truths regarding Measure H. A recent letter in the San Ramon Valley Times by Mary Lou Oliver did again not present the facts. Instead the letter focused on Council term extensions thereby making it "a sneaky measure". The truth of Measure H is even year elections and saving money. Not as I quote "I hope the truth about Measure H will not be lost in the shuffle. The issue is not even year elections the issue is term extensions". Once again Mrs. Oliver is incorrect. Some previous Councilmembers, as well as Mr. Hudson and Mr. Wilson, current sitting members of this Council, continue to complain about this Council wasting money and not working for the City. Measure H addresses this complaint. The measure will save the City money by sharing the cost of elections with other municipalities. Looking at most general elections this would mean a savings to the residents of San Ramon of approximately $50,000 each election. This savings in some form would continue to provide further benefits financially to all residents of San Ramon for all subsequent elections. This measure is not a sneaky measure. The official ballot sent to all voters clearly states what the measure is actually about. The general municipal elections will be held, reading it off the ballot, "held on first Tuesday following the first Monday in November of each even numbered year". That is nothing sneaky or unclear about this. There is no hidden or deceptive print on the official ballot or the pamphlet. And I do believe that Mr. Curry, our City Attorney, would be able to clarify this for all of us here tonight that to misrepresent Measure H on the official ballot would be illegal for the County Board of Elections to do. Another argument has been poor voter turnout. By voting yes on this measure, voter turnout is bound to increase as a result of far reaching issues of national and local interest. Will this measure extend terms one year. Yes, but only this one time. However based on the facts of this measure, the long term benefit to the city is more than apparent to anyone who chooses to read it. How come this wasn’t done before. Why do previous Councilmembers not stop to calculate the tremendous savings to residents. By some very rough calculations of mine, if you go back 20 years worth of odd year voter votes times $50,000 for each election that would have meant $500,000 worth of savings to the city and its residents. Why didn’t previous Councils work out the financial benefits of even year elections long ago. Stop the half truths, misinformation and stop the area of hidden agendas and start dealing with facts of this very important measure. I support Measure H and you all do too.

Mayor Tatarka: I have two speaker cards that asked me to please read the attached during public comment But I don’t know if they are here or not and the first one is Carolyn Vindum. "I am unable to attend the meeting tonight but I definitely support this Council and their decisions for this community and I see no problem with the one time term extension in order to accomplish the change to even year elections in San Ramon. I believe the savings to taxpayers and increase in voter representation at the polls outweighs any minor political skirmish. I will vote yes on Measure H".

Mayor Tatarka: There is one more right after that says, please read the attached during public comment or written. I have been since 1981. The few times I attended city council meetings before the current board was elected soured me. Prior city councils didn't listen to what residents wanted and did what was good for developers and businesses. Finally Councilmembers are listening and respecting what a majority of San Ramon residents want. The prior Councils catered to business and allowed nearly anything business wanted. I realize businesses are important to our city finances but residents should be given, at a minimum, the same consideration. We live here. We pay property and sales taxes here. I am extremely grateful to Mayor Tatarka and Councilmembers Cambra and Dickey for listening to us regarding the proposed business heliport by Central Park. It would have adversely affected hundreds of San Ramon homeowners financially, the sellers of any home being sold in proximity to the heliport or its flight path would have to disclose this fact to potential buyers. In addition it would have adversely affected our quality of life. Councilmember Wilson voted to allow it. Councilmember Hudson abstained from voting but later said he thought the heliport was a good idea. With past Councils, the heliport would have been a done deal in spite of the fact hundreds of residents opposed it. I am appalled by how Mayor Tatarka and Councilmembers Cambra and Dickey’s opponents have conducted themselves. A very vocal minority has lambasted these representatives every step of the way. They are doing it again with their opposition to Measure H. They have turned Measure H into a personal vendetta against these Councilmembers. Mayor Tatarka, Cambra and Dickey have the right thing by putting this issue on the ballot. Due to the timing of the even-year elections in relation to their terms, they could not shorten all of the City Councilmembers’ terms. They felt it was not appropriate to take it upon themselves to extend the Councilmembers’ terms. It is something the voters should decide. Please remember all five Councilmembers’ terms will be extended. I believe that Nancy Tatarka, Bob Cambra and Donna Dickey have done what they think is best for San Ramon and I appreciate it. I feel confident that they don’t have hidden agendas or ulterior motives. So far, all they have gained for their efforts is a huge amount of grief. Please join me in supporting this Council and vote yes on Measure H". - Susan Garaventa –

Mayor Tatarka: And the next one is Rena Waterson.

Rena Waterson: Over the past few weeks the number of editorials both in the San Ramon Valley Times and in the Herald have been printed in opposition to Measure H. These editorials have made statements about Mayor Tatarka, Councilmembers Cambra and Dickey that they saying that they are in favor of high-density housing which, will in turn, will create more traffic. In addition they have been blamed for frivolous spending of our tax money in the amount of $2.3 million. Well, I am confused. Those of us who voted for the Council majority less than a year ago, know for a fact that their platform was one of slow growth. The opposition is stating otherwise. At this time I would ask them to please provide the good citizens of San Ramon documentation to support their statements. At what time did any of these three Councilmembers state that they were in favor of high-density housing. Let us not confuse this with low income housing which is a government requirement that all cities must abide by. In order to do this, you, the opposition, could provide us with copies of minutes from meetings, campaign slogans, quotes from speeches or interviews or whatever it takes to validate these acquisitions that you have published to the voting public. Additionally please tell us how this Council has misspent $2.3 million dollars in the ten months that they have been in office. Today in the Herald Mrs. Schinnerer lists a number of expenses that she feels this current Council majority is responsible for. I would like to go through a few of these to set the record straight. The $300,000 that was paid to Mr. Moniz was part of a contract that was written by the previous Council. This Council had no choice but to pay that amount of money to him. The firing of Turner Construction did not cost $1 million but rather cost $55,000 which can be verified at the City offices. Restarting the City Center at a cost of $224,000 is what is stated in the paper today. The new design team’s hourly rate is $130 an hour versus which was $180 and hour. Regarding the legal junkets and spouses meals, that trip was approved by Mr. Moniz and all the expenses incurred by that spouse were reimbursed to the City at 100%. I saw the expense report. I saw the check, a copy of the check. And you can too. It is in the City offices. Lets get all the facts straight before we write the editorials. The citizens of San Ramon need to know the real truth. This campaign against Measure H has nothing to do with saving money and has everything to do with personal vendettas and revenge. Please stop with your lies and made up statements and stick to the facts. This measure is going to save San Ramon a minimum of $50,000 each year and this is something that we cannot afford to let go by. Please support Measure H for it truly is, saving money. Thank you.

Rosalind Rogoff: And just to show that the committee against Measure H is not monolithic I am going to go against what Sam Lemon said and I am going to say something political. Everybody has been getting up and saying things in favor of Measure H. I would just like to say that if people want to know the reasons why the committee against Measure H is against Measure H you can go to our web site which is www.noonmeasureh.com and all of the reasons are up there. All of the people who are opposed to Measure H, well actually not all of the people, but a substantial list of people who are opposed to Measure H is on the web site. A lot of other reasons are on the web site. Some reasons that you may have seen are not on the web site. So you see what the Committee Against Measure H believes are the reasons why you should vote against Measure H. I have been waiting with baited breath, as has everyone else for the new San Ramon.info to appear. I have a link on it, I have had it for three weeks on the front page of the Observer. I finally had to say it was still under construction because it was under construction. It never, it was supposed to appear on the 24^th. I am quite sure that once www.newsan-ramon.info appears on the web they will have all of their reasons why all of our reasons are wrong. You have already heard a preview of that. So you can go to www.noonmeasureh which can also be reached as www.noontermextensions.com, either one will take you to the same web site, and you can see all of the reasons why we are against it and then if they ever open their web site you see all of their reasons too.

Karla Robinson: San Ramon residents please take note. We have a wonderful opportunity in November to express our opinions. The issue Measure H. Measure H is voting on whether to change San Ramon elections to even years which would coincide with other districts and cities in the area. There is no hidden agenda. This is common sense. Why reinvent the wheel. Our City Council wanted to give us, the voters, the right to make this decision since they knew it would extend the term of the Council. Therefore our City Council, in all honesty and integrity, has asked us, its citizens, to be the deciding vote. A rare commodity in this day and time of behind the scene politics. Please join me in voting yes on Measure H. This will save our city money in the long run and make it easier for its citizens and the voting process. I would also like to mention, I am the resident with the Pine Valley Middle School issue. This City Council did support me. They upheld my appeal and we are moving along, making a lot of progress in the last couple of weeks. I have lived in the City for 14 years. My property taxes have doubled in 14 years. If we can save money by doing this, I ask yes why this hasn’t happened in the past. Why now. I am for it because I want to save money. And I ask that you would vote too. Thank you.

