Home City Council Departments Services Calendar Contact Us Search
cherry blossoms in Central Park
San Ramon LogoCity Council Minutes title line

MINUTES OF THE
CITY OF SAN RAMON – COUNCIL MEETING

April 12, 2011

A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Ramon was held April 12, 2011 at 7:03 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2222 Camino Ramon, Mayor Wilson presiding.
PRESENT:  Councilmembers Hudson, Livingstone, Perkins, Rowley, and Mayor Wilson.
STAFF PRESENT:  City Manager Greg Rogers, City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner, Police Chief Scott Holder, Planning Services Division Manager Debbie Chamberlain, Planning/Community Services Director Phil Wong, and City Clerk Patricia Edwards.

* * * *

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

City Manager Greg Rogers led those present in the pledge of allegiance. 

* * * *

ANNOUNCEMENTS

The City Clerk noted that there were no changes or additions to the agenda.  The City Clerk noted that there were no changes or additions to the meetings listed on the agenda.

* * * *

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

(#5.1) Recognition of the 7th Annual Street Smarts Storybook Poster Contest Winners:  Saloni Dhaktode, Grade 5, Quail Run Elementary School; Dooie Doh, Grade 5, Live Oak Elementary School;  Jenny Lee, Grade 3, Hidden Hills Elementary School; Seohyun Jeon, Grade 5, Coyote Creek Elementary School; Phedora Laytano, Grade 2, Montevideo Elementary School;  Michelle Li, Grade 5, Hidden Hills Elementary School.  Recognition of Dana Mentink, Street Smarts Storybook author.  Introduction by Nat Rojanasathira, Street Smarts Coordinator.  Presentation by Mayor Wilson.

Nat Rojanasathira provided a summary of the Street Smarts Storybook Poster Contest.  He stated that over 600 entries were received this year.  The winners were recognized at an Awards Ceremony held on March 10, 2011.  Ten thousand copies of the storybook were distributed to the 30 elementary schools in the San Ramon Valley.  Mayor Wilson presented a certificate to the students who were present.  Mr.  Rojanasathira recognized storybook author Dana Mentink.  Mayor Wilson presented her with a certificate thanking her for her contribution to the success of the contest.  Ms. Mentink stated that it is an honor to write the stories and to be part of the contest.

(#5.2) Recognition of Sunset Development for their Sponsorship of the Street Smarts Poster Contest.  Introduction by Nat Rojanasathira, Street Smarts Coordinator.  Presentation by Mayor Wilson.

Wilson presented a certificate recognizing Sunset Development for their Sponsorship of the Street Smarts Poster Contest to Wendy Swiers, Property Manager for Sunset Development.

(#5.3) Proclamation Recognizing April 10-16, 2011 as “National Volunteer Recognition Week”.  Presentation by Mayor Wilson to Garry Allison, Terry Cunningham, and Paul Truschke.

Mayor Wilson presented the proclamation to City Lights Program volunteers; Garry Allison, Terry Cunningham, and Paul Truschke.  Mayor Wilson announced that these three residents have received additional special recognitions.  Mr. Truschke was recognized with the 2010 San Ramon Rotary Club’s “Service Above Self Award”.   Mr. Cunningham was recognized by the California Parks and Recreation Society as the “Champion of the Community” and “Outstanding Volunteer in Parks and Recreation”.   Mr. Allison received the Culture to Culture Foundation’s Award for “Outstanding Senior Volunteer” and the “Unsung Hero” Award by the San Ramon Rotary Club.

(#5.4) Recognition of Briana Gaines for her Academic and Sports Accomplishments.  Presentation by Mayor Wilson.

Mayor Wilson presented Briana Gaines with a proclamation recognizing her academic and sports accomplishments in soccer and basketball.  Mr. Gaines thanked her parents, her school mates, and her friends for their support.

(#5.5) Recognition of San Ramon Government 101 Graduates:  Patricia Adamcek, Craig Bell, Nancy Bell, Carol Bressoud, Edward Bressoud, Desiree Bussiere, Jonathan Caires, Brenda Carpenello, Brenda Chang, Irwin Chui, Ligaya de la Cruz, Susan Duley, Kenneth Duley, Jr., Mary Dunne Rose, Laura Ferree, Ram Himmatraopet, Geoff Ho, Wayne Hong, Heidi Kenniston-Lee, Jim Hughell, John Lane, Anthony Lopez, Vivek Manickam, Tim Ma, Ken Nolen, Rosa Poon, Ralph Rader, Angela Rivello, Joseph Rivello, David Schulz, Chip Shabazian, Melissa Strickland, Matthew Tsang, Terri Tucker, and Jason Woodbury. 

