Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout102-Minutes - February 4, 2009.pdfMINUTES SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 4, 2009 The City Council of the City of Saratoga met in a Joint Meeting at 6:00 p.m. with the Planning Commission. Mayor Page called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmembers Jill Hunter, Howard Miller, Susie Nagpal, Vice Mayor Kathleen King, Mayor Chuck Page ABSENT: None ALSO Dave Anderson, City Manager PRESENT: Richard Taylor, City Attorney Debbie Bretschneider, Acting Deputy City Clerk Barbara Powell, Assistant City Manager John Cherbone, Public Works Director John Livingstone, Community Development Director Chris Riordan, Senior Planner REPORT OF CITY CLERK ON POSTING OF AGENDA Debbie Bretschneider, Acting Deputy City Clerk, reported that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, the agenda for the meeting of February 4, 2009, was properly posted on January 30, 2009. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The following people requested to speak tonight: Kathy Forte addressed the Council regarding a permit that was granted for the removal of Coastal Redwood trees near her Gate House property. She noted the Gate House Board of Directors received the permit to remove the trees and inquired as to why she was not aware of the request to remove trees. She noted that based on the City’s website, property owners that are within 150 feet of protected trees would receive a notice from the City that a tree removal permit has been granted. Vice Mayor King asked Ms. Forte if the Board of Directors could submit a tree removal request without the input of the members of the Gate House properties association. Ms. Forte stated that the tree removal request was submitted by a representative of the condominium management company; however the property owners were not notified. 2 Councilmember Hunter inquired about the 150 feet noticing requirement for condominium property homeowners after the permit to remove trees is granted. City Manager Dave Anderson stated that when the ordinance was adopted it was assumed that the homeowners association would communicate with the property owners and act as one voice. He noted that apparently this section of the tree removal ordinance needs to be revised to accommodate this type of situation, whereby, all the members in a homeowners association are notified of a submitted tree removal permit request. Janice Gamper addressed the Council regarding the June 9th “Wear Your Helmet” day and asked Council for their support in helping to promote this important safety event. Sumit Dutta addressed the Council regarding tree trimming near electrical power lines and asked who would be responsible for this procedure. Mayor Page stated PG & E was responsible for trimming trees near electrical power lines and suggested Mr. Dutta contact PG&E regarding tree trimming schedules. COUNCIL DIRECTION TO STAFF Vice Mayor King asked staff to contact Kathy Forte about her concerns regarding tree removal permit grants and the required notification of homeowners within 150 feet of trees being removed. Councilmember Hunter stated she would contact Ms. Gamper regarding her request for Council’s support for the June 9th “Wear a Helmet” day. COMMUNICATIONS FROM BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Prior to this evening’s Regular Meeting, Council had a Joint Meeting with the Saratoga Planning Commission. Chair Manny Cappello was present to provide a status report of their joint meeting. He noted they discussed the 2009 work plan the Planning Commission has for 2009, which includes: o Conditional Use Permit update (CUP) o Housing Element discussions by the Planning Commission o Study Session with Council and Planning Commission in March – followed by a public hearing o Administrative changes and clarifications regarding specific ordinances Mr. Cappello also thanked the Council for agendizing the CUP on the January 30th Council Retreat. Mayor Page thanked Mr. Cappello and the members of the Planning Commission for all the volunteer work the Commission does for the community. ANNOUNCEMENTS 3 Councilmember Miller announced that tickets are still available for the Chamber of Commerce Crab Feed on Saturday, February 7th at 6:30PM. He noted people could purchase their tickets at the Saratoga Senior Center, Chamber of Commerce and at various businesses in Saratoga. Councilmember Hunter reminded everyone about the “Saratoga Love Notes” that is occurring and invited everyone to participate by submitting a Love Note. She noted that the Love Notes would be displayed in shop windows throughout the Village and she thanked Foothill School for participating in the Love Note program. Councilmember Nagpal stated the Sister City Board is looking for residents that would be interested in hosting specialized gardeners from Japan from February 23 through February 27th. She noted interested residents could contact her for more information. Mayor Page announced that Saratoga High School is presenting the musical show “Grease” from February 5th through the 8th and invited everyone to attend and support their local high school. CEREMONIAL ITEMS None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. MINUTES – CH-2 STUDY SESSION – JANUARY 12, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Mayor Page removed this item for a clerical correction regarding the first and last name of Commissioner Rishi Kumar. PAGE/HUNTER MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES – CH-2 STUDY SESSION – JANUARY 12, 2009 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – JANUARY 21, 2009 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes. Councilmember Hunter removed this item to clarify her wording describing the 2008 holiday shopping season in the Village from “very good” to “fairly good”. 