November 9, 2015

________________________________________________________________

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER - The Closed Session of the City Council was called to order by Mayor John Marchand at 6:30 pm, in the City Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore, California.

ROLL CALL - Present: Mayor John Marchand, Vice Mayor Laureen Turner, and Council Members Stewart Gary, Steven Spedowfski, and Bob Woerner.

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

1. Litigation - Conference with Legal Counsel. To meet with the City Attorney pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(4) to discuss whether to initiate litigation. One Case.

________________________________________________________________ REGULAR MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER CALL TO ORDER - The meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor John Marchand at 7:01 pm, in the City Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore, California.

1.01 ROLL CALL - Present: Mayor John Marchand, Vice Mayor Laureen Turner, and Council Members Stewart Gary, Steven Spedowfski, and Bob Woerner.

1.02 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

1.03 REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION

City Attorney Jason Alcala said there was no reportable action.

2. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS - None.

3. CITIZENS FORUM CITIZENS FORUM Sean McMenamin, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Stacy Swanson, North Livermore Community Alliance, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Conni Naylor, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Eva Jean, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Les Edwards, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Henry Jean, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Joyce Wallace, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Gina Bentley, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Paul Swanson, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Wayne Wright, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Sue Vincent, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Don Meeker, Livermore, spoke regarding an 1889 lithograph promoting vineyards in Livermore.

Bruce Schultz, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Betty Murillo, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Scott Huntsman, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Lisa Moreno, Livermore, invited the Mayor and City Council to attend an event supporting at-risk under-privileged children on December 18, 2015.

Gale Travers, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

John Stein, Livermore, spoke regarding the airport administration building restaurant, oak trees along Vallecitos Road, the Arroyo Mocho, and results of the Isabel area survey.

Nancy Thorn, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course and the Downtown RFP.

Emily Blumer, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

Tai Rangan, Livermore, spoke regarding the Springtown Golf Course.

4. CONSENT CALENDAR CONSENT CALENDAR Item 4.03 John Stein, Livermore, spoke regarding the funding, location, and size of the three Downtown parking structure options.

In response to questions by Mayor Marchand, City Engineer Cheri Sheets said the parking structure design would be coordinated with the development of the Downtown and would include community input. She said up to three locations would be evaluated and the project was eligible for Successor Agency funds.

In response to questions by CM Woerner, Ms. Sheets confirmed that the design of the existing parking structure could not be leveraged due to different aspect ratios.

CM Spedowfski commented that the recent extensive parking study had indicated a need for additional parking.

ON THE MOTION OF CM WOERNER, SECONDED BY CM GARY, AND CARRIED ON A 5-0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

4.01 Approval of draft minutes - October 19, 2015, special closed session meeting, and October 26, 2015, regular City Council meeting.

4.02 Introduction of an ordinance amending Municipal Code Chapter 12.51, Art in Public Places Program, to remove Section 12.51.110 Sunset.

4.03 Resolution 2015-152 authorizing execution of an agreement with Watry Buehler Collaborative, in the amount of $1,230,000, for site assessment and design of the Livermore Village Parking Structure, Project No. 586003.

4.04 Resolution 2015-153 authorizing execution of an agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $115,000, for airport construction support services for the Runway 7R-25L Rehabilitation, Project No. 2013-13.

4.05 Resolution 2015-154 authorizing execution of a two-year agreement with Siemens Industry, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $247,536, for alarm system services at various City-owned facilities.

4.06 Resolution 2015-155 authorizing execution of an agreement with West Yost Associates, in an amount not to exceed $466,000, for the 2016 Water Master Plan, Sewer Master Plan, and Connection Fee Study, Project 1988-15.

4.07 Resolution 2015-156 accepting for permanent maintenance and releasing of security for the Brisa Street Sanitary Sewer Mainline Bottlenecks, Project No. 1998-74.

4.08 Resolution 2015-157 authorizing the second amendment to the Second Amended and Restated Franchise Agreement with Livermore Sanitation, Inc. for Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials, and Compostable Materials Services, to make minor modifications to franchise agreement programs, terms, and definitions.