Introduction by Patricia Edwards, City Clerk. Presentation by Mayor Wilson.

City Clerk Patricia Edwards explained that the goal of Government 101 is to provide residents the opportunity to learn about their City government.  She thanked the City Council and City staff for their participation and class members for their interest and commitment.   Mayor Wilson presented each participant with a certificate of class completion.   Mary Dunne Rose said that, as a new resident, she learned about the City and volunteer opportunities.  Susan and Kenneth Duley stated that it was a wonderful program to learn about the City and get involved.  Ken Nolan said that it was a wonderful experience and that the staff provided excellent information.  Mayor Wilson thanked the class members who participated and encouraged interested residents to take the class.

(#5.6) Presentation on Court Appointed Special Advocate Program (CASA) by Executive Director Charles Mead Board and Vice President George Carranza.

Executive Director Charles Mead Board and Vice President George Carranza explained the purpose and importance of the Court Appointed Special Advocate Program (CASA).  CASA trains community volunteers to support and advocate for foster children as their voice in court.  Mr. Mead stated that CASA currently serves 175 children but that there are 1,500 foster children in Contra Costa County.  He encouraged residents to contact CASA at www.cccocasa.org if they are interested in volunteering.

* * * *

At 7:45 p.m., Mayor Wilson requested a break.  At 7:55 p.m., Mayor Wilson reconvened the meeting.

* * * *

CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS

Mayor Wilson reported that the Council interviewed two candidates on April 12, 2011 to fill the vacancy on the Parks and Community Services Commission.  He announced that the Council appointed John Mills to the Parks Commission for a term expiring June 2012.   Mayor Wilson thanked the candidates for applying.

* * * *

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

(#7.1) Minutes of the Minutes of the March 22, 2011 regular meeting.

Cm. Rowley’s motion to adopt the March 22, 2011 regular City Council minutes was seconded by Vice Mayor Perkins and passed 5-0.

* * * *

CONSENT CALENDAR

(#8.1) Minute Order No. 2011-09 – Authorizing Cm. Hudson to Attend the Air & Waste Management Association’s Conference & Exhibition in Orlando, Florida on June 21-24, 2011.

(#8.2) Minute Order No. 2011-10 – Accepting the Work by Adams Pool Solutions for the Aquatic Center Resurfacing and Pool Re-Plaster (CIP 5440) as Complete and Authorizing the City Clerk to File a Notice of Completion for the Contractor with the County Recorder's Office.

(#8.3) Resolution No. 2011-034 – Authorizing the Mayor to Execute an Agreement with PurePlay for the Slide Gel Coating (Part of the San Ramon Olympic Pool Equipment Replacement CIP No. 5479) in an Amount Not to Exceed $42,000.

(#8.4) Resolution No. 2011-035 – Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Real Property Sales Agreement and Accept a Permanent Roadway and Utility Easement Deed and Temporary Construction Easement Deed from Contra Costa County for a Portion of the Iron Horse Trail Corridor Property Adjacent to Bollinger Canyon Road for an Amount Not to Exceed $10,000 for the Bollinger Canyon Road Widening Improvements (CIP 5324).

(#8.5) Resolution No. 2011-036 – Accepting Certain Roadway and Storm Drain Dedications and Improvements in RA 1154 (a Portion of South Monarch Road) for Maintenance (Shapell Industries).

(#8.6) Resolution No. 2011-037 – Establishing a Rate of $35 Per Equivalent Runoff Unit for Fiscal Year 2011/12 for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Stormwater Program and Requesting that the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Adopt an Annual Parcel Assessment.

(#8.7) Resolution No. 2011-038 – Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Amendment No. 1 with Enterprise Roofing Service, Inc. for On Call Roof Repair Services in a Total Annual Amount Not To Exceed $50,000.

(#8.8) Resolution No. 2011-039 – Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Amendment No. 1 with McNevin Cleaning Specialists, Inc. for Carpet Maintenance Services in a Total Annual Amount Not to Exceed $47,327.

(#8.9) Resolution No. 2011-040 – Approving the Appropriation of $71,715 from the Vehicle Replacement Fund for the Purchase of Three Replacement Patrol Vehicles.

