Loading...
CC 11-19-01APPROVED MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Monday November 19, 2001 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:47 p.m. Mayor James called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Council members present: Mayor Sandra James, Vice-Mayor Richard Lowenthal, and Council members Don Burnett and Michael Chang. Council members absent: None. Staff present: City Manager David Knapp, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, Community Development Director Steve Piasecki, Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith, Public Works Director Ralph Quails, Senior Planner Vera Gil, Senior Planner Colin Jung, City Attorney Charles Kilian, and City Clerk Kimbefly Smith. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS International Personnel Management Association (IPMA) Agency Award for Excellence to a small agency, in recognition o£ Cupertino's exemplary contr/butions to the efficiency and effectiveness of government personnel operations. Mayor James presented a plaque to Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, Human Resources Manager Sandy Abe, and Human Resources Technician Maria Jimenez. She thanked those people who received the plaque, in addition to Human Resources Recruiter Francine Amarelo, former Human Resources Manager Bill Woska, and former Human Resources Technician Jill Lopez. 2. Congratulations to the proponents for Garden Gate Annexation (Measure D). Mayor James gave a proclamation to Lester Bowers, representative of the group, "Garden Neighbors for Annexation." Jessica Rose presented a laminated election sign to Council, which was signed by the proponents of Measure D. POSTPONEMENTS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS City Clerk Kimberly Smith listed four wr/tten communications: I) A completed resolution for item number 24, canvas of votes for Garden Gate; 2) An email regarding the Rodrigues Avenue development, Item No. 27; 3) Communication regarding the discussion about the teen commission appointment process; 4) A staff report regarding the March 2002 election. November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None CONSENT CALENDAR Chang moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar as recormnended, with the exception of No. 18, which was pulled for discussion. Bumett seconded and the motion carried 4-0. 3. Approval of minutes, October 5, 12, 15, 24, 26. 4. Treasurer's Budget Report - September 2001. Acconnts Payable, October 12, 19, 26, November 2 and 9; Resolution Nos. 01-228 through 01-232. 6. Payroll, October 12, 26, and November 9; Resolution Nos. 01-233 through 01-235. Application for Alcoholic Beverage Control license: Tomokazu Japanese Cuisine, 20625 Alves Drive. Fine Pats Commission recommendations for awarding fine arts grants in November, 2001. Approve the destruction of records from the City Clerk flies, which are in excess of two years old, Resolution No. 01-236. 10. Annexation: Make determinations and approve the reorganization of territory designated "Creston Drive 01-06", property located on the north side of Cmston Drive between Baxter Avenue and Groveland Drive; approximately 0.245 acre, Lim (APN 326-11-006), Resolution No. 01-237. 11. Annexation: Set date for consideration of reorganization of area designated "Alcazar Avenue 01-01', property located on the south side of Alcazar Avenue between Byrne Avenue and Almaden Avenue; approximately 0.2088 acre, Lewizky (APN 357-14-036), Resolution No. 01-238. 12. Declare weeds and brush on certain properties a nuisance and setting hearing for objections to proposed removal, Resolution No. 01-239. 13. Fee waiver request from Pacific Scribes for waiver of use fees for its Holiday Card Exchange at the Quinlan Community Center on December 7, 2001, in the approximate amount of $134.00. 14. Fee waiver request from the Fine Arts League in the approximate amount of $1,920.00 for their use of Blackberry Farm for their Open Studios event on April 27 and 28, 2002. November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 3 15. Fee waiver request from the Optimist Clubs of Cupertino and De Anza/Cupertino in the approximate amount of $100.00 for their November 8 event. 16. Authorization to spend an mount not to exceed $40,000.00 on purchase of equipment for a mobile skate park. The funds are available in the adopted 2001-02 CIP budget. 17. Authorize Nextel to sublease site to Metro PCS, Inc., for installation of mobile/wireless communication facilities at the Cupertino Service Center (Site CA-2151), Resolution No. 01-240. 19. Improvement Agreement, Cupertino Community Services, 20235 Stevens Creek Blvd., APN 316-24-008, Resolution No. 01-241. 20. Improvement Agreement, William J. Gignac and Nancy L. Keder, 10255 Hillcrest Road, APN 326-16-008, Resolution No. 01-242. 