A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Ramon was called to order on June 24, 2003 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 2222 Camino Ramon, Mayor Wilson presiding.

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

ABSENT: None

STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Gail E. Waiters, City Attorney Tom Curry, Police Chief Kathy Samuels, Parks and Community Services Director Jeff Eorio, Public Works Director Joye Fukuda, and City Clerk Judy Macfarlane.

* * * *

Cub Scout Troop 841 from Walt Disney Elementary School led Council, staff and those present in the audience in the pledge of allegiance.

* * * *

Mayor Wilson read a proclamation recognizing the City of San Ramon’s 20^th Anniversary.

Mayor Wilson presented certificates of recognition to the Art and Wind Festival sponsors; ChevronTexaco, KKIQ, San Ramon Regional Medical Center, Windemere, Contra Costa Times, SBC and San Ramon Marriott.

Mayor Wilson presented certificates of recognition to Girl Scout Gold Award recipients, Kristen Charzuk and Megan Weber.

* * * *

Sam Lemon questioned the estimated budget for the City Civic Center and funding sources that were available. He stated this project should be put on hold until the current economic crisis in the city and state had passed.

Scott Miller, San Ramon Aqua Bears swim team, said the team had applied for a permit to operate the public address system at the Royal Vista pool and hoped the permit would be issued prior to the next scheduled event.

* * * *

Cm. Dickey’s motion to approve the minutes of the May 27, 2003 meeting as amended was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 5-0.

* * * *

Cm. Dickey requested that Item 8.2 Resolution No. 2003-67 Establishing fees and charges for various municipal services and repealing Resolution No. 2003-93 be removed for discussion.

Cm. Hudson requested Item 8.1 – Register of Demands be removed for discussion.

Cm. Hudson questioned page 18 of the register of demands and asked for an explanation of the $25,000 expense paid to the Tri-Valley Business Council.

Dave Berger, Interim Economic Development Manager, stated that item was payment for 2002-2003.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to approve the register of demands was seconded by Cm. Dickey and passed 5-0.

Cm. Dickey questioned why the business license fees charged by the City had not been increased. She stated that while the City was limited by a maximum amount, she inquired if there was a way to increase the other categories.

Rob Stout, Interim Finance Director, said he would investigate the possibilities of increasing the business license fees for the categories that had not been capped.

Mayor Wilson opened public comment.

Diane Schinnerer stated that the business license was merely a registration fee. She objected to the proposed fee increase for council packets.

Mayor Wilson closed public comment.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to set July 8, 2003 as the public hearing date for Resolution No. 2003-70 Establishing Fees and Charges for various municipal services and repealing Resolution No. 2002-93, was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 5-0.

* * * *

Sandra Barlow, Administrative Analyst said this was the final step in re-establishing Landscaping and Lighting District No. 1984-1 for FY 2003-04. She stated staff recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2003-64 Confirming and levying the assessment for FY 2003/04.

Cm. Tatarka asked for an explanation as to why park maintenance was added to the L & L District in FY1992/93.

Ms. Barlow stated there was no answer provided in the Engineer’s Report.

No one spoke during the public hearing.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to adopt Resolution No. 2003-64 Confirming and levying the assessment for FY 2003/04 was seconded by Cm. Dickey and passed 5-0.

* * * *

Gail E. Waiters, City Manager, presented an overview of the proposed budget based upon the ratings submitted by Council after deliberation at the June 10, 2003 meeting. She reviewed the following slides in her presentation:

· Proposed city-wide budget

· Budget notes

· Proposed General Fund Budget

· Balance the Budget

· New Revenue

· New Expenditures

· Proposed changes/adjustments

· Council ratings – one time funding

· Council ratings – ongoing funding

· Tradeoffs

· Balance the Budget

Cm. Dickey asked if the projected increase in the Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT) had been included in the new revenue projection figures.

Ms. Waiters explained that the TOT had not been included in the revenue projection figures because the City Attorney was still working on the proposed measure for the November election. She said that if the TOT were to be increased, those revenues would not be realized this fiscal year.

Tom Curry, City Attorney, verified that the earliest the increase in the TOT could be effective would be the day after the election. He said if the increase were approved by the voters, it could be determined then when the increase would become effective.

Cm. Hudson referred to the savings of $1.5 million appearing on one slide, but not the next.

Cm. Tatarka requested an explanation of "non-departmental" expenses and revenues.

Ms. Waiters explained that non-department expenses related to personnel costs and non-departmental revenue related to sales tax, earned interest projection and increase in transfers from other funds.

Cm. Tatarka referenced the "ongoing funding" slide and asked for an explanation of two line items which were both labeled "Crow Canyon Gardens".

Jeff Eorio, Parks and Community Services Director, stated the $9,661 represented expenditures that exceeded revenue projections.