4 NAGPAL/HUNTER MOVED TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES – JANUARY 21, 2009 AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. 3. REVIEW OF ACCOUNTS PAYABLE REGISTERS STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accepts the Check Registers for Accounts Payable cycles: January 15, 2009 January 22, 2009 NAGPAL/MILLER MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CHECK REGISTERS FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CYCLES JANUARY 15, 2009 AND JANUARY 22, 2009. MOTION PASSED 5-0- 0. 4. ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROGRAM – AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Move to declare Guerra Construction Group to be the lowest responsible bidder on the Annual Concrete Repair and Replacement Program. 2. Award a construction contract for the Annual Concrete Repair and Replacement Program to Guerra Construction Group in the amount of $237,465 and authorize the City Manager to execute the same. 3. Authorize staff to execute change orders to the construction contract in the amount of $40,000. 4. Adopt Budget Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2008-2009 budget. RESOLUTION NO. 09-006 NAGPAL/MILLER MOVED TO 1) DECLARE GUERRA CONSTRUCTION GROUP TO BE THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER ON THE ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROGRAM; 2) AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE ANNUAL CONCRETE REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT PROGRAM TO GUERRA CONSTRUCTION GROUP IN THE AMOUNT OF $237,465 AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE SAME; 3) AUTHORIZE STAFF TO EXECUTE CHANGE ORDERS TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000; 4) ADOPT BUDGET RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 BUDGET. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REGULATIONS RELATED TO FENCES, WALLS, AND HEDGES & NEGATIVE DECLARAATION, 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council open the public hearing, accept public testimony, close the public hearing, approve the attached ordinance, waive the First Reading and direct staff to schedule this item for a Second Reading for adoption on the consent calendar at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Mayor Page asked Senior Planner Chris Riordan to describe the reasons why the Council had prioritized the Fence Ordinance over other Ordinances before he presented the staff report. Community Development Director John Livingstone came forward and stated that Council had asked the Planning Commission to prioritize the ordinances and bring that prioritized list to Council for review. Mr. Livingstone noted that the Fence Ordinance was in need of review by the Council due to changes in the type of fence products used, which included fence lattices, fence height, and the resulting code enforcement issues that have surfaced as a result of the new fence products available to home owners. Senior Planner Chris Riordan presented the staff report noting that the Planning Commission has held nine (9) meetings, which included both Study Sessions and Public Hearings to discuss these changes. Mayor Page opened the public hearing and invited public comment. The following people requested to speak on this item: Sumit Dutta thanked City Manager Dave Anderson for inviting him to the Public Hearing and stated that he was in support of the proposed changes to the Fence Ordinance. In addition, he thanked Mr. Livingstone for all his efforts in modifying the Fence Ordinance to help provide security and privacy to the Saratoga home owners. Steve de Keozer addressed the Council by stating 10 suggestions for updating the Fence Ordinance: 1) Keep it simple; 2) do not legislate against the freedom of expression; 3) do not legislate something that is not enforceable; 4) hillsides are different from the city proper and treat them that way; 5) do not encourage wild animals to wander freely within city limits; 6) the exception process is a very good idea; 7) use a line item veto for each councilmember and commissioner – then compare notes and eliminate all but the essentials; 8) specific suggestions can be pointed out from a list during the permit process, but left to home owners discretion; 9) do not legislate your sense of esthetics upon other people; 10) don’t try to rush the ordinance changes through as no one will remember how long it took to implement the changes, rather – how well it was accomplished. No one else was present to speak on this item. Mayor Page closed the public hearing and invited Council discussion. Councilmember Hunter inquired as to what assurances would be in place regarding staff knowledge reflecting the value system when granting fence permit applications. City Manager Dave Anderson responded that they would be rule-based – as they currently are, and the exception process would be decided by the Planning Commission. 