MINUTES OF THE  
CITY OF SAN RAMON – COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002

A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Ramon was called to order on September 24, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 2222 Camino Ramon, Mayor Tatarka presiding.

PRESENT: Councilmembers Cambra, Hudson, Wilson and Mayor Tatarka

ABSENT: Councilmember Dickey

STAFF PRESENT: Acting City Manager Jim Estep, City Attorney Tom Curry, Police Sergeant Scott Holder, Parks and Community Services Director Jeff Eorio, Community Development Services Director Joye Fukuda, Acting Building Official Alina Roshal and City Clerk Judy Macfarlane

* * * *

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Girl Scout Troops 515 and 205 from Walt Disney School led Council, staff and those present in the audience in the pledge of allegiance.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka called attention to all of the meetings listed under announcements.

The Acting City Manager introduced new employee, Douglas Udell and said that he would be serving as the Interim Public Services Director.

Donna Gerber, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, presented a resolution from the Board recognizing the dedication of the City’s Memorial Park and the Thomas E. Burnett, Jr. Bridge. She thanked the City Council for all of the time and effort they put in to help make San Ramon a great place in Contra Costa County. Supervisor Gerber also announced that the County broke ground today on the animal shelter in Martinez.

Sierra Suites Hotel personnel presented a $5,000 check to June Harrison, Central Area Manager, Contra Costa Child Care Council.

Mayor Tatarka recognized and thanked members of the Diablo Valley Quilters Guild for their contribution of the Memorial Community Quilt.

Mayor Tatarka read a proclamation recognizing Iron Horse Middle School as a National Blue Ribbon School and presented it to Principal, Kirby Hoy.

Mayor Tatarka read a proclamation recognizing Golden View Elementary School as a California Distinguished School and presented it to Principal, Cindy Collins.

A proclamation recognizing Neil Armstrong Elementary School as a California Distinguished School was presented to Joann Elgas, Principal and Madeline Robinson, teacher by Mayor Tatarka.

A proclamation recognizing Twin Creeks Elementary School as a California Distinguished School was presented to Carol Loflin, Principal by Mayor Tatarka.

* * * *

Janet Banner invited everyone to attend the 8^th Annual Talent Show Benefit for the Contra Costa Food Bank to be held Friday, October 18 at the San Ramon Community Center.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka said Cm. Dickey had made a lot of corrections to the July 23 minutes and asked that the minutes be continued to the next meeting because Cm. Dickey was out of town. It was the consensus of Council to continue the minutes of the July 23, 2002 meeting to the October 8 meeting.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka pulled item 8.6, Designating standby officers, and said one Councilmember had made a last minute change after the posting of the agenda and she wanted to call this change to the Council’s attention. She said the change had been to Cm. Dickey’s standby officers, replacing Karen Lee with Melody Lundgren.

Cm. Cambra asked that the public hearing on item 8.8, Ordinance regarding the City Clerk, not be held on October 8 because he may be gone for that meeting. It was the consensus to change the public hearing date to October 22.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to approve the following Consent Calendar was seconded by Cm. Cambra and passed 4-0.

Finance
Register of Demands dated September 15, 22, and 30, 2002 in the amount of $935,403.69

Resolution No. 2002-101
Approving the Environmental Mini-Grant Application submitted by the San Ramon Historic Foundation for vegetable garden beds at Forest Home Farms in the amount of $3,300

Resolution No. 2002-105
Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Wesco Graphics Inc., for the provision of printing services of the activities guide and City newsletter in an amount not to exceed $36,400

Resolution No. 2002-106
Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Steiny & Company, Inc., for the construction of the Alcosta Boulevard/North Summerwood Loop Traffic Signal Project (CIP 5378), Bishop Drive/Sunset Drive Traffic Signal Renovation Project (CIP 7725), Bollinger Canyon Road Traffic Signal Project (CIP 7729), and Street light installation at the California High School driveway in an amount not to exceed $317,774; authorizing a budget increase in the amount of $20,000 for the Bishop Drive/Sunset Drive Traffic Signal Renovation Project (CIP 7725); and authorizing a budget decrease in the amount of $20,000 for the Bollinger Canyon Road Traffic Signal System Upgrade Project (CIP 7729)

Resolution No. 2002-107
Authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Frontier Associates for free Residential Green Building Program Consulting services

Resolution No. 2002-110
Designating and appointing standby officers for the members of the City Council and City Manager in the event of an emergency and repealing Resolution No. 2001-163

Resolution No. 2002-111
Amending the City’s Classification and Compensation Plan to assign Maintenance Assistant to Salary Range 3 in the compensation structure

Introduction of Ordinance
Amending the Municipal Code regarding the City Clerk

* * * *

CITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT

Timothy Attoe, Environmental Affairs Advisory Committee Chair, introduced the members of the committee and reviewed the committee’s charge. He said last year’s accomplishments included overseeing the environmental mini grant program and schools environmental project contest, developing a guide to public trees in San Ramon pamphlet and, sponsoring Arbor Day celebration and tree planting at Coyote Creek School. He listed the high points of this year’s proposed work plan; recommending a Green Building Policy for the City, researching short and long term issues and options for the disposal of electronic waste and recommended that staff develop an outreach program and term collection using regional collection programs and provide volunteers for the collection program. He listed the following proposed 2002/2003 work plan as 1) continue the mini grant program, 2) sponsor school environmental contests again, 3) develop an environmental based scholarship, 4) develop a tree voucher program, 5) sponsor Arbor Day activities again, 6) researching Sudden Oak Death Syndrome and follow up with a tree guide pamphlet, 7) research and recommend solutions to reduce point source pollution of aerial waterways, 8) participate in Earth Day activities, 9) research and promote more green building opportunities, 10) provide instruction to staff regarding Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance, 11) provide volunteers for the next household hazardous waste and electronic waste collection that will be held November 16 in San Ramon, 12) research what other agencies are doing regarding electronic waste collection and find out if any of the electronic waste from San Ramon is going overseas, 13) monitor the Iron Horse Trail mulch project, 14) identify any environmental issues facing San Ramon for next year that may involve budgeting. He said the committee would probably be making two recommendations to the City Council in the near future; 1) that the student member of the committee have a vote and, 2) formation of a Watershed Advisory Committee. 

Cm. Hudson complimented Mr. Attoe on the report. He said there was one item he was concerned with and that was the recommendation of a policy to ensure that when disposing of electronic waste the City takes steps to ensure that the materials will be processed domestically instead of exporting. He said he personally would like to see that happen but was afraid if the City is locked into that policy where it can’t be sent out because of that policy we could end up with a lot of televisions sitting around. He suggested changing the wording to "prefer to keep it domestic". He recommended the committee consider this issue again.

Mayor Tatarka asked for clarification regarding the establishment of a Watershed Advisory Committee and what they would be doing. Mr. Attoe said a lot of the things come up in the committee meetings, especially from the new members, who are interested in things that are happening with the creek. He said staff told the committee that the watershed issues were outside of their scope and therefore the committee recommended establishing a Watershed Committee to take on those issues.

Mayor Tatarka asked if this would be a sub committee of the Environmental Affairs Committee or a separate committee.

The Program Manager said in the near future the committee was planning to bring to Council a recommendation to form a separate Watershed Advisory Committee. This recommendation stems from a strong interest on the part of committee members of the last couple of years in watershed issues which far exceed staff’s present knowledge.

Mayor Tatarka asked what was the reasoning for the recommendation to make the student position a voting member.

The Program Manager said that recommendation may be brought to the Internal Operations Committee for consideration. He said it was the feeling of the committee members after working with the student member who had been on the committee for three years, that it was a shame she had not been able to vote along with her peers.

Cm. Hudson said for years there had been talk about bringing back the fish and asked if the waterways issue was part of the discussion to clean up the waterways and bring back the fish.