4.09 Resolution 2015-158 approving City Manager employment contract amendment.

4.10 Resolution 2015-159 approving City Attorney employment contract amendment.

4.11 Resolution 2015-160 adjusting compensation and benefits for unrepresented Executive Management Employees.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

5.01 Hearing to consider an economic development subsidy to The Shoppes at Livermore, LLC for an El Charro Specific Plan Infrastructure Loan and a Sales Tax Reimbursement Agreement pursuant to the City Economic Incentive program.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council continue the item to a date to be determined.

THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINUED THE ITEM TO A DATE TO BE DETERMINED.

6. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 6.01 Discussion and direction regarding City Council appointments to Intergovernmental Agencies. None.

Mayor Marchand reordered the agenda to hear Item 6.04 before Item 6.02 and Item 6.03.

6.04 Financial Update Informational Report.

Resolution accepting the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2014-2015 and other annual reports for the year ended June 30, 2015.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council receive the Financial Update Informational Report (verbal) and adopt the resolution.

Administrative Services Director Douglas Alessio presented the staff report.

In response to questions by CM Spedowfski, Mr. Alessio said the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) was an investment vehicle used by municipalities. He said through the dissolution of redevelopment agencies, the State had limited repayment of loans between the former Redevelopment Agency and the City to the current LAIF rate, regardless of the originally stated rate; the LAIF adjustment was an audited adjustment to comply with that limit.

In response to questions by VM Turner, Mr. Alessio confirmed that there were many existing uses for the extra $4,000,000, such as infrastructure and other essential needs.

CM Woerner said that although the City was in excellent shape, it would be premature to consider any expansive plans until an assessment of the infrastructure and deferred maintenance had been performed.

CM Gary spoke regarding balancing the budget through one-time transfers; in light of potential changes to CalPERS and health insurance costs, he suggested that the quarterly updates provide projections on whether or not sustainable revenues would eventually provide the normal operating budget.

In response to questions by CM Gary, City Manager Marc Roberts said there were three offsetting components, including short-term, one-time dollars relating to economic development; employee costs such as pension, medical, and Other Post-Employment Benefits rising faster than revenues; and in the long-term, the City hoped to see some positive benefits from recent policy changes.

In response to questions by CM Spedowfski, Mr. Roberts said staff would return with information regarding pavement including the potential impact of one-time contributions and other strategic opportunities for investment in infrastructure.

THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVED THE FINANCIAL UPDATE INFORMATIONAL REPORT; NO ACTION WAS TAKEN.

ON THE MOTION OF VM TURNER, SECONDED BY CM SPEDOWFSKI AND CARRIED ON A 5-0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:

Resolution 2015-161 accepting Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and other annual reports.

6.02 Discussion and direction regarding extension of time for City-owned Downtown Catalyst sites Requests for Proposals.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council provide direction regarding possible extension of the Downtown Requests for Proposals response timeline.

Community and Economic Development Director Stephan Kiefer presented the staff report.

Mark Triska, Executive Vice President, Colliers International, and Darnesh Patel, Executive Managing Director, Hotels, Collier International, presented an overview of the project.

In response to questions by Mayor Marchand, Mr. Kiefer confirmed that the RFP process would extend for nearly a year, including the vetting process and community input process. He said there would be a number of opportunities for public comment on the project.

Mayor Marchand invited public comment.

Bill Dunlop, Livermore, representing an ad-hoc committee, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Sally Dunlop, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Denise Leddon, Livermore Amador Symphony, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Jean Shuler, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Lawrence Kohl, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Nick Liang, Uncle Yus at the Vineyard, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Jim McGrail, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Mony Nop, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Jim Murray, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Jean King, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown and read a letter from Donna Fortner.

Jan Brovont, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Ken Ball, Livermore, spoke against condominiums in the Downtown and in support of an extended RFP deadline.

Chris Chandler, Livermore Valley Winegrowers, spoke against extending the Downtown RFP deadlines.

Liz Roberts, Livermore Downtown Inc., reading a letter on behalf of Executive Director Rachael Snedecor, spoke against extending the Downtown RFP deadlines.

Brendan Finley, Livermore Chamber of Commerce, spoke against extending the Downtown RFP deadlines.