(#8.10) Resolution No. 2011-041 – Abandoning Portions of a Certain Offer of Dedication for Drainage Purposes Made with Parcel Map MS 75-78, and Accepting Portions of a Certain Offer of Dedication Made with Parcel Map MS 75-78 and a Portion of a Certain Offer of Dedication as Recorded in Book 6615, Page 330 of the Contra Costa County Official Records (APNs 209-240-019, 209-770-020, 209-770-022, and 209-820-073) for a Portion of Bollinger Creek South of Crow Canyon Road and East of Creekside Drive.

Vice Mayor Perkins’ motion to adopt items 8.1 through 8.10 was seconded by Cm. Rowley and passed 5-0.

* * * *

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

* * * *

NEW BUSINESS

(#10.1) Public Hearing:  Planning the City’s Future – The General Plan 2030 (Update to the General Plan 2020) (GPA 09-400-001). Consider Proposed Amendments to 2020 General Plan.

The staff report was provided by Debbie Chamberlain, Planning Services Division Manager.  Two major changes to the General Plan were discussed at the last Council meeting: removing the Mixed Use designation from the North Camino Ramon Specific Plan (NCRSP) and reverting to the use in the existing General Plan; and removing the policies directing the development of the Eastside Specific Plan (ESSP).  If the Council makes a substantial change to General Plan 2030, the Plan will be referred back to the Planning Commission.  Per State law and the requirements of Measure G, a 4/5s vote of the Planning Commission is then needed to refer the Plan back to the Council.  If this majority vote was not achieved, the Planning Commission would be required to go to the Council for additional direction.  She noted that a 4/5s vote of the Council is needed to approve General Plan 2030.  Voter approval is not required for General Plan 2030. 

Ms. Chamberlain provided staff’s response to the issues raised at the March 22, 2011 Council meeting.  The Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) has not moved since it was approved by the voters in 2002.  Corrections were made to a ridgeline error that designated a ridgeline outside the UGB on the Laborer’s Property.  She said that General Plan 2020 estimated 34,280 homes in the City and General Plan 2030 estimates 34,340 homes.  Regarding the projection discrepancy between the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the City, she explained that ABAG utilizes a regional perspective regarding jobs and housing.  The City has a more focused perspective.  She reviewed the State and regional mandates for housing and the City’s Housing Element.  She stated that the NCRSP does not displace existing businesses.  It is a concept Plan to rearrange the growth potential for the area in order to meet the mandates of AB 32 and SB 375.  She requested Council direction regarding removal of the ESSP policies and reverting the NCRSP land use designation to General Plan 2020.

There were no questions from the Council.   Mayor Wilson opened the public hearing. 

Jim Blickenstaff, representing the Mt. Diablo Sierra Club, stated that there was a lack of consistency on the Eastside Specific Plan (ESSP) and the voter mandate.  He referenced a letter sent by Attorney Stuart Flashman.  He questioned the change in the use of “shall” to “may” on the conservation items.  He noted that the General Plan 2030 changes the current 25 acre City standard for minor adjustments to a UGB that can be approved by a four-fifths vote of the Council to 30 acres.  Ms. Chamberlain stated that General Plan 2030 retains the 25 acre requirement and is noted in the Errata.  He asked the Council to respect the ballot measure and the people’s will concerning the Laborer’s Camp, Westside issues, and the NCRSP.  Measure W packaged several issues which were too ambitious and wrong for the City.  He suggested that the General Plan be submitted again to the voters. 

Sally Schull, resident, stated that the City Council is not listening to the voters on any issue except for the Tassajara Valley.  She said that residents depend on the Council to do what is right for the City and they do not want the City to grow to 90,000 residents.  She requested that the Council hold more meetings at different locations in the City to obtain additional resident input.

Kevin L’Hommedieu, business owner and resident, disagreed with Ms. Chamberlain’s calculation regarding the City’s growth and stated that there was a 61% increase in the population growth from 45,000 residents in General Plan 2020 to the current 72,000 residents.  He is concerned about the crowded schools and increased traffic which this has created.  He stated that other cities are planning growth rates of 0 to 8%.  Residents do not want more growth.  He asked if ABAG requires growth.  He remarked that Ms. Chamberlain’s statement that the existing businesses in the NCRSP area will not be displaced when the zoning protection is removed is not true.  He noted that business owners also need to plan.  He stated that the NCRSP will increase greenhouse gases if it brings in big box retailers and people drive to San Ramon to shop.  Cm. Rowley asked Mr. L’Hommedieu what the owner of his building wants to do.  Mr. L’Hommedieu stated that his building is in a Mixed Use area and that the other areas are service commercial.  Cm. Rowley noted that the number of people per home in Dougherty Valley is larger than what was planned for by the County.  Mayor Wilson added that the City did talk with the School District about the population in Dougherty Valley.  The School District ignored the City’s comments.  Ms. Chamberlain stated that the City’s annual growth rate is estimated at about 1.4% per year not the total growth rate over ten years.