The Program Manager said he had not heard the Spawning Bed Feasibility Study discussed this past year but it certainly could fall within that purview as a watershed. He said most of the issues being brought up by the committee right now have to do with creek restoration, pollution prevention and a lot more of the technical type details addressed during the County’s Clean Water Program presentation.

Cm. Hudson said he knew the East Bay Regional Park District was doing more and more of this. He said he would support the knowledge accumulation but he did not want to jump into national waterways issues. He did say it seems like the more we know the better it would be.

Cm. Cambra asked if there would be too much under the whole watershed head to add to the Environmental Affairs Committee and make it part of their purview because they are so interested in it.

The Program Manager said at this time it is the existing City Council’s policy to limit staff time on any committee to the equivalent of five staff hours per week. He said to really address those issues in a meaningful way right now would require not only his on going support to the committee but probably affect staff in the Engineering Services and Public Works Departments. He said in theory it could be done but there would be a lot more staff resources going toward that committee and it would be duplicative in some sense.

Cm. Cambra recommended that staff look at a lot of different options on this issue because right now we have a lot of committees and to add one more might be too much. He said if there are a lot of people who are interested in doing this he would like to be able to utilize their talents.

The Program Manager said in proposing their work plan this year, the committee had four other water related issues that went far outside the present scope to just address pollution going through storm drains but had backed off and suggested maybe taking this approach.

Cm. Cambra said it was evident after the County’s storm water presentation that this issue was going to have a huge impact on San Ramon. He said it might make good sense because no one was going to become an expert on it, to have a group in place because it was going to be a tremendous commitment in time and financial resources for us to be up to speed.

Cm. Wilson said hopefully the committee will become resident experts on this issue because it is going to affect the City. He suggested the issue go back to the committee for discussion and recommendations to come back to the Council.

Mayor Tatarka asked when this issue could be expected to come back before the Council.

The Program Manager said it was a matter of getting together with affected staff and coming up with some options and presenting them to the Council and he would hope this would be at the first meeting in November at the latest.

Mayor Tatarka reviewed some of the many accomplishments and said it was all because of the efforts of the Environmental Affairs Advisory Committee.

* * * *

Mayor Tatarka declared a ten minute recess.

Councilmembers Cambra, Hudson, Wilson and Mayor Tatarka were present when the meeting reconvened.

* * * *

PUBLIC HEARING – VARIOUS MODEL CODE ORDINANCES

The Acting Building Official introduced a public hearing on various model code ordinances. She said the State of California requires that each jurisdiction adopt the current year Model Building Code prior to November 1, 2002. She said these ordinances would provide builders and contractors with a more uniform set of regulations.

Cm. Wilson said San Ramon agreed to rescind the Building Code amendments in order to make it more consistent with uniform requirements developed by the Tri Chapter Task Team and asked if San Ramon had to compromise with any of its requirements in doing so.

The Acting Building Official said San Ramon did not compromise any requirements of its building code, it enhanced our codes.

No one spoke during the public hearing.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to adopt the ordinances approving the various Model Codes and waive the reading was seconded by Cm. Cambra and passed 4-0.

Ordinance No. 342
Adopting by Reference the California Building Code of 2001 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance No. 343
Adopting by Reference the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings of 1997 and Uniform Housing Code of 1997

Ordinance No. 344
Adopting by Reference the Uniform Swimming Pool Spa and Hot Tub Code of 1997 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance No. 345
Adopting by Reference the Uniform Solar Energy Code of 1997 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance No. 346
Adopting by Reference the Uniform Sign Code of 1997 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance No. 347
Adopting by Reference the California Electrical Code of 2001 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance No. 348
Adopting by Reference the California Mechanical Code of 2001 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance 349
Adopting by Reference the California Plumbing Code of 2001 Subject to Certain Modifications

Ordinance 350
Adopting by Reference the California Fire Code of 2001 Subject to Certain Modifications

* * * *

SAN RAMON VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BUILDING AND FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS (DISTRICT ORDINANCE NO. 18)

The Acting Building Official introduced a resolution that would ratify the Building and Fire Safety Standards of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District. She said the Fire District was subject to the same requirements for adopting the Model Codes with an additional step of certification required by each local government agency within their service area where the Fire Code Ordinance would be enforced.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to adopt the resolution ratifying the Fire District’s Building and Fire Safety Standards was seconded by Cm. Cambra and passed 4-0.

Resolution No. 2002-109
Ratifying the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District Building and Fire Safety Standards (District Ordinance No. 18)

* * * *

Sergeant Holder said Assembly Bill 3299 establishing the COPS Program was passed in 1996. He said this Bill appropriates $100 million to local law enforcement through the supplemental law enforcement services fund. In 1997 the City Council approved the use of the funding to provide a Community and Youth Resource officer and each year thereafter the Council has continued to authorize the use of this funding for the program. He said the Community and Youth Resource officer investigates crimes committed by juveniles and administers the Juvenile Diversion program. Sergeant Holder said the funding for this year’s grant would be a minimum of $100,000 and last year amount was $102,000. The total cost for the position annually is $118,000. It was recommended the Council accept the funding from the state and continue to use it for the Community and Youth Resource officer.

Mayor Tatarka asked Sergeant Holder to elaborate on what the Youth Resource officer did.

Sergeant Holder said this officer works in conjunction with the Discovery Center, a local counseling center for families and children, also with the school district and the Parks and Community Services. He further stated all juveniles who commit crimes in the City of San Ramon are first referred to this officer and we try to handle this locally without sending these children to the juvenile probation system. He said it has been very beneficial to the police department and the community.

Cm. Wilson asked where the officers were located.

Sergeant Holder said the officer’s office was at the Iron Horse Middle School gymnasium.

No one spoke during the public hearing.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to adopt the resolution approving the acceptance of the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services was seconded by Cm. Cambra and passed 4-0.

Resolution No. 2001-108
Approving acceptance of the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund Grant Program for the Police Services Community and Youth Resources Officer in the amount of $100,000

Mayor Tatarka said this program is very valuable to our community and for the years that it has been in existence, it has been very productive.

* * * *

The Acting City Manager said he had received an email and a phone call from Betty Nostrand, president of the Crow Canyon Institute Board of Directors making a request that this item be continued to the October 22 Council meeting as she felt they would not be prepared for this meeting.

Mayor Tatarka said it was her understanding from the email that they heard this item was going to be on the agenda at the last minute and that was why they were asking for a continuation. She asked the Council if there was a consensus that this item be continued considering one Councilmember was absent.

Cm. Cambra said he did not have a problem with this item being continued to the October 22 meeting.

Cm. Wilson said he asked to have this item on the agenda and he would like it to stay on the agenda and proceed.

Cm. Hudson said this issue has been going on for so long he would like to open the item and then continue it because there are a number of people in the audience who have come to address the issue. He recommended listening to the comments and then consider continuing the item.

Cm. Cambra said at this point there is no sense of urgency and maintenance of the gardens could be on a month to month basis if necessary. He said he would like to honor Ms. Nostrand’s request to have a fair presentation on October 22.

Cm. Cambra made a motion to continue this item to October 22.

Mayor Tatarka seconded the motion. She said the reason she would like to continue this item was in the staff report there is not a copy of the request for proposal nor is there copies of the proposals from Joe Queirolo or Crow Canyon Institute. She continued to say this may be another reason to continue the item because the Council did not have the documents to make a decision on a contract for garden maintenance services.

Cm. Wilson said he had seen the contract at the Finance Committee meeting on June 3. He said the Council has been going back and forth on this subject since June 3 and he felt it was imperative that this issue be addressed. He said whether we address it tonight or a month from now the facts are not going to change. He said the Council was talking about a bid process that was followed and whether or not we continue to follow that process. If we continue this, the facts are not going to change and the majority of the people who have a stake in this are in the audience. He said the Council has to decide if the City’s bid process works and was it carried out correctly.