Joye Fukuda, Public Works Director, stated the $32,437 related to the maintenance costs for the Crow Canyon Gardens and the surrounding park site.

Ms. Waiters answered Cm. Tatarka’s question regarding Community Promotions stating the reduction of $100,000 used to be called the Community Grant Program.

Cm Dickey inquired as to the status of the library grant writer funding.

Mayor Wilson thanked Ms. Waiters and staff for the work done in preparation of the Budget. He stressed the importance of "living within our means" and that Council and staff were working hard to increase revenues.

Mayor Wilson opened the public hearing and requested that each speaker limit their comments to three minutes.

Pauline Nolte submitted a card supporting Sunday hours at the library and the library grant writer.

Noreen Divito submitted a card supporting the current management team at Crow Canyon Gardens.

Krissa Jacobson submitted a card supporting the Crow Canyon Gardens.

John Ebert suggested the TOT be increased to the same level of 8% as the surrounding cities with the increase used to fund the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor’s Bureau.

Karen Noh spoke in support of continued funding of the Crow Canyon Institute’s maintenance fees.

Mayor Wilson read a letter from Don Schinnerer, DDS, supporting the continued funding of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor’s Bureau.

Mayor Wilson read a letter from Robert C. Lemon supporting the continued funding of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor’s Bureau.

Mayor Wilson read a letter from the Monarch Hotel supporting the continued funding of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor’s Bureau.

Dorthe Desvernine submitted a card in support of funding for the Crow Canyon Institute.

Teresa Inchauspe said she supported the funding of Crow Canyon Institute for the maintenance of Crow Canyon Gardens.

Beverly McAdams, CTV Board member spoke in support of the funding for the relocation of the CTV studio.

Amy Blaschka, Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau, requested continued funding for the CVB.

Mark Bolton, General Manager of San Ramon Marriott, requested continued support of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau.

Cm. Dickey asked if the Marriott did independent advertising and attended trade shows.

Mr. Bolton replied that the bulk of advertising for the Marriott was handled on a corporate level.

Cm. Tatarka asked the amount of dues the Marriott paid in each of the markets.

Cm. Tatarka’s question was answered that $3,000 was paid annually by the San Ramon Marriott.

Barbara Stott, Crow Canyon Institute, expressed her displeasure that detailed budget information had not been made available to the public and questioned the future of Crow Canyon Institute.

Linda Wilgus, Crow Canyon Institute, presented an overview of the maintenance costs of Crow Canyon Gardens and encouraged the Council to continue funding the contract with Crow Canyon Institute.

Cm. Hudson stated the City remits a check in the amount of $8,000 each month to CCI, and questioned the figures presented by Ms. Wilgus.

Pauline Nolte submitted a card supporting the continued funding of Crow Canyon Institute for maintenance of the Crow Canyon Gardens.

Diane Higgins submitted a card supporting the funding of Crow Canyon Institute for the maintenance of the Crow Canyon Gardens.

Charlotte Canning submitted a card supporting the City’s continued contract with CCI to maintain Crow Canyon Gardens.

Mahmoud El-Gasseir submitted a card supporting Crow Canyon Gardens Institute.

Roz Rogoff expressed support for the continued funding for the Tri-Valley Incubator. She said the City should cut the City Civic Center from the budget and use the funds for other projects slated to be eliminated.

Thomas O’Malley spoke in support of the Tri-Valley Business Council.

Cm. Tatarka asked Mr. O’Malley for an explanation of the disparity between the amounts paid to the Tri-Valley Business Council by Danville and San Ramon.

Mr. O’Malley said Danville paid less because they had a smaller industrial base.

Mayor Wilson asked what would happen if San Ramon discontinued funding the Tri-Valley Business Council.

Mr. O’Malley replied there would have to be a reduction in their work plan.

Mark Corti, Principal of California High School, spoke in support of continued funding for the school resource officer. He described the school resources officer and DARE officer’s involvement with on-campus activities.

VM Cambra asked what the effect would be if the school resource officer were called off-campus to respond to an emergency.

Mr. Corti replied that this situation had occurred resulting in no problems on campus.

Cm. Dickey asked if anyone had approached the school district to share the expense with the City for the provision of the school resource officer.

Mr. Corti said the school district was faced with budget cuts and did not see this as a viable alternative.

Joyce Gunn, San Ramon Librarian, said the architect’s drawing for the City Civic Center library plans were of vital importance pursuant to the Title 5 Library Bond regulations and urged the Council to continue funding the City Civic Center Project.

Ed Cheng, Library Advisory Committee, spoke in favor of maintaining the funding for Sunday hours at the library.

VM Cambra requested a breakdown of the cost listed as City Civic Center Project in the amount of $734,000.

Ms. Fukuda stated that figure of $734,000 included contract costs for Fisher Friedman, Swinerton and the environmental consultant through November 2003.