Jim Blickenstaff: I just wanted to clarify a couple of things that are misleading out there. First of all I wanted to elaborate on the fact that my background was I was on the Council in the early 90s and I am Conservation Chair for the Mount Diablo Sierra Club. So with that kind of background in that regard I wanted to clarify a couple things that may be misleading. One of them is in terms of slow growth, what is slow growth and for is for it and who is against it. Recently it seems like some people are trying to reinvent themselves in terms of slow growth. Accusing, it is almost comical, accusing the people here that are very cautious about growth is kind of refreshing change of pace from what we have had in the last 15 years. Accusing them of trying to get into high density and all kinds of things that are just. Where did it come from. I don’t know. There are some absurd things out there that need to be clarified. And as a long-term resident of this community and being an active member in conservation I have become very familiar with the factions in the politics of the community. And I see the same faction, today against this City Council with a smear campaign and against Measure H, is basically the same faction that has been against me, trying to slow down growth and keep high-rise housing out of Bishop Ranch and so forth, from happening. Many of the same players that attacked me with brochures and so forth. So I don’t want anybody to have any doubts in terms of slow growth that this new majority on the City Council is the majority that is responsive to the citizens and slow growth and quite a refreshing change of pace in what I have seen in the past. And so it does offend me to see gross misleading statements about them in what consider a smear campaign just to deceive Measure H. Measure H is very simple and straightforward. The ballot booklet right there, if you would care to read more than 25 words, goes on to explain that it has a one term, one time one year term extension for all Councilmembers. That is not controversial. That is standard procedure. Cities from Walnut Creek to Danville and sewer districts, many other districts have done that automatically. It is only controversial if you are offended by the slow growth trying to rein in some things that have been happening in the past and you are against their programs for bringing more residents into the picture in terms of city politics and then some point it might be stepping on your toes. But it is not controversial as a standard practice with other districts. It is not controversial now in my mind, and it is a one time and as far as I know all other cities in this region and all the other districts in this region have done that as a matter of course. There is, and most of the time they don’t even let the voters decide on the issue. In terms of nit picking financial matters, phone bills, receipts that maybe some staff members of the Council, I mean not the Council but the staff of the City has allowed to go through, I look at that in the bigger picture, that it has not been brought up by the opponents of Measure H and just one example is Turner Construction or Turner Consultation, there is an estimate that if they were allowed to proceed at their rate of payment to them, the net difference between them and people we are going with now could have been as much as $3 million. So in essence to go down, what I thought is a dead end pass because of the fiasco in Milpitas with Turner Consulting, we didn’t want to repeat that. So in my mind this majority on the Council stopped the bleeding on Turner Consulting, got us on a fresh start with more public input and, ultimately, by doing this the right way could end up saving us $2 to $3 million. So you can nit pick little receipts from people on the Council if you want to but in long term monetary things I think $2 to $3 million is more important. And that is not even mentioning the tens of thousands we saved by getting out of a developer-sponsored lawsuit to get rid of the urban limit line in Tassajara Valley. So again they are looking out for the residents' interests in trying to rein in growth and Measure H is the right thing at the right time. In fact it should have happened 15 years ago but the other majority was interested in greater voter turnout or greater participation.

Nancy Thompson: Like many Americans, I am turned off by slick packaging of political campaigns. Great care and a lot of money can go into figuring out just what buttons to push to snag voters and all too often the merits of an issue get lost in a sea of well financed rhetoric. I am speaking out because I am offended by the misleading contents of a No on H flyer, this one the infamous quality of life flyer. I am disturbed by the negative political campaign that is being waged in San Ramon by the No on H supporters. Given the fact that the signers of this flyer organized a political action group last spring with the stated purpose of discrediting and unseating Nancy Tatarka, Donna Dickey and Jerry Cambra, I was not really surprised to see their names on the No on H flyer I found on my doorstep. I fully expected these so called citizens for San Ramon to morph to into the No on H Committee and indeed they have. Recently a friend told me she had participated in a telephone survey a month or so ago regarding key issues of concern among San Ramon voters. A survey which particularly focused on the City Council. I can’t help wondering if the results of that poll are the reason why a flock of dyed in the wool hard line pro growth politicians like Mary Lou Oliver, By Athan, Pat Boom, Dave Hudson, Curt Kinney, Diane Schinnerer and Herm Welm suddenly developed such a passionate interest in our qualify of life, high density, development and our traffic woes. I find it ironic that these same people, who maintained a pro growth strangle hold on the City Council for 20 years now have the audacity to circulate blaming the new slow growth majority for the very problems they themselves created. These are problems that Tatarka, Dickey and Cambra are working to fix. They certainly didn’t create them. All of these problems originated under the administrations of Oliver, Boom, Athan, Hudson, Kinney, Schinnerer and Welm. As to allegation that Tatarka, Dickey and Cambra are anti business, is voting to deny Alex Mehran his private use heliport at Bishop Ranch is anti business, so be it. It is the one and only time this Council has voted an issue relating to San Ramon business. And I applaud them for prioritizing the quality of life and concerns of the residents over the whim of wealthy and powerful developer. It takes a whole lot of money to run a campaign on the scale No on H has mounted. When one simple mailer can now cost thousands of dollars I have got to wonder, where is the money coming from. I don’t know. But I do know that developers traditionally have deep pockets and have never hesitated to fund campaigns they believe will benefit their agendas. I understand that Dennis Garrison, the owner of Club Sport, has subsidized the No on H phone banks. Caller ID is helpful sometimes. Mr. Garrison is not even a San Ramon resident but he sure does not hesitate to meddle in our politics and throw his money behind pro growth politicians. He has been doing it for years. San Ramon’s Measure H is simple and straightforward. It isn’t about traffic or development or business. It is about making the choice to convert to an even year election cycle by extending all Council terms for one year, one time only, so that San Ramon can save a minimum of $50,000 per election. Nothing sneaky or confusing about it. It is right there in our voter pamphlet. On Election Day, I hope San Ramon’s voters will see through the malarkey and join me in voting yes on Measure H.

Jim Monroe: I am here to speak about times past and time present. I would like to remind the assembled citizens here and the people watching at home about the times past of our City Council which from the time the City was incorporated in 1983, it was dominated by City Councils which are pro development. They never claimed themselves as such but the fact was they approved every major housing development that was brought before them with very little change. The major office park that was in our city, the Bishop Ranch, brought forth numerous proposals to vastly increase the height density of the offices that they wished to develop. All of which were in violation of the City’s General Plan. They needed variances which the City Council and the City Council Planning Commission granted without exception. I was a member of a neighborhood group, Vista San Ramon, we appealed several of these. We were always turned down by the City Council on appeal, even though it violated the General Plan. We were simply appealing the approval of variances. Past City Councils never listened to the neighbors when they came up whenever it involved a conflict with a developer. They would listen if it did not involve a conflict with someone who had a lot of money. But as soon as it came up to a conflict with someone who had a lot of money and was willing to fund their next campaign, provide campaign workers, provide money for phone banks, provide money for mailers, then it was always whatever the developers wanted and the neighborhood lost. Times present. Last November the voters of the City of San Ramon elected for the first time a majority of Council people who were slow growth, smart growth, whatever you want to call it. This was the first time we had gained control of the Council, those people who agreed with me and others in the City that the City should be run for the benefit of the residents and not for the business interests. We are not anti business. We all enjoy going out to the restaurants. We think it is wonderful that we have offices here that people can work in, everything. We just don’t want it to dominate things to the extend that it has in certain areas such as Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Walnut Creek, where they have turned the place into something that the residents never intended. We all moved here because we wanted to live in a nice residential community. We didn’t intend this place to turn into another Silicon Valley. I want to address a couple of things. There have been a lot of charges made against the City Council over the last few months, the current majority of the City Council. One of the major things is about Herb Moniz. People don’t think I should speak about this. But I want to talk about it. Herb Moniz, whether you like him or not, presided over a massive expansion of this City’s government and their staff. Now everybody is happy with the results. Everybody is liked the fact they got great city services. We have great city parks, things like that. That is true. But how many of you ever thought about how much it cost. Do you know that up until a couple of months ago we had eleven city department heads and a city clerk all of whom made more than 90,000 a year and most of them made over $100,000 a year and that was just basic salary. Their benefits amounted to about another 35 to 40% over that. Well what is wrong with that. Isn’t that necessary. No it is not. Did you know that Walnut Creek and Hayward who have twice the population that we do have half as many people in those positions at that rate. The City Council decided they needed to cut back. They wanted to conserve. So they needed to make a change. They made that change. The change was made and they have been crucified for it. They mistakenly agreed to a non disparagement clause which they feel doesn’t allow them to explain why they did what they did. I think they are mistaken. I think they should explain what they did. What they did was in response to a fiscal need of this city. And they have been cowed into to silence by this Grand Jury investigation, which I think is totally malarkey. It is a lot of baloney. They haven’t done anything wrong. I am as close to them as anybody. I know of nothing they have done that is illegal or improper or wrong. I have lots of other things I would like to say and I don’t think I will get them into the newspaper but I decided enough for tonight. I would like for you all to think about what I have said. Times past, time present. Lets keep the present.