Cm. Cambra said he agreed that this needs to be brought to some resolution and if we establish the date of October 22 as a firm date to deal with this, that should be fine and it won’t carry on any longer than that.

Cm. Hudson said obviously with only four Councilmembers present nobody should make a motion but half of the people in the audience are here to speak to this issue. He recommended hearing from those present and then letting them speak again on October 22 if they wish. He said if the October 22 agenda is full, this would be an opportunity for the Council to listen to what those who are present have to say and then continue it.

Cm. Cambra said he felt everyone would come back at the October 22 to talk about it. He said there is no sense of urgency about this issue tonight and it would give the Council time to look through the information that Mayor Tatarka had requested.

Mayor Tatarka said she had received some emails from people who could not attend the meeting.

Cm. Wilson said he would be glad to read the emails and asked for the Council to continue with the process that night.

Cm. Hudson said if the item is opened the emails could be read.

Cm. Wilson said there is always going to be someone who cannot attend a meeting.

The vote on the motion to continue the item to the October 22 meeting was 2-2 (Cms. Hudson and Wilson dissenting).

The Acting City Manager said for Council consideration was a staff recommendation to award a garden maintenance services contract for the organic gardens at Crow Canyon Gardens to Joe Queirolo in an annual amount not to exceed $72,000. As background he said the City of San Ramon purchased the 7-1/2 acre Crow Canyon Gardens Park in 1991. Included in that site is a three-quarters of an acre organic flower, fruit and vegetable garden which was started in 1979. He continued to say soon after the City of San Ramon purchased the property in 1987 Crow Canyon Institute, CCI, a non profit foundation, entered into an agreement with the City to maintain the gardens. In 1993 CCI was given the program responsibility in addition to the maintenance agreement and has been doing so since. As the current contract was due to expire a RFP was issued and two proposals were received, one from Joe Queirolo, who had formerly worked for CCI, and the other from CCI. A panel of City staff members reviewed the proposals and interviewed the two applicants. Following the presentations, staff ranked them numerically according to the guidelines that were outlined in the RFP and Joe Queirolo was ranked the highest and it was recommended that he be awarded the contract. He said Mr. Queirolo had worked for Crow Canyon Gardens for more than 15 years. The Finance Committee reviewed this item on June 3 and at that time there was some discussion related to the ability of CCI to continue to provide their programs in the absence of the maintenance contract. It should be noted that the programs have never been included as part of the maintenance contract but there was some recognition that there are some shared administrative costs and they do need to work together. At the Finance Committee on June 19, CCI representatives reiterated that they could not provide programs without the maintenance contract. To clarify he said the programs pay for themselves and are not subsidized by the maintenance contract but there are some shared administrative costs. Staff met with representatives of CCI on September 3 to clarify that this item would be on the September 10 agenda. The item was subsequently removed from the agenda prior to making it to the Council meeting and was added to tonight’s agenda. City staff at that meeting and in prior meetings informed representatives of CCI that they would work with CCI and Joe Queirolo to enhance communication between the two so that those programs and maintenance functions can work together as they have in the past. Parks and Community Services staff has recently been working with CCI to develop a standard for continued provision of the programs offered at the gardens. The Program of Services for FY 2001/2002 include an allocation of $71,820 for a contract of maintenance of the organic gardens as well as the surrounding 2-1/4 acres. This year $100,000 for contract maintenance was included, anticipating an increase in costs. Joe Queirolo’s proposal will maintain the three-quarter acre organic garden for an annual cost of $72,000, an increase of approximately ¼ % over the prior year’s contract price for the entire three acres. The prior contract equated to $23,940 per acre, while Mr. Queirolo’s new proposal equates to a cost of $96,000 per acre, due to the fact that we went from three acres down to three-quarters of an acre, however to justify some of this so it doesn’t sound that bad is that the predominance of importance is in the organic garden area, the remainder of the area is primarily weed abatement. This proposal is within the allocated amount in the adopted FY 2002/03 Program of Services in the Public Services Department. The Crow Canyon Institute’s proposal to maintain the three-quarter acre organic garden was at a bid price of $144,010. This is an increase of over 100% over the prior year’s contract price. The old contract was $23,940 per acre while CCI’s new proposal equates to a cost of $192,000 per acre. This is $44,000 in excess of the amount allocated for these services adopted in FY 2002/03 Program of Services. CCI also included a three year projection in their proposal detailing a 16.4% increase in the price by FY 2002/2005. Staff recommended that the City Council award Crow Canyon Gardens maintenance contract to Joe Queirolo adopting Resolution No. 2002-98. Mr. Queirolo’s experience with the Gardens for over 15 years and his ranking as a preferred contractor quality him for the award of this contract.

Cm. Wilson asked the Acting City Manager if there had been a deviation from the normal procedure as far as having anyone submit a bid for this contract.

The Acting City Manager said the RFP process that we used is the one we use typically for all maintenance contracts.

Mayor Tatarka asked if there were any other questions.

Cm. Wilson asked the City Attorney if he had seen any questions or if he had evaluated the contract and the City’s procedure.

The City Attorney said he had evaluated the contract as to whether or not it was legal, stating the process was legal.

Mayor Tatarka asked why this item was before the Council that night. She asked if this is the normal City process, stating usually this item would be on the consent calendar.

The Acting City Manager said normally this item would be on the consent calendar as a typical maintenance contract however representatives of CCI had asked that it not be put on the consent calendar so that they could address the issue.

Mayor Tatarka said Mr. Wilson had asked that it be placed on the agenda and that was the reason why it was before the Council.

Cm. Cambra said this issue was brought before the Finance Committee twice and asked if it was typical to bring these kind of contracts before the Finance Committee.

The Acting City Manager said it was not typical but due to the nature of the discussions the City has been having with CCI, staff felt it was prudent to bring it to the Finance Committee so they could listen to the arguments that CCI had.

Cm. Cambra said he was curious as to what that would accomplish at the Finance Committee as opposed to the Council meeting.

The Acting City Manager said it hopefully would provide for more open discussions prior to making a formal recommendation to the City Council should anything come up that the Finance Committee wanted to respond to.

Cm. Cambra said in his exposure to the Finance Committee, being on it, typically the committee makes a recommendation to City Council. In this particular case there is no recommendation.

The Acting City Manager said that is correct, no recommendation came from the Finance Committee meeting.

Cm. Cambra said part of that might have been because he was not able to attend either one of the two meetings and he had requested that an additional Finance Committee meeting be established where they could actually make a recommendation to Council whether it be unanimous or split or whatever and he wasn’t allowed to have that. So he guessed that was the reason why there wasn’t a recommendation at this point.

The Acting City Manager replied that could be part of it. He said he didn’t set those meetings.

Cm. Wilson said as Chair of the Finance Committee, the reason why the Committee had the meetings was because he had felt that hopefully there would be a chance for the two parties to get together and work together and that was precisely why the meetings were held. As far as making a recommendation, he had not either thought or considered making a recommendation to the total Council. It was more of an information session so that everyone could meet and so it would not be in this forum. It would be much more relaxed and people would have a tendency to possibly be able to work out the problem and that is why we had them. He said he made sure that there were notes taken and that Mr. Cambra received the notes. He said we had two meetings, isn’t that correct, and unfortunately Mr. Cambra was not able to make the meetings. All the meetings were duly noted and to make it quite clear at the time the meetings were posted, both of Mr. Cambra and he were able to make the meetings.

Cm. Cambra: I don’t mean to be disagreeable. It is just that I had asked at least the second meeting and I am thinking possibly the first could have been rescheduled and I am not sure our schedule worked out so that would work. You actually got, I think it was, Mr. Hudson at one time and Mayor Tatarka one time to fill in. There was some sense of urgency that these meetings take place on these dates.

Cm. Wilson and it was important also the fact that Mr. Cambra couldn’t make it, it enabled other members of the Council to interact and understand the problem. Therefore, even though Mr. Cambra could not make it, I consider that a positive aspect. Again, the more exposure the members of the Council have on this subject the better they would be able to make a decision.