21. Grant of Easement, Roadway, William J. Gignac and Nancy L. Keder, 10255 Hillcrest Road, APN 326-16-008, Resolution No. 01-243. 22. Recommendation for 2001-02 Human Services funding prograna. 23. Consider closure of city offices on Christmas Eve and New Year's Eve. 24. Declare the votes for and against Measure D: the Garden Gate Reorganization Ballot and confirm its previous action to approve the reorganization of Garden Gate, Resolution No. 01-244. 25. Year end budget adjustment for 2000-01. Vote Members of the City Council AYES: Bumett, Chang, James, Lowenthal, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above) 18. Award of contract for the Street Widening Project for Stevens Canyon Road from Santa Lucia Rd. to County Park Entrance, Project 98-120, and addition of $75,000 to the project budget. Public Works Director Ralph Qualls said that one of the recommendations for approval would be the review of traffic issues on Stevens Canyon Road. He said that staff would report back in 2002 with the findings. November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Cotmcil Page 4 Burnett discussed the unusual characteristics of Stevens Canyon Road. He said that a tragic accident occurred on the road in December 1996, in which Jeff Steinwcdel, a young husband and father, was killed. He said this street-widening project would serve to reduce the dangerous conditions on Stevens Canyon Road where that accident occurred. He acknowledged Adrienne Steinwedel, the widow, and suggested that the City provide some sort of memorial. Adrienne Steinwedel thanked the Council for taking this action to make the road safer. Lowenthal said that if the Council wants to make the city more suitable for all types of alternative transportation, it would be necessary to do more projects like this one. Although it is expensive, it is the right thing to do. James and Chang offered condolences to Mrs. Steinwedel and acknowledged Don Bumett's persistence in making this project happen during a time when the budget was getting tighter. Lowenthal moved approval of Project 98-120 along with the addition of $75,000 to the project budget. Chang seconded and the motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 26. Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Application No. 14-ASA-01, regarding architectural and site approval for lighting, color, materials, landscaping and other design features of an approved apartment building at Lot 1, Tract 7953, Cupertino City Center (APN 369-01-029). The applicant is the Stevens Creek Apartments (Verona). The appeal was filed by Don Burnett. Burnett explained that Council is notified whenever a project is approved by the staff or Planning Commission. In this case what was described as minor changes to the Verona Apartments actually made a substantial change in the faqade, so he appealed the decision. Staff then worked with the developer to make some changes and corrections, and Bumett said he was now satisfied with the new design. Mayor James opened the public hearing. There were no comments, and the public hearing was closed. Burnett moved to uphold his appeal and to modify to the conditions of approval contained in Planning Commission Resolution 6095 to reference the revised site plan and elevations. Lowenthal seconded, and the motion carried 4-0. 27. Approve Use Permit to construct 9 single family townhomes on an approximately one acre parcel and rezone an approximate one-acre parcel from RI-10 to P(Res); Tentative map to subdivide an approximate one-acre parcel into nine parcels for a townhome development; Application Numbers: 08-U-01, 06-Z-01, 03-TM-01, 14-EA-01; R&Z Development. The project is located at 20075 De Palma Lane at the intersection of November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 5 Rodrigues Avenue; APN 369-32-003. A Negative Declaration is recorrmaended, and this item is recommended for approval First reading of Ordinance No. 1889: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Rezoning a 1.04-Acre Lot from RI-10 to P(Res) to Allow 9 Single-Family Town.houses Located at 20075 De Palma Lane." Community Development Director Steve Piasecki reviewed the staff report. He said that this item had been continued from the Council meeting of October 1 to allow the applicant and staffto meet with the neighbors to explore ways to resolve issues regarding density and massing of the units. Later in October staff met with approximately 15 neighbors and the applicant. Staff reviewed the original proposal, and the applicant reviewed four conceptual development plans, which had variations in setback depth and number of units. Piasecki said that most residents had preferred the conceptual plan for 6 single-family homes. Many of the neighbors who spoke also opposed the concept of a trail access through the property to a potentially longer trail network along Regnart Creek, which had been requested by the City Council. He