Phil O’Loane, resident, asked the Council to look at the big picture.  He believes that the staff, the Planning Commission, and the Council are not paying attention to the defeat of Measure W and are proceeding in the wrong direction.  The proposed General Plan 2030 is a slight tweak of what the voters rejected.   Residents want the Council to honor the City’s UGB and become more deliberate in its dealings with growth.  He disputed the housing growth information reported by staff.  He stated that a ‘blanket’ zoning change is not needed before a Specific Plan is done.  Mixed Use zoning is not a good approach for Toyota and UPS.  He supports the suggestion that the Council hold meetings in Dougherty Valley.  There is no need to do the General Plan update at this time as more reflection and input would provide a better product.  He supports elimination of the ESSP.  He noted that the City currently has three approved specific plans with no action being taken because the market is not responsive.  These plans are the City Center, the Northwest, and the Crow Canyon Specific Plans.  The City should not congratulate itself on the accuracy of projections for General Plan 2020 but should re-evaluate and consider less growth.  He stated that the Dougherty Valley was the result of a legal settlement and not the result of a lost law suit as the Council claims.  Mayor Wilson stated that Toyota has retracted its previous statement and regards San Ramon as business friendly.  Mr. O’Loane disagreed.  Mayor Wilson stated that San Ramon has not denied any proposed projects by Toyota but that Toyota is bound by Sunset’s CC and Rs. 

Edward Lee, resident, stated that he was glad some of the elements of Ordinance 197 are included in General Plan 2030.  He expressed concern regarding the rezoning for the NCRSP which would displace existing businesses and does not want that area to be taken over by redevelopment.  Mayor Wilson noted that this is not being considered.  Mr. Lee is concerned about adding another 30,000 people to the City and asked how the City will deal with this growth.  Vice Mayor Perkins responded that the developer has all of the entitlements and the growth projections are included in the General Plan.  Mr. Lee requested that the NCRSP and General Plan should be looked at in greater detail. 

Jonathan Winslow, Walnut Creek resident, provided his perspective regarding development and building in San Ramon as a result of his 20 years of business in the City.  The General Plan and the General Plan Update both call for growth but the difference is in the scale of growth.  A Specific Plan cannot be developed if it is not included in the General Plan.  He added that nonconforming use is not a good thing and Mixed Use zoning will give the City more flexibility in implementing state policies.  The Specific Plan is the process for working out the details.  He stated that, overall, San Ramon has been planned well.  He believes that the NCRSP will incentivize businesses to change but will not penalize them if they do not change.

Seth Adams, representing Save Mt. Diablo, said that the growth in San Ramon has been very large and very fast.  He believes that San Ramon was involved in the development of Dougherty Valley.  When the City proposed expanding its UGB into the Tassajara Valley, it did not provide a plan or detail for how it would provide protection for the Valley.  He stated that the only reason for preparing a Specific Plan and expanding the UGB is for development.  The City should have placed only the UGB issue and not the entire General Plan on the 2010 ballot.  The NCRSP provides a dramatic increase in density prior to conducting an environmental review.  He criticized the City for its lack of leadership and that it should have conducted a post election campaign to determine what residents want.  He believes that the General Plan 2030 update is essentially the same rejected General Plan.  Residents do not want the UGB changed and want the Tassajara Valley protected.  He believes that the ESSP should be removed from the General Plan.  He stated that the New Farm development is illegal and that the City should be speaking out against this project if the City supports protecting Tassajara Valley. 

Roz Rogoff, resident, stated that the residents are completely misunderstanding what the General Plan is about.  She noted that the people who are complaining about Dougherty Valley are those who are benefiting from living in Dougherty Valley.  She clarified that the state is requiring this General Plan.  She added that “Shaping Our Future” was supported by three slow growth former Councilmembers – Nancy Tatarka, Donna Dickey, and Jerry Cambra.

Mayor Wilson closed the public hearing.