Cm. Dickey asked what the status of the project would be if the funding for the City Civic Center was eliminated. She said at this point we did not have final drawings, design documents, or any information pertaining to the financing mechanisms.

Ms. Fukuda stated all work would stop effective June 30, 2003.

Cm. Dickey asked for a progress report on the City Civic Center project.

Steve Fust, Swinerton Management, expressed his belief that the consultants were at the 75% completion level. He stated invoices were currently being reviewed and would be included in the FY2002/03 budget, and they were not part of the $734,000 being discussed.

Cm. Dickey stressed the importance of the completion of final drawings for this project, stating without the drawings, the cost estimating could not be done.

Mayor Wilson requested discussion cease and returned to the public hearing.

Jay Bhalla encouraged the continued funding of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau. He also said a more pro-active approach needed to be taken to gain resident interest in the City Civic Center Project.

Carol Rowley spoke in favor of funding the school resource officer and the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau.

Sam Lemon read a letter signed by himself, Dianne Schinnerer, Patricia Boom, Juanita Whitney-Harding, Roz Rogoff, Mary Lou Oliver and Joe Covello, which stated the City Civic Center project should be eliminated entirely from the budget.

Toby Brink, San Ramon Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the continued funding of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau.

Dianne Schinnerer requested the City put a halt to the contract with Fisher Friedman for the City Civic Center project, and urged the Council to continue funding the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau.

Gary Craft, Tri-Valley Telecommunications Incubator, requested the City’s continued funding for the incubator.

* * * *

Mayor Wilson declared a 10-minute recess.

All Councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened.

* * * *

Ms. Waiters proposed to Council that budget items be voted on individually, and those items that did not have consensus, be presented individually for deliberation and decision. She said this would assist in establishing how much funding would come from the general fund reserve.

Mayor Wilson requested that a roll call vote be taken for each item.

1-4 (Cambra, Dickey, Tatarka, Wilson dissenting)

Cm. Tatarka asked if the City had ever funded capital improvements for CTV-30 before, and what the $96,000 payment from the City was based on.

Mr. Eorio said the cities initially capitalized the station in 1984, and the $96,000 payment was based on a $.50 per Comcast subscriber. He recapped the strategy established by the franchise agreement to phase out the cities involvement with funding CTV stating that 65% of the operating budget was funded by the cities through Comcast with the balance being covered by fund raising and contracted services.

Cm. Dickey inquired if all cities were budgeted to participate in the shared expense of the relocation project.

Mr. Eorio stated that Pleasanton and Dublin had committed, while Livermore was considering bridging the funding over two fiscal years during which time the project would proceed through the construction document phase, bidding process, etc.

Mayor Wilson confirmed that if the city decided to approve $125,000, partial funding, it would not impede the project from moving forward.

VM Cambra stated he found it difficult to fund this project while almost all other projects had been eliminated from the CIP. He suggested waiting a year until the economy had recovered.

The motion to fund CTV passed 3-2 (Cambra and Dickey dissenting).

The motion to fund CTV in the amount of $125,000 passed 4-1 (Cambra dissenting).

The motion to fund Sunday library hours passed 4-1 (Hudson dissenting).

The motion to fund the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau failed 2-3 (Cambra, Dickey and Tatarka dissenting).

VM Cambra’s motion to partially fund the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau was seconded by Cm. Dickey.

Cm. Tatarka said she could not support funding the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau when the Community Grant Program had been eliminated from the budget. She expressed her displeasure with the by-law requiring city membership to allow local businesses to belong. She stated the TOT was economy driven resulting in a $4M revenue reduction, and stated that membership in the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau did not increase the TOT. She asked VM. Cambra to elaborate on his motion for partial funding and describe the partnership he envisioned.

Cm. Hudson disputed Cm. Tatarka’s statement saying the TOT had not gone down the $4M she quoted. He said at a November 2002 Council meeting he had requested staff to schedule a meeting between the Council, Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau, and the Chamber of Commerce, to establish an uniform effort to increase the TOT to 10% for the ballot. He said this would have established a complete buy-in by all parties involved and would have eliminated the annual debate on the funding of the CVB. He stated that it did not matter was amount was budgeted for CVB, the return would be the same. He said it was not a subsidy, a grant or a gift, but a return to source of our tax dollars.

Cm. Tatarka stated Amy Blacshka had personally called the funding a "city grant".

Mayor Wilson said that increasing sales tax would assist in reducing the financial deficit in the City and that funding the CVB was an obvious step to accomplish that task.

Cm. Dickey said the CVB could not provide direct marketing results showing a positive return from membership. She said that San Ramon was not tourist driven but was a business driven city and there should be some sort of tracking record on what the TOT was prior to funding the CVB.

