HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2000-03-29 MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 29, 2000
CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM
400 GRAND AVENUE
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
o
6:08 p.m.
Present:
Councilmembers Datzman, Mullin and
Penna, Mayor Pro Tern Fernekes and
Mayor Matsumoto
Absent:
None
Staff Present:
City Manager Wilson, City Attorney Mattas,
Assistant City Manager Moss, Director of
Economic and Community Development
Van Duyn, Director of Public Works Gibbs,
and Redevelopment Project Manager Beyer
Others Present:
Mr. Phil Copeland, Mr. Armando Garcia,
Mr. Jerry Fuchs, Ms. Michelle O'Donnell,
and Mr. Norm Faria
Consideration of correspondence from Arvind Desai dated October 20, 1999 and
response to said letter dated January 30, 2000
Staff report presented by ECD Director Van Duyn that was an overview of a detailed
response memorandum, prepared January 30, 2000.
Mr. Armando Garcia, 530 Grand Avenue, stated his support for staff, the City Manager
and Council. He felt his working relationship with the City has always been positive.
He objected to a recent article in the Independent that was unfavorable to the City
Manager and considered it unjustified.
Mr. Phil Copeland, P.O. Box 190218, San Francisco, spoke on behalf of Mr. Arvind
Desai who is currently out of the country. Mr. Copeland stated his objection to the
process that Mr. Desai was subjected to; Mr. Desai has always been cooperative with the
City, but now feels he was misled. In response to Councilman Mullin, Mr. Copeland
stated that there is a deficiency in the planning/development process and suggested
Council be kept apprised of proposals by staff so that developers will know from the
beginning if their project has any possibility. Chronologically, he reviewed the history
of the hotel proposal dating back to 1994, although he was not hired by Mr. Desai until
1997. Mr. Desai feels he was encouraged to buy the Borba property, that the
redevelopment agency act would apply to the development, and to submit six different
schemes for a project that would never be approved.
Councilman Mullin questioned Mr. Copeland regarding his statements and asked him to
further explain how he felt the process failed. Mayor Matsumoto explained Council's
open door policy to discuss proposals directly with developers. At Councilman Mullin's
request, Mr. Copeland reviewed the January 30 memo point by point, but only in
reference to items that he had first hand knowledge of.
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Fernekes, City Manager Wilson explained how the
redevelopment agency act came into play regarding the Caltrain site. He stated that the
City never considered or inferred eminent domain to Mr. Desai, but Mr. Desai made a
proposal suggesting redevelopment money be used for his hotel project.
In response to Councilman Datzman, Mr. Copeland explained that Mr. Desai did
research several potential development sites and he was led to believe that a process
would take place that would include the availability of the Caltrain site. He stated that
Mr. Desai is not a novice developer.
Director Van Duyn explained the method he used to respond to Mr. Desai's October 20,
1999 letter with the use of brackets to reference each response. Mr. Copeland objected
to the spirit of the responses and the use of terms such as "force" and "coerce".
Councilman Mullin suggested this matter be deferred until Mr. Desai is present to
respond to questions directly.
In response to Councilman Datzman, Mr. Copeland stated he did not participate in the
Downtown charrette, but did see designs for the Airport Boulevard corridor.
Councilman Penna asked why this issue was being discussed in open session. Mayor
Matsumoto explained why she made the decision and felt the sanctity of closed session
was broken. Councilman Penna stated his objection to the January 30 memo prepared
by staff, which makes reference to him, yet he was not consulted about it, and that it is
not marked privileged and confidential. He stated he was confused as to who originated
the memo and the length of time it took before reaching Council. He questioned the
tone of the memo and what it reflects; he found it to be inaccurate. He stated that it is
his policy to let staff know if he is dealing as a realtor or Councilmember. Councilman
Datzman discussed with Councilman Penna the October 20 study session when
Councilman Penna's name was mentioned as participating as a realtor in discussions
with the City Manager. Councilman Penna reviewed the instances where his name is
mentioned in the January 30 memo and gave a chronology of events that occurred since
1994. He reiterated his concern regarding the tone of the January 30 memo.
Mayor Matsumoto questioned Councilman Penna's participation on issues before the
Council, which City Attorney Mattas clarified. Discussion of the January 30 memo
continued.