Cm. Hudson stated that because the Tassajara Valley is in Contra Costa County, the question is ”Does Tassajara Valley bear a relation to the planning in San Ramon?”  The Tassajara Valley does bear a relation to the City’s planning area but the City has no plans for housing or development in the Tassajara Valley in either General Plan 2020 or General Plan 2030.  He stated that the ten year General Plan update is required by the Department of Housing and Community Development.  He said that the statement that “Dougherty Valley is 11,000 homes built with the full support of San Ramon” is inaccurate.  San Ramon requested 7,000-7,500 homes and four elementary schools not the 11,000 homes and four schools which the County is building.  San Ramon cannot build in Tassajara Valley even if the UGB had been changed because a Specific Plan is required.  This requirement does not apply to the County.  He noted that no one attended the County meetings to contest the number of homes planned for the New Farm Development. 

Cm. Rowley disputed Mr. Adams’ statement that the City did not meet with Save Mt. Diablo and other community groups.  She stated that the purpose of extending the UGB was to Tassajara Valley from development.  She emphasized that the Council heard the 72% vote and is not expanding the City’s UGB but is updating the General Plan to include other state mandates. 

Vice Mayor Perkins thanked everyone who took the time to attend the meeting and speak.  He asked staff if the General Plan incorporated changes relative to the Williamson Act for the issues identified by Mr. Newman.  He said that the Library Standards need to be reevaluated and requested that a future General Plan update modify the Library Standards to incorporate computer terminals and the internet and the use of computers in the library.  He stated that he is satisfied that the evidence provided by staff regarding the error in the ridgeline modification of the Laborer’s Property meets the intent of the General Plan Review Commission (GPRC).  He stated that the NCRSP needs more discussion.  The land use designation in Figure 4-2 should be removed from the General Plan as the NCRSP has not been reviewed and approved by either the Planning Commission or the City Council.  If the General Plan includes the NCRSP land designation, the boundaries and land use designation have been presupposed and this precedes the process.  He requested that references to the NCRSP outcomes be removed from the General Plan but that the General Plan include a statement that a NCRSP will be prepared.  He recommended retaining Figure 4-3 which identifies the proposed NCRSP area.  He stated that the Tassajara Valley and ESSP should be removed from the General Plan.  He suggested that voters will interpret a “Plan” to mean a ‘plan for development’  despite the intent of the City plans for no development and to maintain the agriculture and open space uses.  He stated that any plan for the east side is contradictory to the voters.  Although not required, the City should place the General Plan on the ballot.  He would like to see the General Plan without the NCRSP, Tassajara Valley, or ESSP components be provided on the ballot so residents can vote on it.  He stated that there is a need to create a General Plan and a Specific Plan while no development is going on and to adjust the Specific Plan if needed in the future.

Cm. Hudson does not agree with removing the NCRSP from the General Plan because the NCRSP is a potential Priority Development Area (PDA).  The PDA designations will get future funding for needed improvements such as the Norris Canyon on/off ramp.  He noted that the GPRC came up with a 20 year Plan.  The State requires a 10 year plan update.  He stated that the ESSP must remain in General Plan 2030.  Per General Plan 2020 mandates that, if the County moves the UGB, the City must pursue a Sphere of Influence (SOI) with LAFCo.  He noted that housing is already built in the Westside.  He emphasized that development in the Tassajara Valley does affect San Ramon’s planning.  No one in San Ramon has worked on Tassajara Valley because to do a development plan in San Ramon you have to do an ESSP.  This is the City’s barrier.  He stated that the City must do long range strategy planning. 

Cm. Livingstone concurs with Cm. Hudson that no items should be removed from the General Plan.  He complimented Ms. Rogoff on her comments.

Cm. Hudson said that General Plan is being updated to incorporate state mandated AB 32 and SB 375.  He noted that the housing sites were identified in 2002.

Vice Mayor Perkins clarified that he suggested removing the NCRSP from the General Plan so that the City can continue the process.  He added that the PDA designation is important but that a Specific Plan should not be done at the same time as the General Plan.  He added that putting the land use map in the General Plan presupposes the outcome and should be part of the NCRSP process.

Cm. Livingstone stated that the current steps for the NCRSP are the same as those which were done for the Crow Canyon Specific Plan.  He stated that there have been many opportunities to provide input.  The NCRSP is a conceptual plan and should go forward.