Cm. Hudson said because San Ramon was a business destination, it was during the weekend that assistance was needed to help fill the hotel rooms and restaurants. He said that is where the CVB would be of assistance to the local business as well.

VM Cambra referred to returned revenues in the amount of $23,000 listed in the Community Development Director’s report. He said by making the motion, it had been his intent to negotiate a partial payment in lieu of totally eliminating the funding.

Cm. Dickey said the bylaws of the CVB were a major concern and asked what the distinction was between referrals and advertising.

Mr. Berger explained that there were several percentages in the community development report. He said that the estimated TOT revenue from CVB booking activities was 27.5% of the City’s total membership contribution. He said that based on total hotel bookings to date for the current fiscal year, San Ramon had received about 23% of the total room nights for the four jurisdictions. He said this corresponded very closely to the 22% that was the basis for the City’s contribution in the formula.

Cm. Tatarka referred to the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau guide and said Alameda County cities were predominately featured and it was very difficult to find San Ramon businesses.

VM Cambra amended the motion for partial funding of the Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau in the amount of $35,000 died for lack of second.

The motion to fund the Tri-Valley Business Council failed 0-5.

The motion to fund the ad for Tri-Valley Wine Grower’s passed 3-2 (Dickey and Tatarka dissenting).

VM Cambra stated he would like to explore funding the incubator on an interim basis from the general fund. He said this would be in anticipation of relocating the incubator to office space in the redevelopment area at which time funding would come from redevelopment funds.

Ms. Waiters stated the City Attorney had opined that funding of the telecommunications incubator was not an appropriate expenditure from the RDA. She said if approved for funding, the incubator would have to be funded from the general fund until such time it was relocated into a redevelopment area.

Cm. Tatarka requested a breakdown of the funding for this item.

Ms. Waiters said it was a two-year lease for space in the amount of $354,000 per year. She said the City had funded the incubator in the past and Council needed to determine if this was going to be one-time funding, or on-going funding. Ms. Waiters stated staff had been working closely with Mr. Craft to enter into an agreement which included performance standards.

Mayor Wilson stated the incubator had been pro-active in bringing down its operating costs and improving the format to establish itself more as a business incubator. He said as the incubator generated funds, grants or other means of support, the funding from the City would decrease. Mayor Wilson said the main goal was to get the incubator self-sufficient.

Cm. Dickey asked if funding for the incubator came from the general fund, by what means would the City be reimbursed.

VM Cambra suggested funding the incubator during an interim period until such time as space is secured in a redevelopment area. He said then the incubator could be fully funded from the RDA. He verified that the $354,000 was per year, and the agreement was for a two-year period.

The motion for the on-going funding of the telecommunications incubator passed 5-0.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to continue the meeting past 10:30 P.M. was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed unanimously.

Ms. Waiters said this was a CIP project funded by Park Development Funds.

The motion to fund the Pine Valley Parking Lot project passed 4-1 (Hudson dissenting).

VM Cambra asked if it were possible to move forward with just city offices and the library. He asked if the cost would be reduced if the project moved forward focusing only on those two components.

Cm. Dickey stated that the library and children’s museum were designed to be in concert with each other, but they could be built independently. She said she was uncertain whether or not the children’s museum design work had been incorporated with the library plans.

Cm. Hudson said the decision whether or not to proceed with the City Civic Center Project needed to be made.

Ms. Waiters said the contract with the architects had deliverables and costs listed. She said it was conceivable that the consultants had not gotten to the point in funding and with regards to the deliverables, there could some adjustment to the dollar amount. Ms. Waiters requested Mr. Fust to indicate exactly where we were in the process.

Mr. Fust said if the project were able to move forward, conceptual plans for all four buildings and the phasing plan would allow the City to move forward with any one of the buildings, independently of all of the rest. He said this would allow the City to move forward with some type of development on the 7-acres. He said the 7-acres was included in the EIR review and would be included in the final presentation that would include feasible funding alternatives. Mr. Fust stated with Fischer Friedman contract, the City would own the work product at the end of the contract. However, he indicated, if the contract were terminated, there would be a question as to ownership of the work product. He said Fisher Friedman’s contract was $1.675M, with $200,000 being reimbursables. He said $60,000 of the reimbursables had been used, and there would be some savings if the contract were terminated today. He stated it was also possible to massage the design and stop work on the performing arts center and the museum, but could not provide an estimate on the savings the City would experience.

Mayor Wilson inquired if adequate information for the funding alternatives would be available in time for the November ballot.

Mr. Fust said he would have to work with staff to determine the numbers and establish what was feasible. He stated there were many options that could be reviewed with staff for feasibility of funding alternatives for this project.

Mayor Wilson stated the only reason he had voted in January for this project to proceed was the promise that the information would be ready in time to prepare a ballot initiative so the residents could vote whether they wanted a City Civic Center and the price they would be willing to pay.