said that the neighbors' preferred plan (6 units) and the applicant's preferred plan (9 smaller units) were sufficiently far apart that staff didn't feel another continuance would be highly productive. Staff believes that the trail access through the site is an essential project amenity and any of the revised plans can accommodate adequate setbacks and landscape buffers to include it. He noted that the hearings on the broader Regnaxt Creek Trail would occur at a later date, and the issue with this application is to retain the option for the trail connection should there eventually be a broader trail along the creek. Piasecki said the 9-unit, reduced-size plan would have a floor area ratio (FAR) of .454, the 8-unit plan would have a FAR of .442, and the 6 dwelling unit plan would have a FAR of approximately .324. In the immediate neighborhood, the duplexes have a FAR of .317, although the density is similar to the 9-unit plan. The single family, cluster development to the west has an FAR of about .345. He explained that other access points to the Regnart Creek Trail could be about 400 feet to the west of this project, or from Blaney Avenue. Mr. Glenn Cahoon, the project designer, said that they prefer the 9-unit scenario (Scenario B in the exhibits) in which all of the units are reduced. He described the increased setbacks, greater buffer between the 9-unit development and existing homes, more buffer space for the parking, relocation of parking spaces, increased landscaping, etc. He said it reduces the scale and massing of the units themselves. He said that the trail issue is an issue for the neighbors, but it has a lot of potential to beautify the area. The following individuals spoke in opposition tO the item and their comments included: Concerns about the creek trail going through private property and potential safety issues; traffic concerns and danger to children walking to school; lack of residential desire for the November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 6 creek trail regardless of its potential beauty; density (suggestion of 7 houses at 2,000 square feet each being more desirable); not wanting townhomes to be built alongside single-family homes; asking the developer to reduce the project to 6 homes to be in conformance with the rest of the area. Dave Fishback, 20065 De Palma Lane Lucy Lieu, 20172 Rodrigucs Avenue Tony Fong, 20182 Rodrigues Avenue Alex Vaysberg, 20012 Rodrigues Avenue Marie Gatto, 20072 Rodrignes Avenue Jack Wedgwood, 20137 Las Ondas Way Dan O'Keefe, 34 Pasco Alba in Santa Clara Vicky Yutronic, 20162 Rodrigues Avenue Mark Roberts of the R & Z Development Company, 10227 Adriana Avenue, spoke in favor of the item and said that he thought the project was a good use of the land andthey had been working on the project since March 2001. He said that they had taken direction from City staff and made at least 6 revisions since then. After listening to neighbors they had increased the setbacks, decreased the floor areas in the mass of the building, increased the common areas, adjusted the trail to work it away from the westerly property and adjusted the parking locations to be less obtrusive. He said that a negative declaration was granted on traffic and that there is a good line of sight coming offofboth driveways into the project. He requested Council approval on Scenario B because the project follows the General Plan, the direction of the City, and provides more housing for the City. Bumett said that he initially supported the project as initially proposed because of the desperate housing shortage and that the land had been zoned to allow as many as 11 units. He said that 9 units would be more affordable than 6 units and that the significance to the traffic issue would be minimal. He said that the trail is a Council policy and he supported Scenario B. Chang said that last time he expressed reservations because of the single-residence neighborhood and suggested that the number of units be decreased and made smaller. He commended the developers for moving in that direction but said that the compromise wasn't quite enough. He said that in order for him to approve the project, the developer would need to present a new proposal combining Scenario C with 8 units but smaller, like proposal B, with the setback being 15 feet rather than 10 feet. He said he wouldn't approve any scenarios as they currently stand. Lowenthal said that he had previously supported the project as-is and that the developer had reduced it 1350 feet in all scenarios, which is about 3%-4%. He said that he didn't think the difference between 6 and 8 units would make a significant difference in the traffic and wanted the properties to be as affordable as possible. He said that the trail resistance to the trail that he heard residents talking about was about the creek trail, not the one in the development itself. He