Gail Travers, Livermore, spoke in support of an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Richard Deets, Dublin, speaking on behalf of Cantabella Childrens Chorus President Pushpa Krishnan, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Don Meeker, Livermore, expressed concerns regarding hotel operating costs and strings attached to the money that originally bought the land.

Valerie Raymond, Livermore, spoke against extending the Downtown RFP deadlines.

Deborah McMenamin, Livermore, spoke against extending the Downtown RFP deadlines.

Maryann Brent, Livermore, speaking on behalf of herself and Ralph Moyer, supporting an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Stacey Swansen, Livermore, spoke against extending the Downtown RFP deadlines.

Clay Widmayer, Livermore, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Dana Klebes, Artistic Table, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

David Jonas, Livermore, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Lee Younker, Livermore, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

Jeff Kaskey, Livermore, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

John Stein, Livermore, supported a hotel on the Downtown site and spoke against condominiums.

Richard Ryon, Livermore, supported an extended deadline for an alternative process for hotel/conference center proposals for the Downtown.

In response to questions by Mayor Marchand, Community and Economic Development Director Stephan Kiefer said the site was purchased primarily with affordable housing monies collected from developers for around $13.5 million.

In response to questions by Mayor Marchand, Mr. Patel said there were many factors that would contribute to the level occupancy rates necessary for the hotel to break even and a study would probably be required to make that determination. He said renting less than 50% occupancy would probably not keep the hotel open.

In response to questions by CM Gary, Mr. Kiefer said the Downtown Specific Plan was adopted in 2004 after extensive community discussion and included a variety of mixed uses. He confirmed that the pro forma for the then proposed regional theater assumed the debt would be paid by higher tax producing condominiums, more people, and a wide variety of uses.

VM Turner said there was an obligation to provide workforce housing, saying that nurses, police officers, and firefighters could not afford to live in Livermore. She said part of the Downtown RFP plan would address that issue; however, the discussion regarding the composition of the proposals would take place next year. She said that as the Downtown Specific Plan included condominiums, that was what she expected to see. She stated she had not heard any arguments that made her want to derail the RFP process and expressed concerns regarding delays.

In response to questions by VM Turner, Mr. Triska confirmed that the present RFP allowed for alternative proposals, that it was reasonable that a hotel might offer meeting space, and that the RFP had requested an iconic hotel and not a budget hotel. He said the RFP was flexible and allowed for developers to provide their best proposals.

CM Woerner said he had not heard requests to delay the current RFP deadline. He said the question for him was whether the dual track would derail the process; generally, he wanted maximum information when making a decision. He said the current RFP allowed additional proposals to be injected into the process. He supported letting the issue play out while the study was done and acknowledging that if a compelling proposal was put forward it would be looked at. He did not support extending the current RFP proposal.

In response to questions by CM Spedowfski, City Manager Marc Roberts said in accordance with the RFP timeline, the City would enter into a Development and Disposition Agreement in March or April of 2016; all steps prior to that were preliminary. He said it was not illegal to look at proposals that came in during January; the Council could accept one of the proposals, have discussions with finalists, or reject all of the proposals. Once entered into a contract, there would be contractual obligations with consequences.

CM Spedowfski said that while maintaining the current RFP date allowed the Council to start exploring options, he wanted to see everything and anything that came their way for the site.

CM Gary said common sense said that if something came in after the deadline, the Council could still look at it. He said bidders would be looking for commitment, stability, and vision and courage of leadership. He expressed concerns regarding an alternative deadline sending mixed messages, the possibility of a public-private partnership of unknown certainty in the Downtown, and the ad-hoc groups lack of communication with key stakeholders. He expressed continued support for expanding and aggregating parcels to accommodate something bigger by re-tuning the Downtown Specific Plan. He said if there would be a public-private partnership for a large convention center in the Downtown, he believed there ought to be a vote and the public should be involved.

Mayor Marchand said condominiums had been embraced in the past as a means of funding the regional theater and the people he spoke with loved living in the Downtown.

In response to questions by Mayor Marchand, Mr. Roberts said the ad-hoc committee had previously stated that public-private dollars might be in the range of $8-10 million.