Mayor Tatarka: Thank you for being respectful Jim. All right I have no more public comment cards. We are moving on to item 7. – Approval of Minutes for August 27, 2002.

Mayor Tatarka: I just want a quick question of Judy Macfarlane on August 27 minutes. If you could answer, it is a brief question. In reviewing them Judy I noticed there were a few situations where like some blank areas, like there was a word missing or something. If you just help me along. When I was reading it was a little bit hard to understand what was happening there.

City Clerk: The August 27 minutes are verbatim and there were times when I was not able to make out a word on the tape and then I would do . . . so that you know that I wasn’t skipping something intentionally.

Mayor Tatarka: I have some s but there is still a space.

City Clerk: If there are s I was not able to make out that word.

Mayor Tatarka: So that is the reason why we might blank space or so. I wanted to make it known to everyone that it was a little bit hard to follow. Any way thanks for doing that. We appreciate that.

Cm. Dickey: On page 37 at the very bottom, about seven lines up, the line that starts Diablo, the word like is left out. I would not like to see this risk happening here.

City Clerk: Excuse me Cm. Dickey would you repeat the location again.

Cm. Dickey: Yes, seven lines up where it says Diablo, on page 37. I believe I said I would not like to see this risk happening here.

Mayor Tatarka: Any other corrections or anything like that. I just wanted a clarification because I was reading this, there were a few words missing and I thought okay, just to get back to my thought. Thanks for doing the minutes that way Judy. That was very important. So do I hear a motion with the correction that Ms. Dickey said of the amendments.

Cm. Dickey’s motion to approve the August 27, 2002 minutes as amended was seconded by Vice Mayor Wilson and passed 5-0.

Mayor Tatarka: We are on to item 7.2, the minutes of October 8, 2002 meeting. Judy is trying to catch up here. Do I hear a motion for approval.

Cm. Dickey’s motion to approve the October 8, 2002 minutes was seconded by Vice Mayor Wilson and passed 4-0-1. (Cm. Cambra abstained – he was not present at the October 8 meeting).

Mayor Tatarka: We are moving on to the Consent Calendar. Does anyone want to remove any items from the Consent Calendar.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Item 8.2 just for clarification.

Mayor Tatarka: Is it a simple question Abram.

Vice Mayor Wilson: There are two, three.

Mayor Tatarka: A simple question. OKAY I think we can handle that right now. And that would be 8.2. So if everyone would turn to 8.2 quickly Abram has some questions that I think will be to Joye Fukuda.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Whose is the direct contact that Francisco & Associates would be responding to as far as staff.

Ms. Fukuda: There are two items of work, one is an on-going planning related function and to that particular task the contact is Phil Wong, Planning Services Manager. The second item which is relating more to the County Service Area assessment and the fiscal analysis associated with that, that contact is through both the City Manager and the Assistant City Manager.

Vice Mayor Wilson: The total amount is $100,000, of that $25,000 has been spent for this. The $75,000 that has been left has been allocated for this.

Ms. Fukuda: Yes

Vice Mayor Wilson: Is it in here that they are requesting there could be request for further financial costs for this.

Ms. Fukuda: We believe that this amount will carry Francisco & Associates through the end of the fiscal year. At which time thereafter the coordination function, the ongoing planning coordination function we will anticipate will be brought in house and done by City staff.

Cm. Dickey’s motion to approve the following Consent Calendar was seconded by Cm. Cambra and passed 5-0.

FINANCE
Register of Demands dated October 4, 13 and 20, 2002 in the amount of $451,059.47

RESOLUTION NO. 2002-115
Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Francisco & Associates for planning, engineering and financial services relating to the Dougherty Valley in an amount not to exceed $75,000

RESOLUTION NO. 2002-119
Authorizing the Mayor to execute Amendment No. 2 to the agreement with Parsons Brinckerhoff (formerly dba Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc.), for engineering design and construction support services for the Alcosta/I-680 Interchange Project (CIP 8144) in an amount not to exceed $235,344

INVESTMENT REPORT
Quarterly Investment Report – period ending September 30, 2002

RESOLUTION NO. 2002-112
Denying Land Use Permit (LUP-01-500-005; 2641 Camino Ramon), filed by Sunset Land Company, Bishop Ranch Heliport, 2641 Camino Ramon

* * * *

Vice Mayor Wilson: Madam Mayor could I request that because the 10.1 and 10.2 items are relatively in-house and items 10.3 and 10.4 are not, that we move 10.3 and 10.4 up in front of 10.1 and 10.2. It is all under Unfinished Business. It is just getting the residents out earlier.

Mayor Tatarka: So what you are asking is just to switch items 10.3 and 10.4 with 10.1 and 10.2 and then have a recess and do the public hearing.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Whatever way, just we do 10.3 and 10.4 and 10.1 and 10.2 later.

Cm. Cambra: Could we do the recess now. Is that possible.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka declared a recess.

All Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka: Cm. Wilson has requested that we move items 10.3 and 10.4 up before the public hearing and I want to get a consensus on the Council that we are going to do that.

It was the consensus to hear items 10.3 and 10.4.

Interim Public Services Director: The Assistant City Manager on September 24 brought this item to you. It included a very lengthy and detailed background report. I don’t intend to belabor that to much more. It is included in your staff report as Attachment A. What we have done since then, we have met on several occasions with CCI and at least one occasion with CCI and Joe Queirolo. Staff continues to recommend that we award the contract to Joe Queirolo for several reasons, 1) reasonable people can disagree and often do and to that end we have established a staff committee to mediate any concerns. We will meet first on a weekly basis and if that works out we will move to a monthly basis and so forth. That will get both parties together and allow the smooth operation of the gardens. If you do not intend to do that we have listed some alternatives and one is to direct staff to go ahead and take over the operation in regards to maintenance. We have a half person up there already so it wouldn’t much problem. I understand that is not a very popular option so we will go to option three which is reject the request for proposal. And you can do that if you find that there are substantial changes. If you want to make changes in the request for proposal you can reject it. Give us additional criteria and we will go out again with another RFP. And hopefully we will get a lot of respondents so we can move on with this project. You can’t reject it just because you don’t like it or because there is a conflict. There has to be a substantial change in it. So with that we will await your direction.

Mayor Tatarka: Alright lets see if there are any questions of you first sir. Are there any questions from the Council for Mr. Udell.

Mayor Tatarka: I have several speaker cards to this item. And beginning with the people from Crow Canyon Institute. Barbara Stout