said that he would support either Burnett's or Chang's proposal at this point. ~qovember 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 7 28. James said that she was the one who had originally suggested sending the project back to the developer for a compromise and was disappointed that the community didn't accept the compromise. She said that the community keeps asking for more housing and that smaller townhomes would be more affordable than the single-family homes. She said that Chang's solution might be the best one for a win-win situation, to go with the 8 units but to make them a bit smaller. R & Z Developer Mark Roberts said that he didn't agree with cutting the units to 8, but would be willing if the unit size wasn't reduced as well. This would be scenario C. Piasecki outlined the options for Council: 1) Go with scenario C as Chang outlined and have the developer decide whether he could build it or not; 2) Choose scenario B, with the 9 all reduced in size. He noted that if scenario C was approved, that the tentative map would need to be continued to reflect an 8-nnit plan, but the rezoning and use permit could be approved at the current meeting. Chang moved to approve scenario C, with the units reduced to the size of the units proposed in scenario B, and with the setback on the 2 middle units increased to 15 feet on the east side. Bumett seconded and the motion carried 4-0. Staff clarified that final action on the use permit and tentative map would take place at the second reading of the ordinance to allow the developer time to determine feasibility. The City Clerk read the title of the ordinance. Bumett moved and Lowenthal seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. The motion carried 4-0. Lowenthal moved to adopt a Negative Declaration. Burnett seconded and the motion carded 4-0. Application for the rezoning of approximately 20 acres from Light Industrial to Planned (Light Industrial) to provide for a previously approved transfer of office square footage from an adjacent parcel; Application Number: 07-Z-01. The applicant is Grosvenor California Limited and the project is located at 10120 Imperial Avenue and Results Way; Assessor Parcel Numbers: 357-20-013, 357-20-040, 357-20-042, 357-17-067, 357-17- 068 and 357-18-033. This item is recommended for approval. First reading of Ordinance No. 1890: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Rezoning Approximately 20 Acres of Property Located on Results Way From ML(Light Industrial) to P(ML) (Planned Development Light Industrial)". November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 8 Senior Planner Vera Gil reviewed the staff report. She said this item was part of a formality to finish up the application process. The City Clerk mad the title of the ordinance. Burnett moved and Lowenthal seconded to read the ordinance by title only, and that the City Clerk's reading would constitute the first reading thereof. The motion carded 4-0. PLANNING APPLICATIONS - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS 29. Selection of application deadlines and interview dates for an unscheduled vacancy on the Planning Commission. Council concurred to set the deadline for applications on Friday, December 14, and to conduct interviews on Monday, January 14, at 5:30 p.m. 30. Council discussion of Council member Chang's memo regarding commission appointment process. Chang read an excerpt from his open letter to City Council. He said that he was concerned about Council's decision to ignore staffs application-based rankings, which resulted in the substitution of a subjective and arbitrary process that led to the exclusion of Asian-American male applicants. He asked why 4 out of 5 male white students were selected while only 1 of the 8 male Asian-American applicants was selected only after lengthy negotiation. He said that 2 of the rejected male Asian-American applicants had been ranked first among grades 10 and I 1, with perfect scores of 100. One student was elected class president for 3 years and the other earned an Eagle Scout award. He said he didn't understand why Council excluded these 2 young men. He said that the resulting 12-member Teen Commission composed of mostly Asian-American females and white males in 11~ and 12t~ grades only appears to have racial balance. He said he didn't question the qualifications of the commission's present members, but he did question the exclusion of the large, visible group of Asian-American males that sought inclusion, as well as the seriously flawed selection process. In summary, he said his two main issues were: 1) The outcome where he felt a fairly large significant group of students in the community was excluded; 2) The process that is flawed and needs to be revised, amended and looked at again. Lowenthal said that the good news was the creation of the Teen Commission is that it exists and