Mayor Tatarka asked if there were any other questions of the Acting City Manager.

Cm. Hudson said it was his hope at least should we continue this item tonight that it appear on the October 22 agenda under Unfinished Business which is under number 11 instead of New Business which is under 12. Because as I just pointed out to the Mayor the October 22 meeting has an unbelievable public comment, pre-election flavor to it. So hopefully we will be able to address this and get it taken care of once and for all because it has been going on way too long. Is that correct that we do move it to Unfinished Business.

The Acting City Manager said yes that would be correct.

Mayor Tatarka: I have some speaker cards and I definitely have some emails. The first one is from Del Nagel.

Del Nagel said the City at some time will be making an important decision regarding the future of Crow Canyon Gardens. The contract should go to someone who will communicate with the people who use the park. I think it would be wonderful if plants were identified, because there are a lot of people who come over at lunch time and walk through the Gardens. It would be nice to identify the plants. Someone who will communicate with community gardeners who should be kept informed on time regarding meetings and should be held accountable to comply with regulations established for the community gardeners. Your choice should also be held accountable to wisely use resources including the use of income from fees collected and employ environmentally sound practices with regard to water, chips and manure. A safe environment should be provided for the children. Lots of children are going through there on tours and so forth. Weeds should be mowed regularly and not just before meetings like this one. And I don’t think the tour leaders should be suggesting that children drink from garden hoses. A drinking fountain would be a wonderful addition to the park and so much healthier. And finally the issue I brought to your attention on several occasions. I started out talking about four buckets and three buckets and two buckets and now there are no buckets. The Chair of the Parks Commission said that we could be using these for green waste. The City Manager said, I have learned, that he was going to be formulating a policy regarding green waste buckets. She asked who took all these buckets including recycling, not just green waste but the other types of recycling buckets.

Linda Wilgus: I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you tonight and my goal is to have you share the experience the Crow Canyon Institute has had over the past several months and that is, we have constantly found ourselves asking the question – why. We don’t understand and to date have not been given a clear answer as to why the process that has been used to determine the Crow Canyon Gardens maintenance contract in the past was not used this time. Crow Canyon Institute has been the contractor who maintains Crow Canyon Gardens since the City took over the property in 1991. When that first contract was issued there was no competitive process and in his staff report to the Council, Mr. Estep noted that this was a unique situation and it did not need to be subject to the normal competitive process. But a new contract was entered into in 1996. We began negotiating a renewal and we ended negotiating an entirely new contract. Again at that time there was no competitive process. There was no posting. We renegotiated our contract. In August 2001 we knew our contract was coming up to renew at the end of the year and contacted City staff and asked when we should begin the process of negotiating our contract. My first conversations were with Mr. Eorio and he said we would probably start doing that sometime after the first of the year. The first time we learned that the process used in the past would not be followed was in February. On February 6 we had one of our regular quarterly meetings with City staff and representatives of Mudd’s Restaurant. Jeff Gault attended that meeting and told us that the process to determine the contractor would either be by RFP or by bid and he emphasized with us that the preference was for an RFP because the City was not interested in taking the low bidder. That sometimes when you asked for a low bid you got what you asked for and so they were much more interested in doing a RFP where the quality of services provided and the bid would be taken into consideration together. He also told us that once the process was underway there would be an opportunity to negotiate the exact terms of the contract. We relied on those statements, obviously to our detriment. We believe that we were being asked to give a proposal that we thought would provide the optimum service for Crow Canyon Gardens and I think the fact that our proposal was within $5,000 of the City’s estimate of what it would cost in-house to do that contract speaks well for the reasonableness of our bid. But the reason we made the bid we did and we put the services that we did into our proposal was that we believed that what we were being asked to do. Not to low ball it but to say what we thought that garden was worth and what he was entitled to receive in terms of funding. We were told at that time also that the RFP would probably be offered sometime within six weeks. We didn’t learn of the RFPs actually being ready until April 8 and the first meeting of contractors was on April 17 and the time to submit the proposal was made first. So it was a very rough job getting it in, nevertheless we thought we did a good job on it. All through this process we kept asking various City staff at various points why has this changed. We asked Jeff Gault the first time we met with him "why is the process different this time". Well this is the way we are doing all of them. Well why didn’t we need to do this in the past. Well that was different then. At our next board meeting, April 15 Jeff Eorio and Jim Estep attended and we asked them the same question, why is the process changing when Jim himself recommended that there didn’t need to be a competitive process initially. Again the answer was essentially the same "we are doing the RFPs , that is the way it was being done". Again on May 10 when we asked that question at the oral interview, the answer was the same. Finally at the first Finance Committee that question was asked and Mr. Estep said the reason they used an RFP was because they knew there would be more than one bidder. We had never been told that. We didn’t know there was another bidder until Mr. Queirolo informed the chairman of our board on April 15 that he was going to bid against us for the contract. I remember it so clearly because Mrs. Scott and Ms. Mellon and I all wrote it in our notes. We were so shocked to hear that. So we feel like we are really at sea on what has been going on here. The only question that keeps going through my mind is why has the scope changed. There was no expression to us that there was dissatisfaction with the way we were doing the contract. On the contrary we received praise for it. All of a sudden instead of doing the whole thing we are just doing, well it is not really three-quarters of an acre because I think if you measure all the way out to end of the production beds it is more like an acre, probably more than an acre. But I don’t think that is real significant. In any event there was no clear explanation for why we were no longer going to be responsible for the other areas. In our previous contract, the one negotiated in 1991 and again the one signed in 1996, it was specifically mentioned that we were responsible for the community gardens and I am glad that Del Nagel brought that up. Under this maintenance contract the community garden isn’t part of it. Whoever is the maintenance contractor will not be responsible for the community gardens. We don’t understand why that happened either. We went to the oral interview and we received on June 3 the ranking that you all received and that is another question that we have, why was Joe ranked number one. Was it money? If so why were we told that money wasn’t to be the key factor in this. Moreover our bid is so much closer to what the City clearly considered necessary support of that garden. Their estimate for doing it in-house was $139,000. Our bid was $144,000. And our bid included programming, tours, the community gardens, special events. It was never mentioned in our proposal, we didn’t say we are going to do programming for this, but it was something that the City was getting for free. If we no longer do programming there the City will need to pay for programming at that site. So the total cost is going to be well over the $139,000 that the City estimated. And in fact the very brief estimate that City staff was asked to do in a hurry for programming costs, was the cost of maintaining the community garden was so high that City staff said they wouldn’t do it, that they would open it up to a committee of gardeners to manage the community garden. So it doesn’t seem reasonable to me that it was money. The other question is was it the proposal. Mr. Queirolo submitted essentially a two-page proposal with very little detail. There was no breakdown of his bid price, what he planned to spend it on. We submitted a thorough proposal and again I am glad that Del Nagel raised the issue of plant identification. One of the items in our proposal was we want to do things like that. Plant identification, we want to do more demonstration gardens. We want to involve more volunteers in the garden, members of the community. If we are going to make that a true teaching garden we can’t do it for $72,000. Nobody can. $72,000 is essentially what we are doing now and we can maintain it and that is about it. In looking at the rankings in the oral interview as well, it was hard not to think that Mr. Queirolo had been credited for the experience, our 11 years of experience as contractor at that site. He was ranked higher than we were on management experience and he was ranked higher than we were on staff experience. Yet his proposal says that the staff he will hire are our gardeners. So I don’t see how he could be ranked that much more highly than we were. This leads into another question that has troubled me throughout this process and that is why the staff has seemed to be totally unconcerned regarding the fact that Mr. Queirolo had an unfair advantage bidding as an insider. The administrative law judge who heard his appeal of his denial of unemployment benefits found just that. That we were made more vulnerable in the bidding process by having to bid against a former employee who had inside knowledge. And in fact Mr. Queirolo knew that we were planning to bid at least $100,000 because the prior year we had all talked about that. So he was well aware of what our bid would be when he submitted his bid. Of course we had no idea that he was even bidding until a couple weeks before, so we didn’t know. The other item that I would really like the City Council to think about and question is why the City staff doesn’t assign any monetary value to the programs that we have provided over the years. We provide a tour program that brings in 5,000 children a year and probably about 1,300 adults with helping them through those gardens. Every single person on those tours hears that that garden is made possible by the City of San Ramon. That that’s a City of San Ramon park. They get a wonderful look at a garden. They get a wonderful experience in San Ramon. They come from as far away as Moraga, Castro Valley, Antioch. They come from all over the Bay Area. It is a very, very popular program and it reflects wonderfully on the City of San Ramon. We have attempted, as Mr. Estep alluded to, to work with City staff on some kind of proposal and in fact I think that Mr. Estep’s staff report mentions that there will be some kind of funding of a program proposal. After waiting to get something, finally a proposal was hand delivered to us last Friday. It not only doesn’t give us any more money, we are going to have to give more money back to the City for our classes. Currently we have a 90-10 split with the City. Where the City gets 10% of our class revenue in exchange for publishing our classes in the bulletin’s schedule. We do all of the arrangement of teachers and the classes and everything else. And the proposal is that we will get 60% now and the City will get 40%. In addition there have been on-going discussions with community services about the use of the preschool classroom in the event of our having a disabled person attend one of our classes. We don’t have a disabled ramp. We are all hoping that there will be a new building at that site and that the temporary buildings won’t be necessary at all. In the interim, providing a second disabled ramp would be unsightly to start out with and it would cost us about $6,000. So we had asked to use, in the event that we have a disabled person come to a class, that we could use the other building that has a disabled ramp. In the proposal that staff has submitted to us if we use that building for a class we will have to pay rent for it. Now I don’t know if the members of the current Council remember or not, the reason that that building is there, the preschool building, is because there was going to be, the master plan was in the schedule and then it was deprogrammed. And because there was not a functioning toilet on the site and because Crow Canyon Institute was operating out of a trailer about a third of the size of the Council table, it was decided that we would bring on a temporary building that would be for joint use of Crow Canyon Institute and Community Services and it would also provide a flushing toilet. When it came it wasn’t as big. Funding issues made it necessary to get a smaller trailer. We have never had any access to that trailer except I think for the first time this year for our Spring Festival. We have access to the restroom. Now we are being asked to pay rent for a trailer that was initially going to be brought in partly for our benefit. We purchased the trailer, are purchasing the trailer because we didn’t have a classroom site. I gather from the City’s proposal that the consideration that they see us receiving under this proposal is that they are giving us free rent for the Little Wanders Room and letting us keep the fees that our programs generate. We don’t use the Little Wanders room. The only thing that we use the Little Wanders room for is, I teach a class through the City, the value of nature class, and I use it in the same way as the woman who teaches Digging for Dinosaurs through the City uses it. I can’t tell you how disillusioning and disappointing it was to us. We have come faithfully to every meeting beginning with the meetings of the Finance Committee. I was happy to hear the discussion tonight about why things went on and off the agenda there, because that was not shared with us. We didn’t know where the item was or why. Then we met with Mr. Estep on July 2 just to sort of talk about the status of things and then we met again on September 3 to talk about the status. And at everyone of those meetings nothing had changed from what was presented to us on September 3 except last week we are now worse than we were because we are being asked to pay for services that we didn't pay before. We submitted a proposal for funded programming in good faith to the City and it went no where and in return that is what we got back. It has been a mystery to me throughout my association with CCI that there seems to me to be really valuable programs, the community garden with 57 plots and the tours and no one seems to attach any kind of monetary value. I think the City would be hard put to replace those programs for any where near what we operate them for. Finally I have real concerns about the portion of staff’s report and it has been suggested to us many times that maybe that there won’t be a problem, we will be able to work with Mr. Queirolo because the City will be monitoring very closely and it seems to me that that is truly inconsistent with an independent contractor. The kind of monitoring that is being suggested to me is the kind of monitoring that you would give an employee and I would think that Mr. Queerly would be well within his rights if someone were to attempt to terminate his contract because he wasn’t working well enough with us to say that that wasn’t what he was assigned to do. He was assigned to garden there. And I am not hopeful because we worked with Mr. Queerly for many years. We regretfully terminated his employment and we continue to be going through the unemployment appeal process with him. He has filed a discrimination complaint against us and we are going through with that. I find it very unlikely that we would have a harmonious working relationship. We are willing to try. I don’t want to give anyone the opinion that we aren’t willing to try. But I would hope you would be realistic about it and think about your own professional life. If you had been as employee or employer, if you had been in that kind of situation, how realistic is it that you are going to be cooperating that closely. And we need to cooperate very closely with the person who is doing garden maintenance if we are going to continue the kinds of programs we have today. In conclusion, I would ask you to ask yourself these same questions and to really look at this process. I share Vice Mayor Wilson’s belief in following processes and I don’t this one was followed. It was like it was cut and pasted all along the way and then a decision was made that was to come to the Council on May 28 and here we are four months later and it is still not resolved. It seems to me that it is the farthest thing from the typical process. I would urge the Council to dismiss bids in this case, both proposals and to begin again. And I would urge you to consider not having a maintenance contract and a program contract. The reason that Crow Canyon Gardens is successful and the people who have submitted letters today love it so and more people keep coming out is because it is totally integrated. The garden and the programs work hand in hand and that can only be done with one contractor doing both.