6 Vice Mayor King asked if it would be similar to two-story home applications that had gone through the Planning Commission process, appealed, and then brought to the City Council for findings, discussion and a final decision made by the Council. Mr. Riordan concurred that would be the process. Councilmember Nagpal asked Mr. Riordan if this proposed fence ordinance was adopted, would it allow for the 15% or 6,000 square feet fence enclosure. Mr. Riordan confirmed that it would. Vice Mayor King asked if the fence along the front was 3 feet, would the gate be allowed to go up to 5 feet. Mr. Riordan confirmed that the gate could be 5 feet. Vice Mayor King asked if an applicant could go through the Planning Commission to apply for a higher front fence and higher front gate exception. Mr. Riordan confirmed that an applicant could do that. Mayor Page had a question on the section that states wrought iron entrance gates within the front setback area designed with openings to permit visibility through the same, may extend to a height not exceeding 5ft and shall be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of the street pavement and asked if that only applied to wrought iron gates within the front setback area. Mr. Riordan confirmed that this requirement applies only to wrought iron gates or a see-through gate, within 20 feet from the edge of the street pavement; solid gates cannot be 5 feet tall; they can only be 3 feet tall, and if the gate is not in the front setback, they could be taller than 3 feet. Councilmember Miller inquired about the policy for “grandfathering in” existing structures, fences, and gates in the community. Mr. Riordan stated that the “grandfathering in” section of the ordinance states that any existing fence can remain the way it is, however, the fence will be required to be brought up to code if 50% of the fence is removed. Councilmember Hunter had a question regarding “front elements” with regard to the height of pilasters or pillars between the fence sections. Mr. Riordan stated that pilasters or pillars can be 2 feet more than the height of the fence. Councilmember Hunter acknowledged that that would make it a total of 5 feet in the front. Mr. Riordan stated that was correct. 7 Vice Mayor King noted that the number one issue regarding code enforcement in the City pertains to fences. She stated she was very pleased with the amount of work the Planning Commission put into updating the Fence Ordinance; feels that the proposed updated fence ordinance is very well written and supports everything that is proposed in the new Fence Ordinance. Councilmember Miller also acknowledged all the effort the Planning Commission put into revising the Fence Ordinance; however he hopes that when a property owner applies for exceptions, there will be a fair amount of flexibility regarding existing fences in order to maintain privacy. Councilmember Nagpal noted she participated in a great number of Planning Commission meetings when she was on the Commission and stated that it was not an easy compromise. In addition, she questioned if maybe the exception process should be an administrative policy rather than going through the Planning Commission and suggested the exception issue be monitored for a year to see how it is working. Ms. Nagpal acknowledged the Planning Commission for all their hard work and stated she supported the proposed updates to the Fence Ordinance. Councilmember Hunter stated she is not in favor of 8 foot fences and is against spikes; has concerns about the free movement of wildlife; does not support modification of hedges, except for where views are affected; and feels that when fence regulations are not adhered to by property owners, it does not make it right to give property owner’s permission to do what they have been doing. Mayor Page also thanked the Planning Commission for their long arduous work in revising the Fence Ordinance and feels that the proposed fence ordinance will be enforceable as well as allow for changes in life styles and behavior that come about over time – while still preserving the environment that we want in Saratoga. Mayor Page acknowledged that the hillsides are different, but feels that the proposed revision of the fence ordinance accommodates those needs based on the lot size. He also stated he is very pleased to see that there is an exception process included in the revised fence ordinance and supports the proposed revised fence ordinance. RESOLUTION NO. 09-007 NAGPAL/KING MOVED TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. NAGPAL/KING MOVED TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED ORDINANCE, WAIVE THE FIRST READING AND DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE THIS ITEM FOR A SECOND READING FOR ADOPTION ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. OLD BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS 8 6. REVIEW THE FEES REQUIRED FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (CUP) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct Staff Accordingly. Community Development Director John Livingstone presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited public comment. The following person requested to speak on this item: Van Nelson, President of Saratoga Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council stating that the Chamber has a great interest in promoting commerce and to improve the business climate in the City of Saratoga. He stated some of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) restrictions and requirements should be reviewed in order to make the City of Saratoga more business friendly. He noted that a successful business would bring in more tax dollars than the fees charged to provide services for the permit. Mr. Nelson also suggested creating a brochure instructing people how to go through the permit process. In addition, Mr. Nelson recommended having a permitted use for the Chamber of Commerce that opens onto Big Basin Way, which would serve their purpose as the visitor’s center for people wanting to know what is happening in Saratoga. Mayor Page closed the public comment and invited Council discussion. Councilmember Miller feels that expediency to make the City more business friendly is important; noting that this item was agendized mainly to discuss the fees for the CUP, however he feels there is more to discuss based on public input and discussions from the recent Council Retreat. Additionally, he feels it is important to create an administrative process to speed up the permit process by putting certain types of businesses on a permitted use list. Vice Mayor King asked for clarification on the savings of a CUP fee if the permit process became an administrative process. Director Livingstone responded it would be an approximate savings of $1,000.00 depending on Council’s desire to have a zoning administrative hearing or a letter of notification of approval and appeal rights. So the cost of the CUP permit would go from $4,700 to $3,700. Vice Mayor King noted that someone could file an appeal for $700.00; which would give that applicant a longer period of time, but pay no additional money. Director Livingstone responded that would be correct, however, if a new administrative process was implemented, that could be addressed specifically. Councilmember Miller agreed that the administrative process could define the permitted uses. 9 Councilmember Nagpal noted that the first decision Council should make is the permitted use versus conditional use, along with additional changes to the existing permitted use list. She also noted she would like the conditional use permit process made easier for those businesses that require the CUP, rather than remove those businesses completely from the CUP list and put them into the permitted use list. Councilmember Nagpal also noted that with regard to the process of the use permit, she supported going to the administrative process because it will reduce the time and cost involved. Additionally, she supports an incentive program with a specified date for specific businesses – at a reduced permit fee; and if the City pays for the difference in the permit fee – where would the funding come from. Vice Mayor King stated she is comfortable with restaurants and/or retail for the use permits and feels that with the parking moratorium in effect for three more years now is the perfect time to combine incentives, such as restaurant versus retail, without a use permit change as an incentive. She also supports the option where you pay your administrative use fee; and if you are declined, your use fee will be refunded. She believes Saratoga needs different ways to incentivize businesses to come to Saratoga and make it as easy as possible. Councilmember Miller stated the process to change the permitted uses could be rather lengthily, if they chose to do so; and asked if they chose to implement an administrative review process, could this be done in a shorter amount of time. City Attorney Richard Taylor concurred it could be done in a shorter amount of time. Councilmember Miller noted that it would require time and caution in making changes to the permitted use process and that maybe the administrative process could be accomplished more quickly, with some additional guidance as to the types of businesses that we would encourage and with constraints if necessary. Vice Mayor King concurred and stated she would like to withdraw some of what she said earlier, in that she supports the administrative approach with only one step appeal to the Council or to the Planning Commission. Councilmember Nagpal noted it is important to identify the types of permitted uses that we want and incentivize those uses rather than making it a market driven process. Councilmember Hunter noted that much of these concerns relate to the businesses in the Village as that is where many of the concerns are. Councilmember Hunter stated she supports expediency as well as the incentive program; lowering