Mr. Fust assured Mayor Wilson that a completed cost estimate and model would be presented at the July 8 meeting along with the conceptual designs.

Cm. Tatarka asked Mr. Fust what still needed to be completed.

Mr. Fust said the conceptual designs, models and renderings would be completed by July 8. He added that the interior workup of the library would be ongoing through the last half of this year. Mr. Fust said the EIR had always been considered to be on-going with completion scheduled for November. He advised that the cost estimating and financing options were going to be handled in July and August. He confirmed for Cm. Tatarka that if the project stopped, it would put a halt to the library grant.

Cm. Tatarka asked if it were possible to use park development funds for any portion of the City Civic Center.

Ms. Fukuda confirmed that park development funds could be utilized however they needed to compare park related costs to the funds available in the park development fund.

Cm. Tatarka asked the Finance Director if it were possible, when the City Center was funded, that a resolution be adopted that would reimburse the general fund.

Rob Stout, Interim Finance Director, stated that repayment could be possible. He explained that a capital project fund needed to be established for the City Civic Center, where all costs would be incurred, and then some of the costs that are paid for can be reimbursed when and if there is a bond issuance. He said the general fund would loan money to the CIP for the design and preparatory costs and repayment would occur when the funding mechanism was in place. Mr. Stout also explained intra-fund loans but cautioned that there were limitations that needed to be observed.

Ms. Waiters interjected that Council would need to vote on this process. She stated it could be accomplished that night or at a future meeting.

Mr. Stout said that the $1.1M was already budgeted. He said this discussion regarded the recommendation from staff to stop funding the project. He said in essence, staff was asking permission to ignore the budget and cease funding the project.

Ms. Waiters said Cm. Tatarka’s question was regarding repayment which would take a separate Council vote. Ms. Waiters said it would be a Council policy, pending consensus, and repayment could include all that had been expended on the City Civic Center to this point.

Cm. Dickey verified with Mr. Fust that if Council did not proceed with this project, the cost or funding mechanisms would never be determined. She asked specifically what was the measure Council was proposing to put on the ballot.

Tom Curry, City Attorney, stated there were two issues that could be put on ballot. One would be a general statement to find out if the residents wanted a civic center. The other question would be far more complicated, requiring certain studies and analysis of various funding sources. He stated that most funding sources would require voter approval, and the question would be to select which of those methods would be most appropriate. Mr. Curry stated it depended on what the Council wanted to put on the ballot, the conceptual advisory approval of the land use decision or the funding mechanisms for the financing the project could be done.

Cm. Dickey stated it was rather redundant to put a measure on the ballot for an advisory vote when the people had said that wanted a civic center. She stated the decision had been made and if it was not the right decision, then the Council had wasted an awful lot of money. She asked how could you ask the people if they approved of the design when it has not yet been completed.

Cm. Hudson said the discussion pertained to putting a bond measure on the ballot to fund the project. He stated the discussion was whether or not to cut $734,000 from the budget, but what had been forgotten was that $7M in uncollected permitting fees from the 11 and 7-acre parcels. He said a solid look had not been taken at the other problems, like paying back the financing, the operation and maintenance. He said the effort was to compensate for a $8.1M deficit and it appeared that by proceeding with the City Civic Center project, another deficit could also be built.

Cm. Dickey said the costs for the project could not be substantiated until the designs were finished.

Mayor Wilson again said that the main reason he had voted in favor for proceeding with the project was the promise that the cost estimates would be complete in time to write a ballot measure for November.

Cm. Dickey questioned exactly what was being proposed to be put on the ballot.

Mr. Fust stated because the design was in the final stages of completion, the specific cost estimates for the project, including the phasing of the project, were still being compiled. He said by waiting until the designs were completed, the financing options and mechanisms could be pursued with a reasonable expectation as to what the buildings would cost.

Mayor Wilson expressed his disbelief that the consultants could not provide a realistic cost estimate for this project at this time.

VM Cambra said it would appear that the City would lose $2.3M if the project were to stop at this point in time. He expressed his desire for the project to move forward to ensure that the City would own the designs and accurate estimates for the cost would be obtainable.

Cm. Tatarka stated that this was an investment in the City. She stated we were at a crossroads from being a small city to a medium sized city and this project was the infrastructure that was needed to facilitate the process.

VM Cambra stated that the City Civic Center would be a great benefit to the business community.

Mr. Curry said the issues in placing the City Civic Center matter on the November ballot involved matters of policy, finance and design. He said those decisions needed to be made before he could draft language for any ballot measure.

Mayor Wilson stated that 100% of the residents he had spoken with favored a City Civic Center, but they all had inquired as to the cost. He said the most important facet of this project was not the design, but the funding mechanism.