Cm. Rowley requested that the Planning staff discuss its outreach efforts.  Phil Wong, Planning/Community Services Director, replied that the City notified property owners several years ago.  With their input and comments, a draft was prepared which was presented to City committees, the Planning Commission, and civic groups.  He stated that the City will continue to provide outreach.  Cm. Rowley asked why the Council has to vote on the General Plan.  Mr. Wong noted that it is required by Measure G and the State Office of Planning and Research.  Cm. Rowley asked what will happen if the Plan is not approved.  Mr. Wong responded that it will create internal inconsistencies and the potential to jeopardize state funding.  Cm. Rowley noted Mr. L’Hommedieu’s concerns as a renter.  Mr. Wong stated that the City is committed to keeping current businesses.  Mayor Wilson asked staff to address the requirement that a vacancy be filled within six months or the use is nonconforming.  Mr. Wong said that this provision could be amended but he did not recommend it because it is part of the Zoning Ordinance.  He noted that it is possible to provide policies in the NCRSP to accommodate this option.  Cm. Hudson asked if changing the zoning to Mixed Use creates a nonconforming status.  Mr. Wong noted that Fostoria is zoned for Mixed Use.

Mayor Wilson stated that the Council is here to protect businesses and land owners.  Smart growth and transit development mean that San Ramon does not have control.  He wants the citizens, not the State, to decide San Ramon’s fate.  No one wants uncontrolled growth so the City needs to plan.  He does not support “Shaping Our Future”.  He added that people have a right to say what they think and get clarification.  Cm. Hudson remarked that General Plan 2030 is a good General Plan 2020 update.  He would like the Council to vote on it at the next meeting with no changes.  Ms. Chamberlain requested clarification whether or not the Council was closing the Public Hearing.  Mayor Wilson asked if the Council can vote on the General Plan at the next meeting.  Ms. Chamberlain responded that it depends on the comments.  Cm. Rowley requested that the Public Hearing be continued.  Ms. Chamberlain responded that the Public Hearing will be continued to a date certain on April 26, 2011.

* * * *

CITY MANAGER COMMENTS

* * * *

PUBLIC COMMENT

Bill Newman, Tassajara Valley resident, provided clarification to the Council regarding the Williamson Act.  He noted that this information does not need to be included in the General Plan Errata.

Roz Rogoff, resident, asked why the City is willing to spend $500,000 to tear down the Mudd’s building but is not willing to spend $1 million to restore the building for other City uses.  She stated that the building is part of San Ramon’s history. 

* * * *

COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS

Cm. Hudson expressed concern that the Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2010-11 comparison survey indicated a .8 to 1,000 officer to resident ratio and that the ratio should be 1 to 1,000. 

Cm. Rowley encouraged residents to attend Sheep Shearing Day at Forest Home Farms on April 16, 2011.

Cm. Livingstone announced that he is getting married on April 14, 2011.  The Councilmembers extended their congratulations.

* * * *

MAYOR’S REPORTS AND COMMENTS

Mayor Wilson thanked everyone who participated in the Earth Day Clean-Up at Forest Home Farms.

* * * *

CLOSED SESSION

(#14.1) PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE §54957 for City Council to meet with its Labor Negotiators: Eva Phelps, Toni Renault, and Greg Rogers concerning Negotiations with SEIU LOCAL 1021.

(#14.2) PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a) for City Council to meet with City Attorney regarding Timothy Mitchell, Sr., et al. v. Lester Galer, et al., Docket No. 11-15457, Case No. 09-CV-0794 SI (9th Dist. Ct. App.).

(#14.3) PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(b)(1) for City Council to meet with City attorney regarding one pending case.

(#14.4) PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.6 for City Council to meet with City’s labor negotiator, Mayor Wilson, for agreement with City Manager.

At 10:39 p.m., the Council met in Closed Session to address the Closed Session items.

At 11:57 p.m., Mayor Wilson reconvened the meeting.  All Councilmembers were in attendance.  Mayor Wilson reported that the Council did not take any action on Items 14.1 through 14.4. 

* * * *

At 12:01 a.m., there being no further business, Mayor Wilson adjourned the meeting.

Signed:
H. Abram Wilson, Mayor
Patricia Edwards, City Clerk

Approved as presented at the April 26, 2011 City Council meeting 5-0.

We provide efficient delivery of quality public services that are essential to those who live and work in San Ramon.
2226 Camino Ramon, San Ramon, CA 94583 | Map | Phone (925) 973-2530 | Fax (925) 866-0547