Mayor Tatarka said that Linda Wilgus was with the Crow Canyon Institute so she had allowed her more time to speak than the normal public because of that.

Rosalind Rogoff said Abram Wilson had asked her to attend one of the Finance Committee meetings when this issue came up. He said he wanted somebody who didn’t know a lot about it but had a lot of opinions. So he called me and he kind of wanted me to get a feeling for the two sides and my feeling was of course, this is a no brainer. There was an RFP that went out for garden maintenance. You got two bids. One was for $72,000 from a person who is highly qualified, the other was for $145,000 from another group that was qualified but was not given as high a rating as the first person that was the lower bid. And it should have been on a consent calendar, it should have gone to Mr. Queirolo right away. He is the person most qualified to do this. The programs, as Linda Wilgus just said, are separate from the maintenance contract. If you want to have a separate contract for programs with CCI or somebody else then you should have that. I understand her frustration and her being upset. People tend to take rejection personally. It is hard. They don’t understand that they had a sole provider contract for a long time and the City finally decided they didn’t need to have a sole provider. They wanted to try to get bids. They wanted to see if they could get a better price, a better offer. They got a better offer. They took it. That is what cities do, that is what they are supposed to do. It is unfortunate that it is making the people in Crow Canyon unhappy but I don’t think that this should become another political football like Forest Home Farms. Lets treat this like a City contract for maintenance and approve it the way it should be approved and then negotiate whatever deal you want with Crow Canyon Gardens or whoever else to do programs with the Parks Department or volunteers. Obviously we can get very good programs over at Forest Home Farms from local volunteers. I think we could do the same here and save a lot of money.