The motion to include the $734,000 funding for the City Civic Center in the FY 2003/04 budget passed 3-2 (Hudson and Wilson dissenting).

The motion to include funding for the library grant writer passed 3-2 (Hudson and Wilson dissenting).

Administrative Analyst Position

Ms. Waiters stated this was a brand new position responsible for public information, community relations, legislative analysis, grant writing and media relations.

She confirmed for Cm. Tatarka that this position would provide city-wide support, including promotions for the economic development department.

The motion to include funding for the administrative analyst position passed 3-2 (Cambra and Hudson dissenting).

The motion to eliminate funding for community grants/promotions passed 4-1 (Cambra dissenting).

Ms. Waiters stated this motion was to decide whether or not to implement the new revenue generating opportunities at the proposed level. She confirmed for Cm. Tatarka that San Ramon was approximately 50% lower in the fees assessed in the Building Department than the surrounding cities.

The motion to reduce the new revenues (as identified) did not pass 1-4 (Cambra, Dickey, Tatarka and Wilson dissenting).

Ms. Waiters stated this was a proposal to provide maintenance service to Crow Canyon Gardens by City staff.

VM Cambra said he found the figures by Mr. Skeel to be more realistic than the stats provided by Linda Wilgus. He confirmed for Cm. Hudson that the community plots were included in the analysis.

Ms. Waiters said staff had proposed to bring the maintenance in-house and keep the same level of service. She explained the two line items identified as Crow Canyon Gardens were listed separately as they related to two different departments, Parks and Public Works.

Mr. Eorio said to maintain the same level of programming currently offered at the gardens, revenues would offset expenses with the exception for approximately $10,000.

Cm. Tatarka stated this was similar to the model being used at Forest Home Farms. She asked Mr. Eorio what was the total cost for maintenance at Crow Canyon Gardens.

Jeff Gault, Public Works Department, stated the maintenance for the gardens would be $168,000 annually.

Cm. Tatarka asked what was the cost for staff for the areas not covered by the contract with CCI.

Mr. Gault replied it was approximately $100,000 for maintenance for the area not covered by CCI.

VM Cambra said that figure was comparable to what was listed on his report. He said there was a difference of approximately $11,000 in the costs in community services, classes, garden tours and administrators.

Cm Dickey asked Mr. Eorio to provide details pertaining to the use of contract employees.

Mr. Eorio replied that contract instructors were utilized for the majority of the programs within the city. He said contract instructors would be used for specialty classes and they would utilize them if there was a shortage of tour guide volunteers.

Mayor Wilson asked what impact there would be if this item was not voted on.

Ms. Waiters encouraged Council to make a decision based on what was currently in place and the direction that had been provided. She said staff could review and find additional funding to close the gap. She said the current maintenance contract expired November 2003, and the RFP process to find a new entity to manage the gardens would be starting soon.

Mayor Wilson said the issue wasn’t about finding a new entity to manage the gardens, it was having a RFP everyone could agree on. He said the normal procedure should be followed and expressed concern that it had been predetermined that in-house would be the best way to manage the gardens.

Cm. Tatarka asked if this matter was being brought in-house for the FY 2003-04 budget.

VM. Cambra said he wanted to stay with the RFP process with the maximum figure that had been previously established.

Ms. Waiters said that would be a Council Policy Committee decision and staff would bring back the information for Council action.

Cm. Hudson’s motion to continue the meeting an additional 30 minutes was seconded by Cm. Tatarka and passed 5-0.

Ms. Waiters stated that the two figures identified as Crow Canyon Gardens represented bringing this activity in-house. She said if you are in favor of bringing it in house, vote yes on both line items.

The motion to include the Crow Canyon Gardens ($9,200 bring in-house) failed 2-3 (Cambra, Dickey and Tatarka dissenting).

The motion to include the Crow Canyon Gardens ($32,437 bring in-house) failed 2-3 (Cambra, Dickey, Tatarka dissenting).

The motion to eliminate funding for the school resource officer failed 0-5.

The motion to eliminate the funding for the equipment for the DARE officer passed 4-1 (Hudson dissenting).

Ms. Waiters stated by eliminating one DARE office it would not impede the program. She said an alternative program was being explored by staff.

Cm. Hudson stated that the elimination of the DARE office was the same as cutting one officer from the department.

The motion to eliminate the funding for one DARE officer passed 4-1 (Hudson dissenting).

Ms. Waiters stated that the new officer positions would be funded by the CSA (County Service Area) if the City were being reimbursed. She said they were currently being funded from the General Fund and said determined by the Dougherty Valley Agreement, there was a nexus between development and when new officers were to come on-line.

Cm.Tatarka requested clarification regarding the statement made pertaining to the Dougherty Valley Agreement.