Barbara Stott: I am the Program Manager and Interim Garden Manager for Crow Canyon Institute. My goal in speaking to you tonight is to illustrate how closely the programs and the maintenance of the gardens are linked together and why the maintenance contract and the program contract should be awarded to one contractor. Prior to that I would like to say that the Institute recognizes the city could take over programming of Crow Canyon Gardens if they wish. And of course you are at liberty to do that if you think that benefits the residents of San Ramon the best. All we are saying that if you do not award the maintenance contract to CCI, although we would be very willing to do programming we would not be able to do so because firstly the organization would not have adequate funds to operate and secondly the non profit group, Crow Canyon Institute, exists to support the gardens and carry on the vision of Virginia Mudd and Kerry Marshall. That was outlined in the articles of incorporation for Crow Canyon Institute which says "The purposes are to explore and implement ecological concepts within the context of a suburban community through education, provision of services to the community, scientific study and charitable programs. The Institutes main areas of concern are agriculture, energy conservation, and health. So we have no funds and no focus for the organization there is really no point to our organization remaining in existence. I would like to briefly outline the current programs. I know most of you already know what they are but I would just like to re-emphasize how these programs relate to the garden maintenance. We have school tours, 5000 children pass each year with their parents visit. The program is much more than simply providing an organic snack in the garden. It involves flexibility on part of the garden maintenance staff to spend time with the tour guides, to show them new things in the garden as the season progresses. The tour guides are to constantly communicate the educational ideas about the garden. They have to feel comfortable that they are part of the garden staff and that ideas and participation in the garden are encouraged. In addition the garden staff have maintained a worm bed and bean tunnel which have been a high light in the garden tours. We offer classes on organic gardening, garden crafts, cooking from the garden and many other subjects. Class instructors need to feel free to use the garden as a teaching tool such as an area of the garden to demonstrate a planting technique, demonstrate how to prune a tree. Craft instructors use natural item to create crafts and it would be difficult to imagine planning out how that could be accommodated far in future especially if classes have to be predetermined many months in advance for publication in the city program guide. We host an annual Spring Festival where plants are grown from seed and offered for sale. We need to be free to ask the maintenance contractor to provide plants that correlate to our speakers. These are things that become known as the planning process for the festival progresses. We need cooperation to provide produce for the lunch. As a big attraction to the festival is the garden and to provide. Often times the chefs only decide the menu close to the date of the festival so it would be impossible to predict what would be required far in advance. People come to the festival for many reasons but many people come expecting to speak to the gardening staff and find answers to their gardening questions. We need plant material for craft items which is sold in the crafts sale. Flexibility is required as the garden staff are asked to grow certain plants as ideas for crafts come up. It would be difficult to accommodate the dynamic of the Spring Festival if every idea involved a change in the maintenance contractors scope of work. The annual Fall Children’s Concert is another we have. Organic snacks are provided. While this event draws many children it is also a golden opportunity to reach parents. This year we added a produce stand to this event and it seems like a natural addition to any event we are arranging. Obviously this would involve an additional time commitment from the garden maintenance contractor. We publish a quarterly newsletter. Currently we expect the garden manager to provide information on what is growing in the garden, a calendar of garden activities and in addition the garden manager writes an articles that is integral to our mission to educate. If the garden staff do not work for CCI it would be hard to justify asking them to take on these extra activities. This summer we had a successful produce stand and produce was provided for sale twice a week. If we had a separate maintenance contractor we would have to come up with some very tight guidelines to make sure enough produce was available. A potential problem I foresee and one that we faced ourselves is what happens we run out of a harvested item such as tomatoes. Currently garden volunteers are free to go and harvest more tomatoes to satisfy the demands. If the garden was a separate entity they would not be free to do that. During our recent meeting with City staff and Joe Queirolo, Joe himself said that a produce would be something additional and he would have to think about that. We host a Children’s Nature Club called Valley Oaks. Again it would take a lot of forward planning if we have to ask permission every time the children go into the garden to harvest or do a nature activity. This summer we had many volunteers work in the garden. When people call to volunteer, they naturally want to work in the garden as this is what has attracted them to Crow Canyon Gardens. Sometimes they want to learn more, sometimes they just want to contribute something to the community and something they enjoy. Obviously it would be difficult for us to accommodate garden volunteers if we were not responsible for the gardens. It is difficult to envision future programs at every opportunity or program proposal has to be sanctioned by the maintenance contractor and it involved extra time to added onto the contract. When you are dealing with something dynamic as a living garden it is hard to predict and plan definitively. We have many future program ideas such as the internship with Diablo Valley College Horticulture Department. This would involve horticulture students working and learning in the garden along side garden staff. We are working with Annie of Annie Daniels for the next Spring Festival and we would like to have a planter border as part of her presentation. This would need a commitment on the part of the maintenance contractor to provide the garden space and to maintain it. We already have in place and in operation a produce subscriber program where individuals can sign up to get produce on a weekly basis. This would require close liaison with the garden maintenance contractor to find out what was available each week and to have it harvested at the appropriate time. It is also a time commitment that would be in addition to regular garden maintenance. We would like to expand our donation of excess produce to the Food Bank and other worthy causes such as cancer patients who are advised to eat organic produce but cannot afford to do so. This is something we could perhaps do in conjunction with the community gardeners if they had excess produce. We have many more ideas for programs such as the wild life habitat garden and developing a program and curriculum around that and demonstration gardens. The opportunities are endless that can educate and or involve the public and at the same time showcase San Ramon’s most unique park. Perhaps it could be worked out to constantly ask the maintenance contractor to accommodate programs. But I put to you it would be a cumbersome and costly exercise. The citizens of San Ramon paid nearly $1 million for the park, Crow Canyon Gardens, and I believe they deserve to have a great deal than a park solely dedicated to growing food for local restaurants. As one resident said to me recently "what would be the point of just having the gardens and nothing else". The only way programs can be successfully run at Crow Canyon Gardens is to have one contractor for both maintenance and programs. And I urge you to make a decision tonight that would accomplish that goal.

Betty Nostrand, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Crow Canyon Institute: And although I hate to do this, I will read it tonight because there is a lot to get in and I do want to stay in the time. I am here to urge the City Council to adopt alternative 3 on the City staff report for item 103. which states that you would reject the current request for proposals and we would hope that you would direct staff to restructure and renegotiate the current with Crow Canyon Institute that would cover both the programs and the maintenance done at the gardens. We have said for several years that we thought our contract needed to be renegotiated when it ran out last June. We were quite surprised when we were finally informed that there would be a request for proposals issued when there had never been one before. Up to that time we had had no criticism of the work being done at the gardens and thought that the contract would be renegotiated to reflect the actual worth of what was being done there. Increases in the contract since 1996 at 8% a year have been to just bring the contract amount to where it should have been in 1996 but the City did not have the funds at that time and could not fund it properly. I wonder if there are any other programs, salaries or contracts in this City that are still operating at 1996 levels. Barbara Stott has illustrated why we strongly feel that the programs and the maintenance of the gardens are so intertwined that must be done by the same contractor to be cost efficient for both the City and the contractor. If you have two separate contractors, whomever they might be, with no actual contractual arrangement between them, there must be some method of deciding who will settle disagreements about the use of the gardens especially if it involves more work for the maintenance contractor. Currently the City is proposing that there be weekly meetings between two members of the City staff, one from public services and one from community services, and a representative of CCI staff and the garden maintenance contractor to mediate any disputes. This seems a very costly solution. City staff is proposing that if CCI has an idea for a program that is deemed worthy but involves more work for the maintenance contractor then the contractor would have to have a change order and additional funding provided since the RFP bid did not include that particular work project. With a single contractor for both program and maintenance the City would not be involved on a weekly basis and probably would not be involved very often at all in working out programs for the gardens and this would save the City a lot of money and a lot of staff time. The City also proposes that in order to reduce the number of disputes during the year that a planting plan for the whole year be attached to the contract. Whose planting plan. That of the program operator or that of the maintenance contractor. The RFP already requires a general planting plan but that can not include any new ideas and changes that might come up. CCI cannot say right now what opportunities and ideas we might want to utilize the garden for that would include planting additional plants or using beds for different things. We hope to be gearing up soon for our Spring Festival and Barbara has enumerated how this would possibly include a lot more work for the maintenance contractor. CCI cannot include all the things that we would like now in either a program contract or as an add on to the maintenance contract. Therefore attaching a planning plan at this time to the maintenance contract will do nothing to eliminate the necessity of change orders in the contract during the year. CCI has continued to maintain the gardens on a month to month basis for the last six months and has in fact maintained them to a higher standard than they have been kept in the last several years. We have, in good faith, scheduled school tours and offered Fall classes with no contract of any kind for programs or even a written proposal for one from the City. We have met many times with City staff as requested concerning a program contact but have seen no result whatsoever of these meetings. In fact, the only result I have seen is that the budget figures which were written by me as a working so that we would have something in writing that was used in one of the meetings a couple of months ago now appears in your staff report just as I wrote with no further explanation. We are asking, the money we are asking we feel, you can see from those figures as an explanation, that we feel even what we are asking for the most is getting $85,000 worth of goods for $50,000. In conclusion again we encourage you to pick alternative 3 and instruct the staff to renegotiate the contract for both programs and maintenance with Crow Canyon Institute and we will be happy to answer any questions.

Mayor Tatarka: Betty, you are on the Board, is that correct.

Ms. Nostrand: Yes, President of the Board.

Mayor Tatarka: And how long have you been on the Board.

Ms. Nostrand: Probably about four years I guess.