has appeal in the community. He said the purpose of the commission is to represent teens to the Council so that Council would be better informed about making decisions that affect youth in Cupertino. He said that the commission is a rainbow of diversity in many different aspects and that there was unanimous Council support of I~ovember 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 9 every chosen member. He apologized for an error in the process by not making clear what the criteria would be, which caused wrong expectations. He said that the desired criteria was best characterized by Chang during the proceedings, diversity and representation, and that is what was accomplished. He said that the Teen Commission represents the make-up of the City, matching its ethnic, gender, school, and grade make-up. He said he would like the Teen Commission itself to help figure out the criteria next year and do a better job. He said he wanted the other students who had applied, who weren't selected to be on the commission, to be invited to participate in the City in another way. He suggested creating a new pilot program called the Council Intern, similar to a Legislative Aid in Sacramento. This person would assist Council in doing research, attending events that a council member is unable to attend, translating documents from English to Mandarin and back, courtesy correspondence, etc. Burnett said he felt badly about the outcome because many people were offended. He said he thought the process was consensual, but Chang's feeling was that it was not and that his opinions were inadequately considered. He said that there was no formal voting and discussion about the overall make-up of the group at the end. He proposed that Chang be allowed to select 2 additional members for the Teen Commission. He also liked the idea about Council Interns, but wasn't sure how that selection process would come about. He questioned whether all Council members would want that kind of help, if there would be enough for the interns to do, and if young people would be interested in that kind of work. He said the Council would need to be willing to put in the time to train the young people and incorporate them into the operations. James said that it had been 5 years of hard work to get a Teen Commission in Cupertino and that it has been a passion of hers. She said that the Teen Conunission selection process was similar to the selection process for other commissions in that staff doesn't pre-screen the applicants; they are interviewed and appointed. She said Chang wasn't present for the beginning of the teen commission selection interviews when staff had presented Council with the rankings. The 3 council members present agreed that they wanted the selection process to be the same as for other commissions. James said that she was personally looking for diversity amongst the teens for interest groups and their ability to outreach to other teens. Council wanted the Teen Commission to give them advice on anything having to do with youth and teens, including the new library, the sports center, programs, skate park and proposed teen center. She said Council wanted the broadest outreach that they could get, including the student body leaders mad the 4.0 grade-average teens, in addition to those teens that didn't belong to any group. She said that she felt the system worked, without using any artificial means such as rankings or quotas, and that the teens who were chosen mirrored the diversity of the community. She said she was surprised and saddened to hear that Chang was disappointed in the selection process. She said that the adults needed to get out of the way to let the teens do their job and apologized to the teens in the community for what was now happening. She said that she would not object to Council member Chang choosing 2 more commissioners if that was the recommendation of the Teen Commission, but she still felt that it wasn't the right message to give to young people. If a process needed to be improved, it should go to the teen commission itself. November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 10 The following individuals spoke on this item. Kris Wang, 7645 Dumas Drive Barry Chang, 11264 Redondo Court Denise Lu, 20851 Scofield Drive Sue Fay Chang, 11264 Redondo Court Gene Wang, 7645 Dumas Drive Jill Lin, 7527 Donegal Drive Richard Greif, 21971 Columbus Avenue Letter from Homer Tong, Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD) Michelle Hu, 20977 Fairwoods Court Patrick Kwok, 10222 Carmen Road Ming-Ii Chu, from the Asian American Parent Association E.J. Conens, 10480 Pineville Avenue Avie Katz, 21290 Rainbow Drive Roger Peng, 10740 Ofline Court Gilbert Wong, 22103 Hibiscus Court President of Organization of Chinese- Americans of Silicon Valley) Anna Polman-Black, 21118 Gardenia Drive Helen Wiant, 10354 Westacres Drive