In response to questions by Mayor Marchand, Mr. Patel said adding a separate RFP track would add confusion to the marketplace and would send the wrong message. He said PKF Consultings approach was a gap analysis of what would be feasible versus the request for a Downtown convention/conference center to identify the gap in development funds and the cost of how to fill that gap. He said that while the current RFP did not include 1,500 square feet of conference rooms or 200 hotel rooms, it was iconic, full-service, and luxurious.

CM Spedowfski said the project was a major component of the Downtown and meant a lot to the community. He asked how an applicant could not expect some level of public engagement and back and forth. He said the Council should consider everything possible to identify what the community wanted and the financial constraints. In response to questions by CM Spedowfski, Mr. Triska said they knew the process would be political, but a parallel RFP would be going outside of a well-defined and carefully crafted process. He said their concern was that having a two track process would mean no responses would be received. Mr. Patel said the PKF report would be forwarded to developers as an additional data point.

In response to questions by VM Turner, City Attorney Jason Alcala said the City Council had control over the RFP process and generally if an RFP were to be changed mid-stream, the change would be made available to everybody; creating a two-track process might upset that. He clarified that the recommendation from the consultant was to provide one process and one deadline to prevent confusion in the marketplace.

VM Turner expressed concerns regarding setting a submittal deadline while also stating that the City would accept anything that came after; saying either there was a deadline or there wasnt.

Mayor Marchand said during the vetting process, there would be an opportunity to work with developers regarding various options. He said the City did not wish to subsidize the project.

CM Gary said he appreciated Colliers clarification; even if the Council wanted a parallel track, it couldnt be done. He said the Council had put a private-sector, market-driven RFP on the market and if the community did not like the responses received, there could be a conversation regarding how to fill the gap. He said that conversation could not be held in the middle of January.

In response to questions by CM Woerner, Mr. Alcala said the City Council had the authority to reject all proposals and to consider others.

CM Woerner said there was flexibility in the rules; he said nobody wanted to extend the deadline, inject public funds into the project, or change the RFP.

ON THE MOTION BY CM WOERNER, SECONDED BY VM TURNER AND CARRIED ON A 4-1 VOTE, CM SPEDOWFSKI VOTING NO, THE CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO NOT EXTEND THE REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS SUBMISSION TIMELINE.

6.03 Discussion and direction on the Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) Actuarial Study and investment strategy for Retiree Medical Trust.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council adopt a resolution accepting the June 30, 2014, GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation report and approving changes to the Retiree Healthcare Benefit Trust Fund investment strategy.

Administrative Services Director Douglas Alessio presented the staff report.

In response to questions by CM Woerner, Mr. Alessio said the Capital Investment Strategy had returned over 9% since inception, making the 7% discount rate despite short-term fluctuations. City Manager Marc Roberts said that the confidence level was 55%, meaning that more than half the time it would be likely to hit that rate, noting that Council policy required staff to return every two years showing the actual returns.

In response to questions by CM Spedowfski, Mr. Alessio said there were no legal restrictions to changing investment strategies, although he would suggest not changing the strategy more frequently than every two years.

CM Gary said the City was not making a stunningly large, risky move; he supported the changes while continuing to monitor the policy every two years.

ON THE MOTION OF CM WOERNER, SECONDED BY CM GARY AND CARRIED ON A 5-0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:

Resolution 2015-162 accepting the June 30, 2014, GASB 45 Actuarial Valuation report and approving change in the Retiree Healthcare Benefit Trust Fund Investment Strategy.

6.05 Asset Management Program Update.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council accept the proposed work plan and approve the general direction of the Asset Management Program.

THE CITY COUNCIL RESCHEDULED ITEM 6.05 TO THE NEXT POSSIBLE MEETING.

6.06 Discussion and direction regarding pending State or Federal legislation. None.

7. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, STAFF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

7.01 Council Committee Reports and Matters Initiated by City Manager, City Attorney, Staff, and Council Members.

There were no reports.

8. ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT - at 10:43 pm, in honor and memory of former City Manager Gerald Jerry Peeler, to a regular City Council meeting on Monday, November 23, 2015, at 7:00 pm, Council Chambers, 3575 Pacific Avenue, Livermore.

APPROVED:
JOHN P. MARCHAND, MAYOR

PREPARED BY:
SARAH BUNTING, DEPUTY CITY CLERK

ATTEST:
SUSAN NEER, CITY CLERK