Mayor Tatarka: Thank you very much. Trish Allred

Trish Allred: I am a gardener at Crow Canyon Gardens. I was hired in February of 2000. I have been named as gardener in both contract proposals. I worked close with Joe Queirolo for two years and in the last six months I have helped Barbara Stott manage the garden. I love my job and I enjoy the people I work with. I have grown to deeply love this little garden and the land around it. It is a uniquely beautiful of which I have the good fortune of being a care taker. I learned a tremendous amount about organic agriculture from Joe and I found him to be a gifted naturalist. However I feel it is important for me to describe his relationship with CCI as I observed it. Without making this personal I believe the information I will give to you plays an important part in deciding the future of Crow Canyon Gardens. I was not asked to do this. I just want to say and this is also very difficult for me because I care about all the people that are involved. I just want to make that clear. From the beginning of my appointment Joe made it clear to me that he was unhappy with CCI and with City staff. He felt that no one truly understood the uniqueness of the gardens. He spoke daily to me of his frustrations. He disagreed with many of CCI’s philosophies and visions for the gardens. To my knowledge he did not often express his views to the CCI Board or staff. It was difficult for Joe to communicate what his concerns and issues were. Mostly he expressed them to me outside of staff meetings or after Board meetings the following morning. Although Joe did not see it this way, I observed that CCI was very supportive of Joe and they were committed to having Joe as the garden manager for as long as he wanted to stay. He was completely autonomous as the garden manager and he made almost every decision that related to the garden maintenance. Over time however Joe allowed his discontent to grow and I watched the relationship between he and CCI staff deteriorate significantly. Last winter Joe informed me that he was meeting with Jim Estep and Jeff Gault to discuss the future of CCI. He told me he expressed to them his concerns and frustrations about CCI and discussed with them the possibility of pursuing the contract on his own. As my supervisor he asked me not to say anything to CCI about this meeting. I was put in an untenable position. Joe also told me on many occasions that he had no desire to work for CCI in the future. By the time the RFP meeting rolled around he led me to believe he was committed to pursuing the contract on his own. He discussed his contract proposal with me and asked if I wanted to work for him. He was subsequently fired for soliciting business from CCI’s only client. I do not believe that Joe, or anyone after being fired, is realistically going to come back to work with no animosity of any kind. Joe actively pursued an alternative way to separate himself from CCI. To manage the gardens on his own. Which I believe makes him an undesirable candidate for a healthy future working relationship. I can not stress enough that in having helped manage this garden in the last six months, it is essential for CCI in running the programs to have a healthy working relationship with the garden manager. Planning, planting and maintaining the gardens is directly linked and interconnected to the educational programs and all the special events. We confer every day about what we are going to do. This is how Crow Canyon Gardens are truly unique. It is not just a garden, it is a community learning center with great potential for even more educational growth and community participation. If you separate the maintenance from the programs you would diminish the ability to work together to develop new programs or events such plant sales and seasonal events. The contract who maintains the gardens would ultimately make those decisions based on how much time and labor he has to offer. CCI would have the ability to add extra helpers through volunteering or temporary hired help resources to make this happen. If the maintenance contractor is not motivated to participate he will not be obligated or compelled to participate especially if he is already predisposed to his own agenda. CCI’s contract was created with growth in mind and a desire to include and involve the community in the experience of the garden as much as possible and not just maintain the gardens. It is time to view Crow Canyon Gardens as a unique public park with unique circumstances and to create a contract proposal that fits these special needs. Thank you for your time.

Mayor Tatarka: I am going to try and pronounce this name, Dorthe Desvernine.

Dorthe Desvernine: I am here on behalf of Crow Canyon Institute. What I am going to read I sent on September 27 to the City Councilmembers. To whom it may concern. I am a San Ramon resident and have been following what is happening at Crow Canyon Gardens. What finally caused me to write was the article in the Contra Costa Times about the last City Council meeting. I have been very unhappy to hear about all the corruption, lack of integrity and unethical in the big corporations like Enron and World Com. But I felt untouched by it because it did not affect me at all. Now I am worried that the same issues could hit San Ramon. I could not believe what I read in the paper. There is a man named Joe Q, I don’t the last name, who went behind his employers back and bid on the maintenance contract for Crow Canyon Gardens. He had knowledge of what Crow Canyon Institute would bid. He under bid them. He subsequently and rightly so got fired from his job. My question is why is the City Council giving this man the time of day. Here is a man who obviously has no integrity and I personally do not know him at all. I just know what I read in the paper and heard. He does the unethical and under bids his own employer and the City of San Ramon supports this behavior. I am very upset that we are doing right here in a small town what we judge on a big scale with the large corporations. We support corruption and unethical behavior. The Council is considering this man run public land. I hope not. We have enjoyed the benefits of Crow Canyon Gardens. My two children have taken tours there. I buy organic produce at the produce stand. I buy plants at the yearly plant sale and I just signed up to be a docent. I believe that public land is there for the good of the community. Crow Canyon Institute does a great job facilitating that. From what I understand is that if Joe takes over the tours will stop, the produce stand stop, the classes and the plant sale will stop. That is just not right. What good is an organic garden if we the residents of San Ramon don’t reap the benefits of it. I also found out that Joe does not receive unemployment as ruled by a California judge. According to the judge, Joe did damage to his employer by bidding against them behind their backs. Does a ruling like that mean nothing to the leaders of our community. Some City Councilmembers want to give this man a contract to take care of a valuable part of San Ramon when a judge will not even give him unemployment realizing this man did something wrong. I hope you take the time and reconsider what you are doing. I will continue to follow this closely. I have been talking to neighbors and friends about this issue. If you choose to put a man like Joe in charge of Crow Canyon Gardens I can promise you that you will not receive our vote on the next election. Please lets stand up for ethical business practices, honesty and integrity. After I wrote this letter to the Councilmembers I received a phone call from one of them advising me that the programs would continue even if Joe gets the contract. Since I sent this letter I have become a tour guide and part time gardener at the gardens. The one thing I have learned is that you can not separate the programs from the maintenance contract. They are so closely connected that I believe that it would be virtually impossible to run them separately. Thank you.

Linda Wilgus: I am here tonight on behalf of Crow Canyon Institute. I serve as the Executive Director. I wanted to comment on two issues this evening. The first is on the meeting that is referenced in your staff report that was held last Tuesday, a week ago today, with City staff. I think that meeting stands as an excellent example of why the proposed mediation by City staff between a garden contractor and a program contractor will not work. We were there for an hour and a half. We came at City staff’s request. We were repeatedly asked to give City staff language to put into the contract, when our position was that it could not be worked out. Basically our position was, you have two separate contracts. Neither of the contractors in each contract is a party to the same contract, so there is no connection between the two of them. If we have the program contract and someone else has the maintenance contract we would have no ability to enforce anything in the maintenance contract. Neither would the maintenance contractor have any ability to enforce anything in the program contract. So as a proposed solution to this, the City staff proposed what Ms. Nostrand already discussed which was this mediation process. We were there an hour and one half the other day and couldn’t arrive at language to put in the contract. And then were shocked to find that what started out as notes of the meeting erroneously reprinted in the staff report as if they were some kind of petitions that CCI had made to staff and staff had responded to them. And I wanted to make certain that you knew that was not the case. My primary reason in speaking tonight is that after the last meeting, I beg your pardon, Council meeting, at the beginning there was discussion about the RFP. And it was mentioned that some people had not read the RFP. So even though it was difficult to stay awake, I sat down and read it again. And then I read both of the proposals that were submitted and the response to it. And Mr. Udell mentioned that the Council was not free to throw out a proposal, that you could choose a new process. I think there is a circumstance under which you could throw it out and that is if the bidder is non compliant with the proposal. That was brought to us quite pointedly in the Finance Committee when it was erroneously assumed that our proposal contained, we were asking for money for programs, which we were not. It is a strict maintenance proposal. But in going through and reading the proposals and looking at them closely I noticed some things about Mr. Queirolo's proposal. The most shocking was that his proposal was non compliant in that it did not provide to pay the prevailing rate wages. You have before you the materials that I submitted and attached to them are documentation of the points that I am raising. But he proposed a total bid price of $72,000. He proposed that he would be as the contractor, the manager and also work in the gardens and he would pay one 20 hour a week gardener and one 10 hour a week gardener. If you work that out at a prevailing wage of $10 an hour for the gardeners and $26 an hour, which is a fairly low rate for a maintenance supervisor, and you apply the necessary payroll expenses to that, you come up with a total just for payroll in Mr. Queirolo’s proposal of $85,529.37. Now you might argue that he is going to work as an independent contractor or sole proprietor, but he can’t do that. We were required to submit that information as if we were paying a garden manager. So if Mr. Queirolo was allowed to get around the prevailing wage rate then it is not fair to the other bidders who were required to put in that information. My point in making this clear to you is not that you should take action against Mr. Queirolo, against City staff. It is to point out how carelessly this RFP process has been handled. I really question whether anybody read the RFP and then read the proposals. Thank you for your time. .

Del Nagel: Mayor and members of the Council. I guess we determined legally you don’t have to tell where but I will because I am a resident of San Ramon. The fee for community garden plots at Crow Canyon Gardens increased from $30 to $50 this season. When we asked where the funds are going, the usual non answer is "Every year Crow Canyon Institute loses money on the community gardens". When I have asked about green waste containers, the early response was how many do you want. And over the summer what was said in meetings did not always appear in the minutes. But when we listened to the tapes you will find that there was a change in the rules. The waste containers were for everyone, then they were only for those who were physically unable to get the container at the other end of the park. And then now the containers have of course been removed. While we know who took them we have not received an answer as to who ordered their removal. Now we are being told that Crow Canyon Institute will provide carts in lieu of the green waste containers which used to be handy by the preschool. Yet the one large cart that is ergonomically suitable and available to community gardeners needs repairs to the hoses and the faucets in spite of our requests. And the new cart that has been provided is the size of a toy for a few serious gardeners and not suitable for the garden terrain. And apparently someone in the inner gardens has been taking their green waste to the proper disposal site. Green waste is being tossed over the bank of the creek. Fish and Game and the Water Quality Board are investigating. Over 25 years ago we took our children to this beautiful setting. We saw Western Bluebirds, California Quayle, Mallards. Virginia Mudd’s concept began as an educational tool. In my opinion it has become a source of regional revenue as 5000 children trample this park. The Institute was given a grant for composting. We have huge piles of plant material sit at this park. The beautiful bluebirds have replaced by crows and blacks. Any reference to income from CCI’s sale of produce is misleading. This season the food bank has received only a few hundred pounds of produce while we see former employees of CCI and others harvesting bags of produce and taking them away from the inner gardens. The official publication of CCI dated Fall 2002, page three, advocates a new concept in watering, three to five minutes sprinkling daily. Actually they use oscillating sprinklers which according to EBMUD water conservation representative is wasteful and inefficient and actually encourages disease. As someone who works in the animal healthcare industry I have a concern about Kiwi, the hard working kitty cat over there. Is Kiwi properly vaccinated and on parasite control. Since 5000 children are exposed possibly to this cat. Due to our frustration with CCI and lack of communication with their executive secretary and community garden coordinator, whatever you decide tonight, the community gardeners respectfully request that all future fees be paid to the City of San Ramon and that we report to the City. I have some information for the Councilmembers. Thank you.