Cathy Gatley, 1 l 510 Well Spring Court Chizen Chou Mmy Ellen Chell, 7451 Prospect Road Les Burnell Karen Geefay, 7961 Sunderland Drive Their comments are summarized as follows: · Commending Council for its vision in creating the Teen Commission · Criticizing Councilmembers for only appointing those teens that expressed the Council's views, rather than looking at qualities such as intelligence and ability of the teens to express their own voices · Suggested opening the selection process to the public in the future · Asking why there was no representation from Kennedy, Hyde Middle School and Homestead High School · Noting that one student who was selected is from a school outside of Cupertino City Attorney Charles Kilian asked Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith to address the last 2 comments from speaker Barry Chang regarding school representation. Smith said that the student from Harker is a Cupertino resident, one commissioner is from Kennedy and no applications were received from the other schools mentioned. She said that Homestead largely serves non-residents and there was a requirement for the commissioners to live in Cupertino. November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page Public comments continued: · All teens didn't know about the opportunity - it was not published well enough · The appointment process seemed different from appointments to other commissions, and it was selective and not diverse. · Council selections had the appearance of racial bias or suggestion of favoritism for a select group of students. · City staff recommendations were ignored and decisions were made too hastily. The candidates were not given due process. · There were no clear guidelines; clear and measurable criteria should be consistent throughout the process · Council should give a clear explanation of what happened during this process and then be flexible in resolving the problem · Some people suggested expanding the commission to include those teens that were ranked as top applicants; others felt that no additional members should be selected a~er the fact. · Concern was expressed that this issue and the way it was handled may be divisive to the cnnmaunity. A wonderful opportunity was made into an issue about race. · Conncil and staff were thanked for their commitment to teens and for the vision of the Teen Commission · The Teen Commission is sufficiently diverse, and all are Americans. · The interview process supported the selection of the best candidates, rather than just considering at grades and extracurricular activities The following Teen Commissioners spoke: Erin Gatley Kenny Lin Maurice Noone Jacki Colloton Aimee Thayer Zack Kolev Their comments are summarized as follows: The Teen Commission does accurately represent the teen voice, and it is diverse and dynamic; members were chosen to represent different aspects of the commnnity, not just race. · The public is encouraged to attend the meetings and see for themselves that the teen community is well represented. The commission is uniried, and unity leads to success. Adding commissioners won't make it any more effective · The teens who weren't chosen have not felt the need to speak up about the process · The selection process was made into a larger racial issue than it needed to be Movem~er 1O, 2001 Cupert'mo City Council Page 12 · ,The Teen Commission has voted unanimously on its mission statement, which shows there are conunon goals among all the teen commissioners · Teens are open to other cultures more than adults and race shouldn't matter · Only the adults seemed discouraged about the selection process, and there has been too much meaningless bickering Chang said that he had no problem with the Teen Commission mad he didn't question the qualifications of the members. He was concerned that there were some teens that felt like they didn't have a good chance of being selected. He responded a question about why the Chinese press had published a story about the Teen Commission process. He explained that some parents had complained to the Chinese press and that Chang had received phone calls from the press. He went back then to look at the selection process. He said he was the messenger to an issue that people felt sensitive about. He said he relied mainly on statistics and that people would come to their own conclusion. He said the Courier reporter had called the World Journal and Chang wondered why the Courier hadn't yet written any articles about this issue. He wanted staff to have a chance to say what criteria they used in their ranking. Parks and Recreation Director Therese Smith responded that the ranking was not intended to stand alone, but was to provide Council with background information. She said that there was much written material that each teen submitted along with their application and that the material didn't reflect what