Phil Wong, Planning Manager, stated that the service level must be maintained on a equitable basis throughout San Ramon, as stated in the Dougherty Valley agreement. All service level should be equal.

C. Hudson stated that one of our Measure C performances is one officer per thousand people, which is roughly every 350 homes. He said if that was the City standard,

Cm. Tatarka asked how it related to the settlement agreement.

Mr. Wong stated all service levels for all of San Ramon have to apply to Dougherty Valley pursuant to the settlement agreement.

Cm. Tatarka verified that there were four officers currently in Dougherty Valley and this line item would add two more. She asked if the city would be in violation of the agreement if funding for the two officers was eliminated.

Ms. Waiters stated while some areas of the Dougherty Valley had yet been annexed, the settlement agreement allows for that creating a technicality.

Cm. Hudson stated that the officers were supposed to be funded by the CSA, and the real problem was that the CSA was not funding it. He stated this item should not be part of our budget process but because it had not been funded by the CSA the problem had been created.

Cm. Tatarka asked what the status was between the county and the CSA. She said it was her understanding that it was supposed to by the September 2003. She said the City had been working for two years to recover the funds from the CSA.

Ms. Waiters said she was unaware of that deadline.

Mayor Wilson stated that the settlement agreement basically states that the City would be reimbursed. He said to not fund two police officers would be criminal to eliminate importance services to the residents in Dougherty Valley.

Cm. Tatarka stated her frustration that the city was forced to cut programs to fund services for the Dougherty Valley that were two years past due in being reimbursed to the City. She said she had not seen any reassurances that reimbursement was going to be made.

Mayor Wilson stated DVOC had been pushing to resolve the reimbursement issue for the past two years and the City needed to be pro-active in resolving this.

VM Cambra stated the money was owed to the City and it should be repaid within a reasonable amount of time. He asked the Chief of Police, if there would be any difficulties in obtaining officers should this item remain in the budget.

Kathy Samuels, Police Chief, stated there was adequate staffing through the county to fill the positions.

The motion to fund two new police officers in the Dougherty Valley passed 4-1 (Cambra dissenting).

Cm. Hudson’s motion to continue the meeting for an additional 30 minutes was seconded by Cm. Dickey and passed unanimously.

Ms. Waiters stated this item was a new allocation of $300,000 pursuant to previous Council direction for the encumbrance of utility undergrounding.

Cm. Dickey asked if this was Council directions had been passed by resolution.

Ms. Waiters stated this had been Council direction

Ms. Fukuda stated that the utility underground program had been directed by a previous Council general direction to allocate $300,000 , not done by resolution, however, the annual $300,000 allocation was always a part of the capital improvement program so it was part of the overall capital improvement program and so as part of the overall CIP approval, as part of the budget, then there was a Council action taken on it.

Cm. Dickey said she was concerned that there was a formal Council direction taken and we were not able to just inadvertently

Ms. Waiters said the difference or confusion was based on how the City funded its CIP. She said these projects had been approved in the budget and the CIP, but no money was encumbered until the project actually started. She said while it was an approved project, the money would be automatically be taken out of general fund reserves when the project commences. Ms. Waiters stated that effective with FY2003/04, the City would be encumbering for CIP projects. She stated that the $1.5M was in the general fund reserve, it was not specific to the utility underground project.

VM Cambra asked if the money had not been specifically set aside for undergrounding, how was it designated so.

Ms. Waiters said that staff had responded to Council direction to earmark the funds. She said the earmark and encumber are two different things.

VM Cambra asked if any funds had been set aside for undergrounding in any fashion; PGS, 20A, nothing? Zero?

Ms. Fukuda said the allocated PGE Rule 20A money had been dedicated to existing CIP projects, in particular San Ramon Valley Boulevard, south of Morgan. She said that PGE allows borrowing ahead up to five years and said she believed that the city had up to two years to borrow ahead that would be available. Incur about $140,000 per year. Two years of borrow ahead would equate to $280,000. She said two of the years were available for another project.

Mayor Wilson confirmed that the funds were being used accordingly, for under grounding.

Ms. Fukuda stated the Rule 20A money had been allocated for undergrounding for utilities. She clarified that there was a difference between Rule 20A money and general fund money.

Mr. Stout explained differences in accounting methods and terminology. He said the funds for the utility undergrounding had not been encumbered, had not been designated, nor transferred into a specific CIP. He said while the general fund had been growing, the funds for the under grounding had not been designated.

Cm. Hudson stated that each year $300,000 had been budgeted to go towards under grounding.

Ms. Waiters said she was proposing that starting with FY2003-04, if the CIP was approved, funds be transferred to a specific fund earmarked for this project. Ms. Waiters stated that the Council could fund and unfund CIP projects whenever it chooses too.

VM Cambra said the other option would be to leave the money in the general fund, but to designate it to a specific project. This way it would allow the funds to be used for other purposes.