Carol Rowley: I remember when we first moved 32 years ago, walking around and looking at the wonderful gardens and everything that we have in our city. And I had an opportunity with Becky Davies who actually was one of the organizers of the school tours and she was a staff member and also Joe Queirolo. This was before CCI even existed. And they had a wonderful vision and talked to me as an educator. "What do you think about having tours for kids at Crow Canyon Gardens" and we just thought it would be a wonderful idea. And so this is a wonderful example of City staff and a gardener working together trying to envision what could happen to this wonderful spot. And I think there is still a possibility of this. I think the City will always be involved in this. The City has a heavy investment for the citizens and the future of our children to provide a natural setting to have children enjoy gardening, to down to that beautiful creek side. And what better arrangement than to have a master gardener work with the City in a cooperative way to make this happen. Thank you.

Mary Ann Garewal: I am here tonight to speak in support of Joe and kind of express some of the concerns I’ve had as an ex community gardener. I now garden at the Senior Center instead at the San Ramon Community Gardens for a lot of reasons. In 1993 I actually started working very closely with Joe and we set up the community garden project. Somebody else had started it actually but she went to work full time and my husband and I moved in and really worked very closely with Joe in setting up the community garden project. And we worked very closely with Joe and with the City to do this. Initially the area allocated was only the area where you first drive in and we had a lot of people on our waiting list and Joe worked with Jeff Eorio and myself and we met and we expanded. Jeff approved the expansion of the community gardens. There was no water down at that end so I set up a volunteer work committee and worked with Joe on that and CCI provided the funds and I rented a trencher and we did a lot of volunteer work and Joe worked with us on that. And we dug the trenches and he eventually laid all the pipes and made the faucets and closed the trenches. He was very supportive of the whole community garden effort. At the time CCI was providing for the community gardens, the basic things we needed. There some tools, hoses and nozzles and the use of a tiller and carts, manure, wood chips and all. He was a great team player. Joe and I worked very closely that whole first summer and when I needed things done he did it. I wrote a newsletter I sent out about every six weeks. I copied that and sent it off to the gardeners and that was all financed by CCI. We didn’t spend a fortune but Joe managed to find money to support the community gardens and we were very grateful for that. We ended the year with a big bang. We had a big pot luck and had entertainment and activities and everything for the kids that fall, door prizes and Joe was there as a supporter for us there and it was a real community and CCI kind of effort, the community garden was. Particularly that first year. And my circumstances changed and I could no longer manage the gardens but I stayed on as a gardener. But it continued over the years, I continued to get more and more frustrated with how it was being managed and we weren’t relating to Joe any more because he was not in charge of CCI. It seemed that rules were not being enforced, plots even though they were supposed to be rented, they were being worked. There will still people on the waiting list. Tools were broken and not being replaced. The cart access was limited. Weeds proliferated and spread to other plots. It was very frustrating. There wasn’t enough manure or chips and on and on. Paths were very uneven in many areas. The wheelbarrow could be hard to get through and it was very hard for anybody to walk that had some balance problems. The gates got locked so that we couldn’t drive down to the other end. It made it so I had to walk. Eventually a new cart was purchased for the community garden and my husband and I spent three hours putting it together. It was a wonderful big cart but not long after that that cart disappeared and replaced by one of the old CCI carts that often had flat tires and was very hard to maneuver. The whole thing seems to be getting very political and my husband and I finally decided to pursue gardening at the senior center instead because there, there is a good supply of appropriate tools and seeds and fertilizer and group plots for things like zucchini so that everybody does not grow tons of their own and there are fruit trees. The paths are easier to walk on and the garden is fenced so there is not a big problem with theft. In November I had given CCI notice that I would no longer be gardening there and we did what we were supposed to do to clean it up and we had to wait until March to get my deposit back. I have some real concerns about what is happening to the whole CCI community garden project. It is just a small part of CCI but I really think that when we were working with Joe we really had a much better working relationship and I hope that that can happen again. Thank you.

Jamie Pascator: I didn’t come prepared to say anything tonight but based on some of the reactions that I have heard from everybody I feel compelled to put in my own two cents. Part of the reason that I moved to San Ramon when I moved to San Ramon was primarily because of the community garden. It is located right next to where I live. I am a teacher and the 5000 children trampling the garden, that whole concept kind of breaks my heart because what I have seen is truly wonderful things going on in this garden. I take my son there. He hugs me in the garden and he is exposed to things that he wouldn’t have been exposed to if that garden wasn’t there and he wasn’t allowed to see that. We have children who are home schooled who work the produce stand. As you were saying the 5000 students going there and learning about what it is like to work in a garden. We live in silicon valley. The emphasis is frequently on the computer. It is on science and a different route. This is a wonderful opportunity for our children to be exposed to what a garden really is. What I really want to say is that the community garden is not a part of the maintenance contract but one of the things that needs to be taken into consideration I think has been said very clearly tonight. Is that it is a symbiotic relationship. You can’t separate one from the other. They go hand in hand. This are a lot of people here to support CCI and the one thing that I would like is for those of you who are here tonight to raise your hands so that the individuals can who is behind you. There are a lot of us that support the community gardens. It is a wonderful place. Go and look at it. See what is going on there. See the interaction with the children and the people. I worked there in the summer. I worked at the produce stand. It is a place that is home away from home. If you are looking for a sense of community. It is there. It is there because of the women who run it at this particular point in time. Thank you.

Mayor Tatarka: I do have other speaker cards. It says please read. "I am a member of the Crow Canyon Institute Board, a community gardener at Crow Canyon Gardens and a San Ramon resident. As I work at night, I cannot attend tonight’s City Council meeting. I am writing to you to tell you that I support Crow Canyon Institute in its bid to offer maintenance and programs at Crow Canyon Gardens. I support the request that the RFP be thrown out and a new contract for both maintenance and programs be negotiated". Claire Conger

Mayor Tatarka: I do have some emails that I received that I will briefly read. "I am a San Ramon resident and have been a community gardener for the last three years. I enjoy the various programs given and have taken some classes at the gardens. I also have also volunteered for the May Festival and have listened to the public comment and how they have enjoyed coming each year. I am writing to support Crow Canyon Institute and hope they continue to manage the community gardens at Crow Canyon Gardens". Daren Bahowski.

Mayor Tatarka: "Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers, I am a San Ramon City resident and avid supporter of Crow Canyon Gardens. Soon after I moved here five years ago I took a plot at the community gardens. This has been a wonderful experience for my family. My two children take great pride in not only the garden but the nature area as well, showing all their friends and classmates. My youngest daughter participated in the Valley Oaks Club. I also worked as a tour guide for the school tours for three years. The students, teachers and parents who participate in these educational programs love the gardens with a greater understanding of how plants grow and appreciation of the ecological relationships all around us. I am sure you are aware that these tools are in high demand and reach over 5000 students a year. All of these experiences have proven to me that while a strong organic maintenance program at the gardens will provide San Ramon with a beautiful garden. Only creative and thoughtful programming will truly allow these gardens to carry out the mission of education. Indeed Crow Canyon Gardens can be showcase for San Ramon limited only by the vision of its stewards. For example internship, work study positions for our youth, coordination of programming with the upcoming children’s museum and a resource center for school gardens are all possibilities. I urge you to consider the importance of the programming aspect of Crow Canyon Gardens when making a decision Tuesday night. It should be an integral component in any proposal you consider". Pat Graves