the people were actually like. Smith said that staff never asked for grade point average, but were ranked based on level of interest what they thought the issues were to be addressed, their experience regarding communication skills, interest and leadership. She said that one person in each grade was ranked with a score of 100, and all the rest of the applications for that grade were ranked down the scale by one point each (in a group of 8 people the lowest score would be 93). The idea was to have Council add a score for a verbal presentation, so that each candidate would have a combined score over 90. She said that the ranking was for guidance only and it was appropriate for Council to throw it out. She said that Council hadn't made a specific motion on how the process would be handled, so staff blended a system that would provide Council with staff's benefit of having gone through all the written mater/al that each candidate submitted. She apologized for putting Council in a controversial position. Chang read from the transcript from the meeting of October 15 regarding the Teen Commission interview process. Chang asked the city attorney to clarify the wording of the resolution that was passed regarding the Teen Commission and the representation from Cupertino schools. City Attorney Charles Kilian responded that in his reading of the resolution, there would be representation from each Cupertino school. He commented that facts were previously presented that some schools were not represented for lack of applicants. He said that he didn't believe the language prohibits other teens living in Cupertino who don't attend Cupertino schools from being on the commission. He concluded that the current commission is legal in that it meets the criteria based in the resolution. Iqovernl~er 19, 2001 Cupertlno C{ty Coune{1 Page 13 Council further discussed representation from Cupertino schools. Chang commented that possibly the Teen Commission should be treated differently than the other commissions for the following reasons: 1) The people on the commission are not 18 years old; 2) The term is different from normal commissions because their term is for 1 year instead of 4 years; 3) With better outreach in future years, many more applications will be submitted; 4) The task is different from other comanissions--the Teen Commission would assist City staff but other commissions advise Council; 5) The Teen Commission meets more often and the activities are different. He said that what was needed was: 1) A way to select from a large group of applicants and how much weight is given to a paper application; 2) Identify the criteria; 3) Council should have a sense of objectivity and have a process that is less politicized and should give staff a bigger role in providing objective input. Burnett said that the Teen Commission itself should look into the selection process. He said that staff had good intentions in doing the ranking system but he feels responsible for their input. He said that he was impressed with what the Teen Commission expressed and hoped that future commissions and councils would be able to work through this process. Chang proposed forming an ad-hoc committee made up of Council, staff and Teen Commission members to come up with an improved selection process and to discuss Burnett and Lowenthal's ideas spoken earlier. Lowenthal said that the Teen Commissioners showed more wisdom than the adults who spoke. He said he didn't feel that the process was racist, but it was flawed and that it wasn't right to change the rules during the game. James thanked the staff for taking some responsibility for the misunderstandings. She said that the outcome of the selection process was wonderful, but that the process lies in the hands of the Teen Commission. She wasn't adverse to an ad-hoc committee, after the teens had a chance to come back to Council with their recommendations. Kilian discussed the different actions that Council could take. Chang moved to refer the topic of the selection process and criteria back to the Teen Commission, which will work with the staff and report back to Council in the spring. Lowenthal seconded and motion carried 4-0. ORDINANCES - None November 19, 2001 Cupertino City Council Page 14 STAFF REPORTS City C[erk Kimbedy Smith reviewed thc staff report on the preparation of arguments/rebuttals for thc March 2002 election regarding the extension of the utility users excise tax. Council concurred that they would prepare and review an argument in favor of the measure at their next meeting, and then sign it and file it by the deadline in the City Clerk's office (5 p.m. on Wednesday, December 5, 2001), COUNCIL REPORTS - None CLOSED SESSION - None ADJOURNMENT At ! 1:10 p.m. thc meeting adjourned to a swearing-in ceremony for the incoming City Council, November 28, 6:00 p.m., City Hall Council Chambers. K~ity Clerk