Barbara Stott, employee of Crow Canyon Institute, said I have been the program manager at the Institute for several years and since the departure of Mr. Queirolo I have been the Interim Garden Manager. And doing these two jobs has given me a unique perspective on the two sides of the issue. Doing these two jobs as garden manager and program manager has given me a really unique perspective on both sides of the Crow Canyon Gardens fence. I have got to see how it works to do the maintenance, what is involved and see how those, in my opinion, have to crucially integrate programs and maintenance together. I put together some slides here to kind of hope to give an idea of how to give you an idea of how closely these programs intertwine and the kind of maintenance we are trying to set as a standard for Crow Canyon Gardens, which is a very special place. This next slide is our office trailer. This is where all our planning goes on. We have an outstanding garden staff. It has been a real privilege to work with them. They have made an extra efforts. For any program event we have had they have gone all out for us and I can not thank them enough. Despite not knowing if they have a job from month to month they have continued to support the Crow Canyon Institute and all of its programs. Why do they do that. Because they love the place. They love working there. They love who they work with and they just think it is such a worthwhile venture to be involved with. This is the inner garden. Our current staff has very high standards of esthetics. We are trying very very hard to keep the garden looking its best. I feel strongly that a garden can educate and look good at the same time. I really feel that is an important focus. Mr. Ebert, the owner of Mudd’s Restaurant, has told me that he is very impressed with the way the gardens are looking right now and he gets comments daily on how beautiful the gardens look. Jeff Gault was recently doing an inspection of the gardens and he said he had never seen the inner garden look so good. He had never seen it so neat, so weed free and the plants are thriving. And if we are awarded the contract I would like to keep it looking this way and we will continue to keep those standards as high as we can. I am also very unclear about the three-quarters of an acre that is being referred to and is obviously part of the pricing figures. We have never been given a map of what we are expected to provide for in this contract and I really question whether it is three-quarters of an acre and I think that should be looked into. This is the field garden where we grow all of our row crops. We gave a lot of produce to the food bank this last summer. The food bank that was referred to earlier today. We use a lot of the produce for our special events, for the school tours. A lot of the programs use this produce. A past complaint has been that a lot of the produce has gone to waste. It has been left rotting on the ground and we have tried very hard not to have that happen. We use a lot of volunteers. We have a three year old volunteer who picks up apples once a week for us and we have a lot of volunteers who are older than that. One of our most recent events this last Saturday was a children’s concert attended by about 100 people and we had 20 volunteers working with us. The theme of the concert was insects and the lady in the middle is the queen ant and she was having all the little ants dance around with her. The garden was involved in this. We provided an organic snack for the children so they got to experience this aspect of the Gardens. We talked a little bit about organic gardening. Another program Linda has referred to is the children’s tours, about 5,000 children a year. They eat the produce that is grown in the garden and I encourage all the tour guides, if they wish to volunteer in the garden I think it is important that the people who are part of the programs realize that they are important participants in the garden as well. I just received a recent evaluation of the garden tours and the teacher said that we attend every year. You do a great job covering the science curriculum. When asked if the tour guides communicated clearly. The answer was "wonderful tour, very informative, relate well with students, nice variety. Would you recommend one of our garden tours to another group and the answer was absolutely. This is the Spring Festival. About 500 people attended here, 100 volunteers. It is a great community event. It has not been particularly well supported by garden staff in the past and so we hope that will be us and we will be able to do that. It has been described in the Valley Times as one of the most attended events. A new program for us this summer, we have been able to use the produce stand. It has been very successful. It has been totally staffed by volunteers and this is something that we have not been able to do in the past. We take the programs out into the community. We are always asked to participate in Whole Foods Earth Day Celebration. It is certainly an opportunity to publicize our park and to tell what a great place it is. I just have to ask you to really consider how these programs are intertwined with the gardens and whoever has the maintenance or the programming contract here, I would urge you to consider it to be one entity. It would not work with two different entities doing that. It can be two separate contracts. It can be anyway you want but I really don’t believe it can work with two different entities doing it. So we have lots of ideas for lots of other programs. We have a proposal from DVC to have a student internship. We have a wild life habitat garden program that we would like to pursue. A lot of ideas, I think there is a lot of unfulfilled potential that could be worked out if the Council would consider awarding the contract to Crow Canyon Institute.

Mayor Tatarka: I have no other speaker cards on this item but I have several letters that I need to read and put into the record. "Dear Councilmembers, it has been brought to my attention that the City Council will vote tonight whether to award Crow Canyon Institute a programming contract. I urge you to set a precedent tonight by re-evaluating the relationship that the City had with Crow Canyon Institute prior to making an administrative decision that could ultimately affect the quality of life for the residents of San Ramon. The International Council of Museums states that a museum is a non profit making permanent institution in the service to society and of its development and open to the public which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits for purposes of study, education and enjoyment which is real evidence of people in their environment. Crow Canyon Gardens is a living museum. One of the few remaining in the Bay Area. But what is even more unique is that Crow Canyon Institute since the purchase of the land from Virginia Mudd has been the curator with little financial support, only maintenance, not programming from the City. Crow Canyon Institute has done an exemplary job of maintaining the grounds as well as providing residents as well as non residents with quality programming for over 12 years. I urge you again to re-evaluate the relationship that has been established between the Institute and the City. As a resident I would like to see a supportive network established between the City and CCI. The programming contract offered to CCI should reflect both financial and administrative support for the continuation of the exceptional programming that CCI has provided our community both now and in the future. Many view the relationship between CCI and the City as merely another a non profit organization within the City limits. I urge you to step in and alter this perception. Please provide the necessary guidance to establish a positive financially supported relationship with CCI and the City. Your guidance is necessary in order for the Institute to continue to provide your residents with the quality environmental educational programs that they currently offer today. Can you Council afford not to intervene." Sincerely Ms. Teresa Inchauspe – San Ramon resident.

Mayor Tatarka: "My apologies, I emailed this early in order to make a request that this be read out loud at the meeting. Thank you so much. September 24. To the Mayor and all City Councilmembers, as you consider the decision this evening about who to award the contract for Crow Canyon Gardens, please consider first and foremost the children of this area. CCI has for 11 years offered one of the finest programs around the elementary school age children of this valley and beyond. For once do not let the dictates of budget alone influence your decision. No one person can do what CCI has done all these years, maintain the gardens, offer educational and life influencing tours to the children, bringing community together to enjoy the beauty of the natural world at the annual Spring Festival, offer wonderful healthy and safe produce to the community and Mudd’s Restaurant and bring future programs such as organic student internships through DVC, a composting demonstration area and a wild life habitat garden. I ask you as a very concerned citizen to allow CCI to continue in its present goal. The benefits will far out weigh the advantage of saving a small amount of money. Thank you for taking the time to consider my comment." Respectfully Charlotte F. Channing, Art Instructor at John Baldwin School in Danville

Mayor Tatarka: "Here is my letter which may be read to the City Council. Dear City Council: Today I went to Crow Canyon Gardens to purchase some produce and learned that you are recommending that the operation and maintenance contract be awarded to a former employee of Crow Canyon Institute. If you do not award this contract to CCI then will there still be a produce stand or garden tours for the schools or family concerts or composting demonstrations or other activities that are open to the public. As a resident of San Ramon for eight years I have seen my daughters have the benefit from the garden tours given to school groups. Crow Canyon Gardens is a jewel that needs the caring maintenance that has been provided by CCI. We attended the family concert this past Saturday and thoroughly enjoyed it. Please don’t cut out the services that are currently being provided by CCI because they are a unique part of our San Ramon community. I believe that CCI has been an asset to our community and we should not let it wither." Lyn San Ramon

Mayor Tatarka: "Please read this in connection with the agenda item on Crow Canyon Gardens. Dear City Councilmembers: I was told by a friend today that Crow Canyon Gardens may not continue the nature program and maintain the gardens. I am having a very hard time understanding why anyone would want to dismantle such a beautifully organized institution. The staff are basically volunteers that love what they do. I understand that some of them make $50 a week. They work there because they have a passion for teaching and for nature. That alone makes for the highest quality teacher that one could ever hope for. I just recently saw the Gardens and they were impeccably maintained by those same people. The Gardens have people who quietly work to make fabulous events happen for young and old in our Valley. It enriches our lives in simply and profound ways. It connects us to nature and to its secrets. It educates in small intimate groups. It can take us through a working garden that has been lovingly cared for and proliferates colorful fruits and vegetables. It brings people together for the purpose of celebrating nature. There is no other place in San Ramon that can do these things for us. Is it that the City Council doesn’t understand that Crow Canyon Gardens does all these wonderful things. Have you not seen the quality events, the informative classes, the wonderful children’s programs. Do you not know that the Gardens are such a unique, unpretentious, uncommercial gem of a place. One that I am and so many people I know are so proud of. It has been a part of my family’s life since my children were in preschool and nature classes. I can’t imagine it gone. How sad that would be. Do not dismantle Crow Canyon Gardens. San Ramon is a wealthy community that deserves to have quality institutions like Crow Canyon Gardens. It is a gift to our children and our community. We support Crow Canyon Gardens and hope it grows and thrives". Diane Higgins