Mayor Tatarka: "My family and I have found the community gardens program available at the Crow Canyon Gardens very enjoyable especially for our 3-1/2 year old son Ethan. We visited the gardens, which he calls apples because of all the apple trees there, with him since he was an infant. It has been one of the favorite places to go as we live within walking distance from there and have for over ten years. Now he attends preschool there as well as my wife and he is volunteering to help maintain the gardens and help with the vegetable stand. He helps pick up fallen apples for the compost bin and helps pick berries and other vegetables and gains significantly in his development from being involved in the activities acts and caring for one of his favorite places. Resolution No. 2002-98 is on the agenda for Tuesday. October 22 for awarding of the contract of the maintenance of the gardens. It is recommended by City staff to award the contract to a new vendor Joe Queirolo. Maintenance is currently provided by Crow Canyon Institute and loss of this contract will likely put them out of business. CCI is not just a business but a part of the community. It would be a significant loss to the residents of San Ramon and the programs it supplies were to cease. While I certainly don’t know the details involved my understanding that the maintenance contract is based primarily on the cost of maintenance services without consideration to the value of community services provided by CCI. Financial decisions of this kind by all people create an on going and wide spread problem forcing independent book sellers, local hardware stores, local drug stores and other individual retail outlets out of business in favor of discount chains which lack the character, product variety and community involvement as their individually owned counterparts. While both vendors in this case are small this is none the less a case where the City of San Ramon can make a decision for community rather than discount pricing. While I know nothing of the business of the new vendor Joe Queirolo, if he had not been in business for at least several years before performing similar work I would question the wisdom of granting the contract. Nine of ten small businesses fail in the first. It would certainly be an unnecessary loss if CCI were to cease due to the decision only to have Mr. Queirolo do so also after one or two years or more likely by need to raise his rates which would have negated the decision that CCI in the first place. This is an all too often played out scenario. I encourage the City Council to award the maintenance contract to CCI to liability or at least find some other revenue that ensured that these valuable community services are not lost". George, Lynn and Ethan Shaw

Mayor Tatarka: Your Crow Canyon Gardens is a real treasure. It has natural beauty and educational service to many children and adults from well outside your city. I am sure that the funding is a serious concern for you, especially in these difficult times. I would like to call to your attention the example of CCG is well on the way to emulating the gardens at Heather Farms, TGAHF, in Walnut Creek. TGAHF is a self contained non profit that was founded more than 25 years ago on city land with some city financing. I was on the Board five years ago but I can not now give you a dollar versus time. They have become a mostly self sustaining beauty spot that attracts tourists and residents alike to a beautiful restful garden. TGAHF has a very active collection of volunteers from Walnut Creek and many near by communities. They create many educational money making opportunities to support their organization and several full time gardeners. They have classes for school children, adults and seniors. They have fund raising several times a year and their building is rented out every summer weekend for three or four weddings. This whole operation started with a few dedicated volunteers and progressed to hundreds of volunteers and six to ten paid staff. You would do well to investigate this model for Crow Canyon Gardens. But you really have the model for your leaders of this operation in Crow Canyon Foundation, a group of eager volunteers from San Ramon and near by communities. Your maintenance contract with them is starting them out much as was done in Walnut Creek. Three members of the Board that I know are very dynamic people, past and current presidents of the Livermore Amador Valley Garden Club in whom you should have the greatest confidence. They have brought many of us into the Foundation because it is such a regional gem. I am sure that you could do no better than to renew their maintenance contract Tuesday". Dave Oakley, Pleasanton resident

Mayor Tatarka: I have one more. "Mayor Tatarka, I hope you will consider awarding the maintenance contract for Crow Canyon Gardens to Crow Canyon Institute. They perform an invaluable service to the community through programs they sponsor such as the garden tours for school children and the open house in the spring". Norma Vass, Livermore

Mayor Tatarka: I don’t have any more emails or speaker cards to this issue. It is before the Council.

Cm. Dickey: I just have a couple of questions. When I took a tour there yesterday Mr. Randall there was an area that was iffy whether this was going to be covered under the contract. I would have hoped to have some delineation where what we were dealing with. Are we dealing just with the area behind Mudd’s, that small garden there.

Mr. Randall: Let me turn that over to Mr. Estep who is much more intimately involved in this than I.

Jim Estep: Yes, this maintenance contract covers only the organic demonstration garden area which is directly behind Mudd’s restaurant.

Cm. Dickey: I may be wrong but there was a portion in the center out from the preschool. And I don’t know under whose purview that would be.

Mr. Estep: The delineator is the demonstration garden versus the remainder of the area which would include the community gardens. So anything that is part of the demonstration garden which I can’t probably explain that to you very well but other than there is a difference. The community gardeners really know which is the community garden and that is the defining line between the two.

Cm. Dickey: Could I ask you something about the RFP procedure and how that was accomplished. Was it just offered to Mr. Queirolo and Crow Canyon Institute. Did it go out as we usually do with by ad and so forth.

Mr. Estep: Yes it went out by ad as opposed to.

Cm. Dickey: You had no other respondents.

Mr. Estep: No. We used the same procedure we use for all our others.

Cm. Dickey: For all the others, okay. I would kind of like to have an idea of the area that we are. I wish I had a more visual idea of what we are dealing with. Because it seems to extend out a little more from my visit there. The area, it is in question anyway for me.

Mr. Estep: It is hard to explain verbally.

Mayor Tatarka: Questions of staff. I am sorry comments instead of questions. I know you have been sitting there with the light, that is why I am looking at you.

Vice Mayor Wilson: The only person that has not been up. But I want to ask a couple of questions to Joe. Come up to the stand please.

Vice Mayor Wilson: How long have you been associated with CCI or the gardens.

Mr. Queirolo: I started working there in March of 1983. So 19 years.

Vice Mayor Wilson: So before then, Virginia Mudd and Kerry Marshall, what do you know about them.

Mr. Queirolo: That is what attracted me to the place in the first place.

Vice Mayor Wilson: So you worked in this garden for how long, officially and unofficially.

Mr. Queirolo: Well I took a couple of years off, probably 15 years all together, 17 years.

Vice Mayor Wilson: So you are not just a new person coming in to this venture. What has been your relationship with CCI, the past and the present.

Mr. Queirolo: Well, CCI was, when I came back from the, I moved to the foothills for a couple of years and tried to establish a garden up there and I moved back and went to work for Crow Canyon Institute. While I was gone the sale had taken place. So I came back to work and Kerry offered me a job in the garden and I, within a short time he made me the garden manager. And so I just kept doing that. In 1993, I think it was, the City gave us the programs, until then there really wasn’t much to do. And I was the Executive Director of Crow Canyon Institute too at the time, trying to do both jobs. And a finding that kind of difficult. Eventually I decided I had better just stick with gardening and we went out and sought an executive director to do that part of it.

Vice Mayor Wilson: So the programs that we are talking about, that we have been lauded with nationally and internationally, you were the genesis with others that started with like the tours and the garden itself, the structure of the garden and how it was maintained.

Mr. Queirolo: Well the City actually started all those programs and they were very small and when we had the financial problem and we cut back our funding a little bit and return they offered us these programs and the tours, the community garden and the classes and the naturalist, Becky Davies, came along with it. So she got them going, like Mary Ann was saying, we got those programs up and going. And in a few years they were really thriving.

Vice Mayor Wilson: So to make it clear the City was the genesis of this, correct. The City started the tours.

Mr. Queirolo: Yes.

Vice Mayor Wilson: The City cared about enough about these gardens to purchase it and then through the people who were working in the gardens saw a vision. So this really wasn’t CC&I.

Mr. Queirolo: No, no we just were there. Kerry explained to me that Crow Canyon Institute was just a convenient way of getting the maintenance done. Because before that it had just been, originally we just did some classes, we had like macramé classes and things like that and there wasn’t much for Crow Canyon Institute to do. I guess the biggest thing we used to do was the Summer Nature Day Camp which Kerry handed over to the City at some point and so that left Crow Canyon Institute with really nothing to do until this contract. The original maintenance contract was drawn up.

Mayor Tatarka: Are there any other comments that you would like to make. You didn’t turn in a speaker card and so I will give you the opportunity to speak.

Mr. Queirolo: No I really

Vice Mayor Wilson: One other question.

Mayor Tatarka: okay go ahead Abram, one more question and then you can allow him to speak.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Why was the relationship.. Has it always been butting heads together. And do you feel that you can work with CCI to bond together and it is very important that the two entities work together.

Mr. Queirolo: You know it hasn’t always been that way. Since over the last few years it seems like certain people have come to the Board of Directors who may have had different agendas. There were a lot of communication problems like Trish was talking about. I didn’t know what was going on and people didn’t talk to me. It is along story but I would like to put that all in the past in any case and look forward to the future. I have made it clear to anybody who has asked that I am more than willing to cooperate in whatever way the City wants me to. I would be working for the City and however you want to structure that cooperation I am willing to do that.

Vice Mayor Wilson: What was your past relationship with, I have forgotten her last name, Teresa who was the former Director of CCI.

Mr. Queirolo: Teresa when she came on, she was, a lot of us who had been working there for a long time were skeptical that she was going to work out. Even Barbara Stott, I can remember talking to her about it, that we were all nervous that you know, that Teresa was a real gung ho and we were kind of laid back people and you know, we kind of butted heads for a few months and worked it out. We had some real heart to heart talks and eventually we ended up working really well together. We did a lot of good things. The morale went up. We had a lot of creative, enthusiastic people on the staff and it was really a good place to work.