In response to Councilman Datzman, Councilman Penna explained why he prepared an
e-mail to Councilmembers on March 17. He stated the e-mail was in response to the
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 29, 2000
MINUTES PAGE 2
January 30 memo that he did not receive until March 13. Councilman Penna reiterated
his concern that the January 30 memo was not marked confidential and had been
disclosed to the media. Upon being contacted by the media about the memo he
forwarded a copy of his March 17 e-mail. Another concern was that Mr. Desai's letter
did not make reference to him, yet staff's response memo did.
(End of Cassette Tape 1, Tape 2 failed to start as programmed)
City Manager Wilson responded that he did not solicit Councilman Penna to bring in a
hotel and reminded Council he was not hired until 1995. He further clarified that when
he did meet with Mr. Desai and Councilman Penna, Councilman Penna did not represent
himself as Mr. Desai' s realtor, and when asked if he was, he said "no". Councilman
Penna stated Mr. Desai was never a client. Mayor Matsumoto reiterated her concern
regarding a conflict of interest. Councilman Mullin stated this issue is replicated in
other communities and is not unique. He felt if the memo had stated realtor,
Councilman Penna would not have any objections. Councilman Penna agreed.
In order to clarify dates, meetings, and circumstances, Councilman Mullin proposed a
motion to table further discussion until Mr. Desai's return.
Councilman Datzman asked for further discussion of the January 30 memo prepared by
Director Van Duyn. Councilman Penna related his conversations with Director Van
Duyn during the week of March 13 regarding preparation of the January 30 memo, and
with City Manager Wilson on March 20.
(Cassette Tape No. 2)
To further clarify the preparation of the January 30 memo, Director Van Duyn stated he
did not mark the memo confidential, and stated that the memo is an accumulation of
information from himself, Project Manager Beyer and City Manager Wilson. He stated
he prepared, typed and printed the memo under strict confidentiality and submitted it to
the City Manager for Council distribution.
Councilman Penna questioned the length of time it took the January 30 memo to be
distributed to Council, and he further questioned statements made in another memo
dated March 1 prepared by Director Van Duyn. Mayor Pro Tern Fernekes stated that the
March 1 memo was prepared at his request. He had asked the City Manager to follow
up with Mr. Desai on a comment made at the October 20 study session that a "deal" was
made. He stated that his request delayed the distribution of the January 30 memo until
March.
Councilman Datzman requested the October 20 study session tape be transcribed.
Motion-Mullin/Second-Datzman: To request another study session regarding the
document, request Mr. Desai be present to respond to issues, and to have a transcription
of the October 20, 1999 study session. On the question: Councilman Penna
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 29, 2000
MINUTES PAGE 3
asked if he should abstain, and City Attorney Mattas stated no, that this is an
information inquiry and does not relate to the project. City Attorney Mattas asked if a
transcription of this meeting was needed and Mayor Matsmnoto directed it also be
prepared. Motion revised: Motion to include a transcription of the March 29, 2000
special meeting. On the question: Mayor Pro Tem Fernekes asked that all memos,
correspondence, including Councilman Penna's e-mail be included for discussion at the
meeting. Motion revised: Motion to include all memos, correspondence and e-mail be
provided at meeting. Motion continued: Unanimously approved by voice vote.
(Recess: 8:03 p.m. - 8:16 p.m.)
4. Closed Session: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957, Evaluation of City
Manager
Entered into Closed Session: 8:16 p.m.
Reconvened into Open Session: 10:15 p.m., all Councilmembers present.
Report from Closed Session:
City Attorney Mattas reported direction given. The City Council, by a 4-1 majority,
authorized Councilmember Mullin to prepare a statement for the Mayor to distribute
stating that Mayor Matsumoto, Mayor Pro Tem Fernekes, Councilman Datzman and
Councilman Mullin wish to publicly express their continued support of, and confidence
in the performance of City Manager Mike Wilson.
5. Adjournment
Motion-Mullin/Second-Fernekes: To adjourn the meeting at 10:15 p.m. Unanimously
approved by voice vote.
Respectfully Submitted:
City of South San Francisco
Approved:, t
Karyl Matsumoto, Mayor
City of South San Francisco
The entries of this Council meeting show the action taken by the City Council to dispose of an item. Oral
communications, arguments, and comments are recorded on tape. The tape and documents related to the items
are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for inspection, review and copying.
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 29, 2000
MINUTES PAGE 4