the use permit fees; and feels that most people would like to see more retail in the Village. Mayor Page asked City Attorney Taylor how specific they would have to be to relax the conditional designation. City Attorney Richard Taylor stated that when you change the uses you have to consider why are the uses that are required to have a use permit different from the uses that are not required to have a use 10 permit. You would have more flexibility because you are legislating and not making a specific decision, however, it may present some challenges. Vice Mayor King inquired if this process would require a negative declaration. City Attorney Taylor stated it would. Mayor Page supports relaxing the permit requirements in order to encourage more businesses; however he doesn’t support refunding permit fees if someone isn’t approved. In addition, he questions if someone filed an appeal and they were overturned, would their appeal fee be refunded. He noted that there are a number of concerns that need to be addressed. He does believe the restaurants in Saratoga have helped make it what it is and supports “specific use” restaurants – such as a “breakfast” restaurant or a “lunch” restaurant and supports a given number of such restaurants for a limited period of time. Councilmember Nagpal asked if the permit process was left the same – discretionary action but through a zoning administrator instead of the Planning Commission – and if that would that be a relatively easier change. City Attorney Taylor replied that it would because there wouldn’t be any changes made to the standards, therefore the discretion remains and the public is still protected in the exercise of that discretion by the zoning administrator. Councilmember Nagpal asked her fellow councilmembers if they would be interested in this concept, which would help to lower the processing time and decrease the cost of the permit fees. Vice Mayor King noted she supports Councilmember Nagpals suggestion but with the incentive program encouraging specific uses and the fees paid for through a specific fund and with only one level of appeal. City Attorney Taylor noted this could be done without requiring an environmental review of the specific fund. Councilmember Nagpal stated she would be in support of having an administrative process with one level of appeal and specific funding to incentivize certain types of businesses if she knew where the funding would come from – if it was reasonable; and if it supported the types of businesses that they would encourage. Councilmember Miller noted that the fees are only one element of the CUP process and another issue is the indeterminate process. He would prefer that focus is directed to the administrative process and possibly include some type of grant process. We should determine which businesses would be allowed to go through the administrative process, i.e. by size – such as anything fewer than 3,000 square feet for a specific type of business, and the rest would go through the normal CUP process. He also supported the one level of appeal and to increase the cost recovery fee to $1,700 for an appeal fee in order to cover costs incurred by staff time. 11 City Attorney Taylor concurred with Councilmember Miller and noted the administrative process would still be discretionary. Councilmember Nagpal was not supportive of increasing the appeal fee to $1,700. Vice Mayor King asked if a one level appeal could only be appealed to the Planning Commission or could an appeal be brought to the Council as well. City Attorney Taylor stated that if Council wanted that to be the case they would need to specify that in the ordinance by saying that any member of the Planning Commission or the City Council may request to send the permit application to the appeal body. Councilmember Miller noted he would prefer that they reach a level whereby staff would be able to make the correct decision 99% of the time and not have the permit pulled by the Planning Commission or the Council. Discussion continued regarding the specific types of restaurants to be included in the “restaurant” category that would be handled by the zoning administrator. City Attorney Taylor voiced his concern regarding Council’s selection process to determine the criteria that would place a specific type of restaurant in the zoning administrator level and recommended Council use a straight forward approach and designate which category would go to the zoning administrator and then use other economic development efforts, other than the zoning code to state the specifics. COUNCIL CONSENSUS: Zoning Administrator: Council supports zoning administrator to determine businesses in the community such as family- style restaurants, bakeries, ice cream parlors: Vice Mayor King, Councilmember Nagal, Councilmember Miller support restaurants under 3,000 square feet and establishments that engage in sale of alcoholic beverages in CH-1 district. Councilmember Hunter was unsure about supporting restaurants. Mayor Page supports restaurants under 3,000 sq. feet; establishments that engage in sale of alcoholic beverages in CH-1 district and community facilities, such as a visitors center. Level of Appeal: Council concurred with one level of appeal to the Council. DIRECTION TO STAFF: 12 o Provide Council with any additional uses that may not have been discussed this evening in the next staff report, including cost recovery model and available funding in the discretionary budget. o Include the Chamber of Commerce in this evening’s decisions. o Agendize economic development incentive. 