CC Min 1997-05-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

contention that it not be the sole source of funding for the project. That's the entire content of that fourth paragraph which indicates basically statement of intent. What you are talking about is not negotiating and acting in a bilateral context. You are talking about allocating funds under a grant program. I am questioning whether this contract is relevant or germane precisely to the decision before you tonight. If you wish to enter into further funding with respect to the house, pursuant to this agreement, I think it would be appropriate for both parties to step back and take a look at where we are with the agreement. This agreement was entered into in context of specific facts at the time. Historically, the parties were not prepared to agree to future funding or to rely solely on the City for future funding. I am concemed that the existence of the agreement may be confusing your determination because if you make an allocation under the purview of the grants, is that to be interpreted as implementation of this agreement. The question is what are we getting back." Mayor Hartnett said he preferred that the Council not approve either $10,580 or the higher amount of $20,000 for Shelter Network, but preferred to have a negotiated setting whereby the appropriate amount might be discussed under the terms of the contract. City Manager Everett suggested that the Council might want to deal with this issue during the budget process on June 23, 1997 where the Council will set priorities. ITERATION OF THE MOTION. MIS: RUSKINIBUCHAN TO ALLOCATE THE REMAINING $10,580 TO SHELTER NETWORK MOTION FAILED ON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: A YES: COUNCIL MEMBERS BUCHAN, RUSKIN NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS CLAIRE, LA BERGE, LEIPZIG AND MAYOR HARTNETT MINUTE ORDER NO. 97-104 MIS: CLAIRE/RUSKIN TO ALLOCATE A TOTAL OF $20,000 TO SHELTER NETWORK WITH $9,420 TO BE TAKEN FROM THE RESERVE OF $4.1 MILLION TO FUND THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT Councilman Claire said there were many interpretations of the contract, but the fact is, "That Shelter Network went belly up, through a previous provider, and we had to go out and entice someone, almost beg someone to come and take that Shelter Network over. We at that time in 1990... we felt a shelter for the homeless in Redwood City, homeless families, was a very important issue to us. That is why we struck this agreement... I certainly felt we would work together, the City and the agency, together go out and try to find additional funding. I do not believe... that we have done that. We haven't' gone out as a City to find additional funding." Councilman Claire said in 1990 it was a very controversial issue, and it had been his intention that night that "if additional funding could not be found elsewhere, that we would continue to fund this organization because of the real benefit brought to families in Redwood City." REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 55 MAY 19, 1997 MINUTES Page No. 344 PAGE 16