Cm. Hudson motion to defer the $300,000 for the utility under grounding project to a later year was seconded by VM Cambra failed 2-3 (Cambra, Tatarka and Wilson dissenting).

The motion to designate $300,000 for the utility underground program passed 4-1 (Hudson dissenting).

The motion to designate the $1.2M for the utility underground program passed unanimously.

Ms. Waiters said with the decisions made by Council that evening, she requested where the delta is between Service level adjustments new expenditures and the new revenue, the proposed figure needed to be calculated what would be a reserve allocation,

Mr. Stout announced that based on the decisions made by council that evening the figure from the reserve allocation had increased from $4,050,000 to $5,300,000. He stated this would reduce the general fund balance to$22.5M which could still change depending on last minute transactions.

The motion to adopt the budget with $5,300,000 from the general fund reserve failed 2-3 (Cambra, Hudson and Wilson dissenting).

* * * *

Mayor Wilson declared a 5-minute recess.

All councilmembers were present when the meeting reconvened.

* * * *

Ms. Waiters presented to Council a recap of actions taken that evening to confirm

Citizen Inquiry Software – not funded

Library Grant Writer – funded

CTV-30 – funded at $125,000

Sunday library hours – funded

Cm. Dickey motion to eliminate the funding for Sunday hours at the library, with the provision that adjustments be made to the current operating hours to accommodate for Sunday hours died for a lack of second.

Tri-Valley Convention and Visitor's Bureau – not funded

Tri-Valley Business Council – not funded

Tri-Valley Wine Growers – funded

Telecommunications Incubator – funded at $354,000 two years (on-going)

Pine Valley Parking Lot – funded (Park Development Fund)

City Civic Center Project – funded

Administrative Analyst – funded

Community Grants/Promotions – not funded

Reducing new revenue – did not pass

Crow Canyon Gardens ($9,000) – eliminate

Crow Canyon Gardens ($32,000) – remains

School Resource Officer – funded

DARE – not funded

Patrol officers for Dougherty Valley – funded

Utility Undergrounding – reaffirmation

Mayor Wilson stated it appeared Council was at an impasse.

VM Cambra referred to the incubator and funding level. He stated there was a possibility of allocating funds for a period of time while attempting to relocate into the RDA area.

Mr. Berger stated the incubator would remain at its present location until such time as a location would be available in the project area. He stated the current lease which expires at the end of July, stated there was a hold-over provision enabling the incubator to be on a month-to-month basis. He said this that effort was successful, then the incubator could be funded from the RDA fund,. He said it was a reasonable estimate the process would take approximately six months to an approximate amount of $200,000 creating a savings of approximately $150,000.

Mayor Wilson questioned the legality of VM Cambra’s proposal.

Mr. Curry said at the time the incubator was physically located within the redevelopment area, and other conditions clarify the benefit to the area were established by the contract authorizing the expenditure of funds, to encumber it, the RDA could spend the money on that particular expenditure. He stated the current location of the incubator prevented the use of redevelopment funds.

VM. Cambra’s motion to fund the telecommunications incubator for a period of six months and direct staff to secure a new location within the redevelopment area,

Ms. Waiters suggested that staff meet with Mr. Craft to discuss the feasibility of relocating the incubator to the redevelopment area. She stated there may have impacts that need to be explored.

Mayor Wilson said it was apparent an impasse had been reached

Mr. Stout interjected that the original calculations for the funding of the police officers had been misquoted. He said the general fund would pick up approximately 17-18% of the DV costs. He said the total cost of the two officers was $350,000 , however it would impact the general fund total cost of $64,000.

Ms. Waiters stated there was not a mechanism to receive funds from the CSA at this point in time and did not have an indication on when it would begin. She questioned the impact

Mr. Stout stated the $1.8M currently being spent in the DV was not currently reflected in the general fund and suggested handling the expenditure for the new police officers in similar fashion.

Cm. Hudson asked when the new officers would be hired. He questioned the need to budget the entire amount if the officers were not going to be hired July 1, 2003.

Ms. Waiters stated that would be dependent upon the growth factor of the Dougherty Valley and the availability of officers through the County.

Scott Holder, Administrative Sergeant, said there was an eligibility list established in anticipation of the budget passing.

Cm. Hudson verified the coverage of the four officers and there service area that was covered by the CSA.

Mayor Wilson stated it was obvious an impasse had been reached and at 1:34 A.M. the meeting was continued to Monday, June 30, 2003 at 4:00 P. M.

Ms. Waiters suggested that during the interim period, staff would re-work the budget figures to reflect the actions taken to present to Council at the continued meeting.

Signed:

H. Abram Wilson, Mayor
Judy Macfarlane, City Clerk
APPROVED:  August 12, 2003