Mayor Tatarka: "I have been a staff member for the past year at CCI delivering tours to the elementary school children as part of the educational programs. Recently I have also worked in the gardens assisting garden managers with planting, weeding, watering and any and all tasks needed. As an educator I would strongly encourage the continuance of this excellent tour program. I have guided many many groups through the gardens and nature area and our school children love the experience and benefit greatly. They are a little like little sponges taking in everything they learn about organic gardening and the nature area. This information helps them to be good citizens of our community. It raises the awareness of our nature world and the importance of preserving it. I am pleased and delighted to be a part of maintaining the garden and working with CCI staff who have a strong unwavering commitment to the gardens and all the programs and activities offered here. I encourage you to continue these programs in choosing the current contract with CCI." Susan

Mayor Tatarka: "To the City Council: The Crow Canyon Institute has served the community in a superlative manner for longer than a decade that I have been voting and tax paying resident. The value of bringing children is touch with the events in this concrete curb world along would merit their continued management of this ground. Now that my grandson is two I have been bringing him here and look forward to this for many years to come. The proposal to change CCI is unacceptable and the City Council is strongly urged to use intelligence in deciding the long term stewardship of the property and the benefits for the most people" Jim Conway and Barbara J. Clark.

Mayor Tatarka: "To the citizens of San Ramon who are in favor of continuing Crow Canyon Institute and Gardens, we have a similar area in Hayward that is used by families to supplement their diet". Jason

Mayor Tatarka: "I am writing to express my opinion about the proposal to turn over Crow Canyon Gardens which is public property used extensively by the public to an individual person without any regard for those of us who use this beautiful area. I don’t understand how you would even consider turning this area over to a private person and without any stipulation as to how it would be used in the future. What a loss to the community this would be. Right now this is a multi purpose area that benefits so many people, especially children and people who don’t have a garden of their own. I believe that the City of San Ramon always did a great job of serving the community. I made this decision by seeing your beautiful community center, the well kept parks and plazas and Crow Canyon Gardens. What is happening here. Also why wasn’t this publicized. Is this decision made in secret. I think this should definitely be put on the ballot and let the voting citizens in San Ramon have a voice in the matter. Everyone in San Ramon should be aware of a decision like this. This is not a decision that this board should be making without feedback from the community, the voters, the people who elected the Council to represent them. The people who maintain the gardens are dedicated to keeping it available to the community and providing a unique learning experience for everyone. It is a peaceful place for lunch and a wonderful source of fresh organic produce at low price which benefits us all. It sounds like the staff of the City of San Ramon is allowing itself to be blackmailed into giving up these gardens. I hope not. After 9/11/01 we all have the duty to stand up for each one of us and not let anyone terrorize us at any level. Stand up and do the right thing". Linda Ellingson

Mayor Tatarka: "Dear Councilpersons: As an employee in San Ramon I was absolutely delighted to discover Crow Canyon Institute’s garden and produce stand several weeks ago. Since then many of my coworkers and I visited there to enjoy lunch and buy beautiful fresh organic produce. This lovely place is such an asset to your City. I commute daily and am unable to attend the Farmers Market in the city where I live. Twice when I visited there were school groups getting tours. With our disappearing crop land this is probably one of the only ways our young people can learn about growing food first hand. The staff at the garden, both paid and volunteer, are knowledgeable and eager to share information. Truly the influence of this garden and its programs extend far beyond the boundaries of San Ramon. To quote "If it ain’t broke don’t fix it". Thank you" Laurel Ann

Mayor Tatarka: " I support the continued existence of CCI and its programs" Jane Newman.

Mayor Tatarka: That is all that I have in correspondence on the issue. Any other speaker cards I do not have on this issue. I see someone getting up.

Carol Rowley: Crow Canyon Gardens was the inspiration for the gardens at Country Club School. And so when Kerry Marshall owned the gardens he really came out, gave in-services for our school. He just did a wonderful job. So he really inspired us to start gardening and he was the original owner of this area. In 1991 the City purchased the gardens and it has always been the City’s purpose to continue the gardens as they are. So I just wanted to let you know that the gardens have been well used. As part of the evaluation we have to listen to everything too and I know that there might be a feeling that if the Institute doesn’t continue with the maintenance that the programming will go away. And that isn’t the way that I see it as a private citizen. The programs will continue. We just always need to look at maintenance issues also. So I just wanted to tell you how much I have appreciated the gardens myself personally and what an inspiration they were to us and what a coo it was for the City to purchase that area and it will always continue in that wonderful form. Its not going to go away. So I just wanted to tell you that. Thank you.

Barbara Jones: Good evening. I have been on staff as a tour guide for the last year. I am sort of just saying a lot of things that the people are saying in their letters to you. I for years enjoyed the gardens with my daughter who is now ten. So it is a very special place for us. As a matter of fact I still have a picture of us walking down to the creek and a reporter happened to be out from the San Ramon Valley Times and we took our picture and we still have that up on her bulletin board. Since I have been working at the gardens I have learned to respect the people that work there and run it and for very little money. And again they are not there for the money. They are there because they love the gardens and they love children and they are educators. Whenever I mention that I give tours at Crow Canyon Gardens everybody’s eyes light up and go that is such a wonderful place. The children absolutely love it and it is such an important part of the City of San Ramon and honestly before I came tonight I didn’t know all the political and financial ramifications of why this decision was being made. But after hearing everybody speak I can certainly see why it is important not to just look at the financial and also to realize that Crow Canyon Institute has been doing the whole ball of wax and they have doing a wonderful job and I think that they need to continue. I think that it would be very difficult to have the two contract separate. Thank you.

Mayor: I don’t have any other speaker cards on this so now it is before the Council.

Cm. Cambra: I think we are at a point where we have gotten a chance to listen to everybody and we can now continue it to October 22 and still allow public comment on October 22 so this would seem to be the appropriate place.

Cm. Hudson: And move it up without having the one hour or two hours of public comment.

Cm. Cambra: Exactly unfinished business.

Cm. Hudson: Didn’t you want to speak first Abram.

Cm. Cambra: I will move that we continue to the 22^nd and if we get a second we can discuss it.

Cm. Hudson: I will second it.

Cm. Wilson: Again, I am glad that we had discussion tonight. I think one thing that is imperative that everyone know, San Ramon has always had a commitment to this garden. It concerns me that residents and non residents feel that the garden will disappear or the quality will not be there. That is so far from the truth. Programming, if you want to look at programming. How many awards has the City of San Ramon received for programming. Can the City do it. Should we do it. We will discuss that. But can we do it, yes we can. That is not even a question. Financial support for this. It has always been there. And I am torn to be taking this stand, because I have negotiated, helped negotiate every single contract except for this one to benefit CCI. The garden, the tours, the quality will always be a part of San Ramon. And I am proud of the fact that the residents are not even looking at this "political aspect". They see the beauty and will always see the beauty. And I would hope staff and others will understand that. That they diminish themselves and the City when they make false statements about what will happen and what will not happen to Crow Canyon. That is one of the most precious areas in this City. Regardless of what this Council decides, it will be maintained. And we are speaking about, when I look at those pictures, one has to realize that didn’t happen overnight. There is someone who planted that, who worked for 15 years. You can’t just dismiss him by saying he isn’t a part of that. That concerns me, whether you agree or disagree. For 15 years he was the chosen one by the person who we purchased this land from to be the shepherd of that property. So don’t dismiss it like he is just a gardener. That has been his soul for the last 15 years. It has been a partnership, but I have watched both. CCI, fought for them, for programs, for the trailer, for flushables, for everything but I also respect Joe. That is a part of his life. The negativism takes away from the beauty, not only of the garden but what we stand for in the City of San Ramon. And if I hear anyone say that we don’t care as a City then I know that they really don’t know us as a City.