Mayor Tatarka: Is that all

Vice Mayor Wilson: If I have the opportunity to call him back.

Cm. Dickey: He will enjoy that.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Thank you madam mayor.

Mayor Tatarka: Mr. Queirolo will you fill out a speaker card and you have the podium right now would you like to make any other comments.

Mr. Queirolo: No I don’t. I really don’t have anything to add to what I have said.

Mayor Tatarka: Please fill out a speaker card, the cards are in the back.

Mayor Tatarka: Council is up here deciding the issue so I would like to see any other comments please. Dave do you have any comments.

Cm. Hudson: No

Vice Mayor Wilson: I guess I am the only one.

Mayor Tatarka: Right, no hold on. I see one light. I need to see lights please. Mr. Wilson

Vice Mayor Wilson: I would like to have Ms. Wilgus return. Thank you and I want to thank you because we have worked together for many years.

Ms. Wilgus: That is correct.

Vice Mayor Wilson: How long have you been associated with CCI.

Ms. Wilgus: I believe since 1994.

Vice Mayor Wilson: And director.

Ms. Wilgus: I was on the Board of Directors, yes at that time.

Vice Mayor Wilson: And in the leadership role as Director.

Ms. Wilgus: I was Executive Director I believe that was in the spring of 1998.

Vice Mayor Wilson: One thing that has concerned me as I, before and now as we receive communications from different residents. And maybe you can shed some light on this. Why have some residents felt that tours would stop, gardens would be torn up, that the City would not continue quality programs if the maintenance contract was not awarded to CCI.

Ms. Wilgus: You would have to ask them that, I don’t know. I know why I think they wouldn’t but I don’t know why the people that have written you think that.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Please expound:

Ms. Wilgus: Well the reason that CCI believes we will not be able to continue to do that is that we can’t afford to do it.

Vice Mayor Wilson: No not CCI but the programs themselves, lets separate CCI from the programs themselves.

Ms. Wilgus: I don’t think I understand your question.

Vice Mayor Wilson: The quality of the programs, like the tours would stop. I keep hearing from people the tours would stop, the organic gardens we would spray pesticides over it. All these things, residents have come before this Council and stood right there and I just want to clarify that none of that came from CCI.

Ms. Wilgus: Absolutely none of it came from CCI. All we have done is ask people who support us to convey their views, whatever they may be, to the City Council. And as a matter of fact this week a few community gardens came in to the, I guess in the last week, came into our offices because they had been contacted by other community gardeners to come and speak tonight. And one of them said to me, what was he supposed to come and speak about. And I said well I don’t really know because the community garden isn’t part of the maintenance contract and what is going to be covered at the Council meeting is the award of the maintenance contract. And I said but basically the issue is whether Joe Queirolo will be awarded the maintenance contract or CCI is asking the Council to start over again with the RFP process. So you know I went overboard, here was someone who I think who had been asked to come and speak against us and I tried to clarify for him what he … Also as long as I am up here I can tell you what the scope of the garden is if you want to know that. It goes from Mudd’s, from the walkway that goes down from Mudd’s to where the staircase used to be going down into the gardens, out to through the field gardens. When you visited you probably saw the row of apple trees and then we have broccoli planted and we have peppers and then there is a gap where there is some more apple trees and a fig tree and that is opposite the Little Wanderer's Room and the green house and then there another field that has egg plants and tomatoes and used to have pumpkins and then you come up to the community garden. That is the demonstration garden and there is also a section that goes around the front, partly on clay and partly on boardwalk that has always been maintained as part of the Crow Canyon Gardens maintenance contract. My understanding was that the change in the scope of the contract this year was to eliminate mowing the weeds in the far end of the upper level of the park. That is essentially the change.

Cm. Dickey: So if I may clarify. You are saying and I am going to be very visual now because I remember the purple petunias.

Ms. Wilgus: Right, up to the purple petunias.

Cm. Dickey: Oh it is up to the purple petunias.

Ms. Wilgus: Yes and then a little bit in front where that fuyu persimmon and the pomegranate, where we had to rescue the pomegranates from a thief this afternoon but that is another story. And around, there are a couple of pear trees around. And Crow Canyon the maintenance contract has traditionally covered those areas and my understanding that the City was offering to take over the mowing of the weeds from the community garden and beyond.

Vice Mayor Wilson: I have a question that concerned the.. CCI in the past has been able to work with Joe, why don’t you feel the present board can work with Joe.

Ms. Wilgus: Well I have to take exception to your statement. One of my jobs when I became executive director. Teresa left and, for a variety of reasons, and at that time she was making the "princessly" salary of $900 a month. So three of us took on her jobs. We divided them up. And I took on the job that was interfacing with the City and the Board and for that I got $500 a month. And one of my big jobs was running interference between Joe and the City and the Board. And there were many board members at that time who had difficulty. We have all felt that Joe made a tremendous commitment to the gardens and the current board would have kept Joe as their garden manager for as long as he wanted to be there. I would like to make clear that the bad feelings were on Joe’s side not ours. We were not prepared to ask him to leave. In fact we were going to make the bid that we made which have gotten him considerably more in salary then he was making and he had always communicated to us in the strongest possible terms that salaries for the gardeners were his priority. So the cost of our bid is in large part due to wanting to pay our gardeners a better salary and to have a more garden staff so that the garden manager wouldn’t have to be there working over time and doing extra jobs. So I don’t think it is true that this board has a different relationship with him than past boards did. As a former board member and as the person who took over relating to the board, I can honestly say there has been no change. Some of our core board members have been one for as long as the old board was on. They came on when Teresa did and so did I..

Vice Mayor Wilson: I am sure Teresa and I spoke about this. It took three members of the board to do her one job that she was doing. She was very proud of that.

Ms. Wilgus: Yes, she should be. And she had two children at the time.

Vice Mayor Wilson: And quite pregnant with the other one.

Vice Mayor Wilson: When you submitted your bid how did you come to those numbers. How did you decide that. Where did you get the figures from.

Ms. Wilgus: We included it in our bid proposal. We broke down what our bid was in our proposal. And we increased garden staff and we paid them. We didn’t know until we entered into this process that we were supposed to be paying a prevailing wage. And so we immediately since we took over more hands on in managing the garden we currently pay our gardeners a prevailing wage. And we based, what we did was we took from a year ago we got a schedule of City salaries for various positions.

Vice Mayor Wilson: How did you obtain that.

Ms. Wilgus: Oh one of our board members got it from the City offices.

Vice Mayor Wilson: So they just called and gave their name.

Ms. Wilgus: No they went in and they gave it to them. Said there were interested in getting a breakdown of City salaries and they gave it. I assume it was public record. And using that we took the low medium range as a starting point and we paid our garden staff and our garden manager. So I believe we had $109,000 in our bid in staff cost and we felt that that was the staff that was necessary to maintain the garden. We had also been told in the meeting where the RFP was brought up and it is reflected in the wording of the RFP that the point in using a request for proposal instead of a straight bid, was the City did not want to go with a low bidder. They wanted to go with a proposal that would provide the most comprehensive quantity of services or words to that effect.

Vice Mayor Wilson: I think it was quality.

Ms. Wilgus: No it was quantity. I have it here. But quality either way.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Pardon me, it is a difference as far as I am concerned.

Ms. Wilgus: Well it says quantity.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Alright, that is fine.

Ms. Wilgus: And so we took that at its worth and we didn’t try to low ball it. We also believe and that is in the RFP too that part of the process would be one, we submitted a bid and then there would be some negotiations. So if the City felt that our bid was outrageous, as you well know, we have taken less than what we think we need because the City said we haven’t been able to afford any more than that.

Vice Mayor Wilson: The City has also as you know, subsidized a lot and done a lot in Crow Canyon Institute or the gardens itself as far as maintenance.

Ms. Wilgus: How so.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Over the last, as you know. Is this the first contract that you have negotiated with the City.

Ms. Wilgus: No I negotiated, I helped negotiate the one in 1996.

Vice Mayor Wilson: I will have to look. I don’t remember you being there.

Ms. Wilgus: I was there. Teresa’s child had a screaming fit one day when we were up at Public Services.

Vice Mayor Wilson: Now I remember you were there.

Cm. Dickey: I just wanted to make a comment in going over the financial analysis that I noticed Mr. Queirolo’s bid is for actually about 70 hours if you take his full time. He has a part time gardener for 20 hours a week and another part time gardener for 10 hours a week. I believe Crow Canyon Institute has a full time garden manager, a full time gardener and one part time gardener for 20 hours a week. So that equals 100 hours a week versus 70 hours a week. So I think that we are looking at different time commitments also when we are looking at the figures. I would like to point that out. There is a difference in the cost per hour figure which I can go into but it is lengthy. You probably wouldn’t like me to. But actual