Loading...
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