Cm. Hudson: Go ahead, you follow Abram.

Mayor Tatarka: Well, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor of continuing it until the 22^nd of October is that the date we have set, scheduled for. All those in favor say aye. Opposed.

The motion was passed on a 4-0 vote.

Mayor Tatarka: OK we are continuing to October 22. Last item on the agenda is City Council Comment.

Do you have any comments Dave.

Cm. Hudson: I just would say and I know that I have overworked this tonight that lets make every effort to make that a short almost singular agenda item. Because it is obviously an emotional situation and I have nothing to report under City Council Business.

Mayor Tatarka: As you all got the memo from Mr. ……..

Cm. Cambra: Excuse us, we still have to finish the meeting.

Mayor Tatarka: Ok, what we are discussing up here is we are discussing City Council Comments and Dave was talking about our 22^nd meeting to try and make it as short as we can. I think all of us have gotten an update from our City Manager on all of the things that are coming up between now and the end of the year and this City Council is going to be very busy with a lot of issues coming up. So I will do everything I can to attempt to do that. With your help on this Council we have a lot of things that we are going to be doing over the next several months.

Cm. Hudson: That doesn’t mean we load up October 8^th, because Jerry is gone.

Cm. Cambra: I am not sure yet.

Mayor Tatarka: He is not sure yet. That is what you said.

Cm. Hudson: Oh ok.

Cm. Wilson: So hopefully he will be here.

Mayor Tatarka: All right, any other Council comments from Mr. Wilson, Mr….

Cm. Hudson: Just a question. Who is the voting delegate now on October 3^rd. Have we got this worked out.

Mayor Tatarka: Yes we did last meeting.

Cm. Hudson: Ok, it is you. You are going to be there. Two of you will be there.

Cm. Wilson: She is going to carry the flag.

Cm. Hudson: Who is taking down the flag.

Mayor Tatarka: I am

Cm. Hudson: Ok good.

Mayor Tatarka: It is already there. It has already been taken care of.

Cm. Wilson: The next meeting I hope staff will listen to the minutes and prepare responses to a lot of the questions.

Mayor Tatarka: Ok, I have a couple of things. First of all. As I go back to the announcements of the different meetings that are happening within the City, the first Housing Advisory Committee meeting for the City will be on September 26, this Thursday at 7:00 p.m. We will be interviewing the Project Manager for the City of San Ramon for the Civic Center on October 1 at 6:00 p.m. There will also be a Community Workshop on October 15 at 7:00 p.m. And I will speak about that in just a moment. I just want to remind you that October 19 is the third annual San Ramon Habitat for Humanity Day and if you want information on working on that or being involved in that speak with Judy Macfarlane our City Clerk on that and she will obtain all the necessary information so that we can organize that. It was very successful in previous years. And Judy and I learned a lot about sheet rock and doing sheet rock. And she is going to laugh because she knows what that means. Ok, the other items that I do have in regards to the City Center Oversight Committee met and as you know that is comprised of two Councilmembers and staff and also with the Fisher Friedman Ellerbe Beckett. The consultant and the Interim City Manager list some items for discussion and let me tell you what went on at the meeting so that I can give you an update. We talked about the process and the meetings with the advisory committee are going to held as needed until the Project Manager is selected which is scheduled for the October 8 Council meeting. Alternating Councilmembers will be doing the report to the meeting. I am doing it tonight because Donna Dickey is not here and she is the other member of the advisory committee. And the site sign is currently under review by Sunset Development as you all have gotten a memo in regards to and a copy of the letter. Also it was talked about design team outreach. It was the consensus of the committee that what Fisher Friedman and Ellerbe Becket have done so far as far as outreach is concerned has been very very good. The consultant has attended at least every advisory committee, at least one of them, every Planning Commission and Parks Commission meeting. The architectural firm has met with the Chamber and with other businesses and it is thoroughly researching the City’s history and has taken several photographs while touring the City to understand our landscape and demographics in much greater detail. Each of the elements and we are talking about status of the reviews, each of the elements is currently reviewing for its current status and that is the performing arts theatre study, the status of the library grant application, the Valley Children’s Museum’s financials, the Aquatic Facility Needs Committee report is to the Parks Commission on October 25. The consultant Dan Howard will be there in attendance, so that you know that. The status of the public work shop and a facilitator, the consultant of Dan Howard of Fisher Friedman Ellerbe Becket stated that Sherwin Bennett will be a facilitator. A personal invitation is going to be sent to every resident in the City requesting their participation in building the Civic/City Center vision in a community workshop. It is a vision to be something similar to a design "shuret" and the date again is October 15 at 7:00 p.m. at the Community Center Fountain Room. There is going to be overflow chairs for those who just want to listen and observe and don’t want to participate. Outreach is going to be in the form of newspaper and community television and announcements at Council meetings and Dan Howard indicated he will be sending out a request for all committee members and foundation members to assist in the process by observing and allowing as much public participation as possible. It was then discussed that there would be a special City Council meeting for Civic Center in late November, early December. The firm of Fisher Friedman Becket is subscribing to all the local newspapers. So the Tri-Valley Herald and the Valley Times, there are subscribing to the newspapers. That was the gist of the meeting and just to give you an update of discussions and what is happening.

Cm. Wilson: This personal letter going out?

Mayor Tatarka: Personal invitation card.

Cm. Wilson: How much is that going to cost.

Mayor Tatarka: It is within the contract of the scope of Fisher Friedman that has already been adopted.

Cm. Wilson: How does Mr. Cambra find out answers to questions in case he has a question about what the oversight committee is doing.

Mayor Tatarka: He can call Jim Randall. He can call anyone of us or else you can also call Dan Howard. These are from his notes that he sent to me of the meeting to refresh what we had discussed. So I wouldn’t miss anything. Dave…

Cm. Hudson: I am going to get off the City Center/Civic Center thing for a minute. Let me get on something that we probably should have put on the agenda. I just realized it myself that they have changed the Mayors’ Conference to the 10^th and they seem to be, and we get this from time to time where they are asking cities to also bring in the Planning Commissions because of the Shaping Our Future presentation. I would ask that the Council come to some kind of consensus that we get word to the Planning Commissioners to any that would like to come to this, they are more than welcome and they should be involved.

Mayor Tatarka: Dave that was my next comment.

Cm. Hudson: Oh I am sorry.

Mayor Tatarka: That is ok. I am bringing up the Mayors’ Conference the last thing. It is October the 10, it is not this week because of the League and I will be at the League and yes staff is aware of this. Mr. Jim Randall has let everyone know, Planning Commissioners and everyone to be in attendance at that if they can. Councilmembers for October the 10.

Cm. Hudson: And we will foot the bill.

Mayor Tatarka: It is in Oakley, So it is a little bit of a ways so you need to plan accordingly for transportation. Any other…

Cm. Wilson: Final question, so that it will not go away and I am sure it will not go away. We have something that has been tabled, Forest Home Farms. Hopefully that we will find some sort of resolution for that. I will not go through the process of trying to untable it tonight but I think that is something else that has to resolved and hopefully that will be resolved as soon as possible.

Cm. Hudson: Not on October 8^th.

Cm. Wilson: Not on the 8^th but just so that everyone is aware that. That needs to be resolved.

Mayor Tatarka: We have a lot that the Council is doing. We have a lot of decisions we have to make in the next coming months so we are going to be a very busy Council up here.

There being no further business to come before the City, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M.

Signed:

Nancy Tatarka, Mayor
Judy Macfarlane, City Clerk