7. POTENTIAL 2009 WORK PLAN PRIORITIES FOR THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY CITIES ASSOCIATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept report and recommend potential 2009 work plan priorities for the Santa Clara County Cities Association (SCCCA), and authorize staff to return these suggestions to the SCCCA Board of Directors. Assistant City Manager Barbara Powell presented the staff report. Mayor Page invited council members to state what they would prioritize on the Potential Work Plan Priorities for 2009 to forward to the Cities Association for consideration at the February meeting. Councilmember Miller: Prepayment of PERS & Realized Savings, Retirement: Medical Benefits and Retirement at 55, and Emergency Communications Best Practices. Councilmember Nagpal: Countywide Green Building Standards and Countywide Streamlined Solar Power Policy and Solar Permitting Process. Vice Mayor King: Sharing best practices on Solar, Water Conservation Best Practices, and Health Issues – how to keep the community healthier. Councilmember Hunter: Water Conservation Best Practices. Mayor Page: Best practices on Solar Power Policy and Solar Permitting Process, Water Conservation Best Practices, Email Policy and Public Records Requests – Electronic Communications and the Brown Act. COUNCIL CONSENSUS ON THREE (3) MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES: o Water Conservation Best Practices o Countywide Solar Assessment Districts and Best Practices o County-wide Green Building Standards ADHOC & AGENCY ASSIGNMENT REPORTS Mayor Chuck Page – reported: West Valley Mayors and Managers Association – met and discussed the single-use bag issue and the mayors are leaning towards not participating in any discussions at this point and are waiting to see what happens with Legislative Bill AB 68. 13 Vice Mayor Kathleen King – had nothing to report. Councilmember Jill Hunter – reported: Library Joint Powers Association – Milpitas opened their new library, which was an addition to the back of their elementary school and California Governor Schwarzenegger has not indicated that there will be financial cuts to their library; they have concerns about the $125K survey regarding the issue of why people don’t visit their community libraries. Friends of Saratoga Library donated $93K and commended Mary Jean Finn for her years of volunteer efforts for the library. Santa Clara County Valley Water District Commission – met last week and voiced concerns about the water shortage articles written by the Mercury News and the fact that they stated the Water District would be making decisions in March about the water shortage, rather than waiting until the April 22 meeting to make a decision. There may be a 20% rationing due to the water shortage if the water situation doesn’t improve. Bill 1881 is a bill that should be closely observed. Councilmember Howard Miller – nothing to report. Councilmember Susie Nagpal – reported: Sister City Liaison – she attended the board meeting on February 2nd and encouraged members of the community to contact her if they were interested in becoming a member of the Sister City. The Sister City has extended an invitation to anyone who is interested in hosting the gardeners from Japan and they discussed the upcoming 25th anniversary and the delegation that will be arriving in November; and recommended agendizing for discussion in April. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS Councilmember Miller asked for clarification regarding the single-use bag agenda item and Council’s decision at the January Council Retreat to agendize single-use bag for informational discussion rather than for discussion on Council policy and direction. Mayor Page noted that at the Council Retreat, Council agreed to agendize a presentation on the single- use bag issue. Councilmember Hunter asked to agendize the water shortage issue and Mayor Page seconded the request. In addition, Hunter voiced a concern about the Hillbrook School banner that is currently on display at Blaney Plaza advertising a Los Gatos school. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT City Manager Dave Anderson noted that he would be traveling out of state for the upcoming weekend and Assistant City Manager Barbara Powell would be Acting City Manager during his absence. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Page asked for a motion to adjourn the Regular Meeting. 14 NAGPAL/KING MOTIONED TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING AND PROCEED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM FOR CLOSED SESSION ITEMS. MOTION PASSED 5-0-0. Council adjourned the Regular Council Meeting and proceeded to the Administrative Conference Room for Closed Session at 10:00PM. Respectfully submitted, Ann Sullivan, CMC City Clerk