►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting 11-10-09 10c. MOU between PCJP Board & San Bruno
B
B
Also
before
you
and
you
approved
ACIP
project
for
for
the
great
separation
project,
and
you
allocated
funding
for
step,
support
and
consultant
support
to
work
in
the
development
of
this
project
in
September.
Also,
this
item
was
before
you
till
you
give
direction
to
step
on
basic
structural
design
element
of
this
project,
the
purpose
of
the
MOU.
B
Project
design,
JPB
also
acknowledged
several,
are
resolves,
cope
issues
in
this
65
sexy
5%
design,
including
for
heat
actual
future,
and
how
support
or
heat
actual
design
of
the
new
station.
The
aesthetics
and
surface
treatment
of
the
retaining
wall
system,
utility
relocations
and
less
and
landscaping
will
be
resolved
as
part
of
the
final
design.
B
It
is
explicitly
understood
that
the
project
shall
include
all
agreed
on
design
elements
by
the
essay,
as
f,
technically
feasible.
Jp
be
acknowledged
that
the
city
desire
to
limit
construction
of
the
same
Bruno
grade
separation
to
one
continuous
/
Edo
period
of
construction.
But
that
really
mean
that,
as
as
you
remembered
from
the
reason
why
I
am
expanding
little
bit
on
this
point,
they
had
based
on
some
comments
but
I
received
during
the
last
few
days.
B
This
project
is
intended
to
be
developing
to
construction
phases
based
on
to
difference
construction
contract
and
will
be
a
decision
point,
but
JPB
will
have
to
make
poor
for
the
second
phase
of
this
project,
depending
on
the
decision
on
the
high-speed
rail,
and
this
is
a
statement
that
the
city
is
interested
in
one-time
construction,
that
basically
finishing
the
project
for
four
tracks.
Instead
of
finishing
for
two
tracks
and
coming
back
later
for
this
for
the
next
two
tracks,
JPB
and
the
sea
rico
commit
to
conclude
discussion
of
unresolved
issues
in
a
timely
manner.
B
Jpb
vr6
series
series
review
of
the
design
and
will
incorporate
those
comments
by
by
the
city
into
the
final
design
that,
if
they
are
feasible,
JPB
will
keep
City
informed
of
progress
of
construction
and
we'll
coordinate
public
outreach
with
the
city.
They
will
designate
a
point
of
contact
and
the
city
will
do
the
same.
B
The
Syrian
JPB
shall
enter
in
a
construction
and
maintenance
agreement
which
is
not
ever
available
at
this
time.
Yet
this
all
only
does
highlights
what
of
this
mou
of
more
interest
to
the
city,
but
they
are
not
intended
to
encompass
all
of
the
issues
included.
Enzyme,
oh
you,
my
recommendation
tonight
is
for
you
to
consider
to
authorize
the
city
manager
to
finalize
and
to
enter
in
this
mou.
D
First
and
foremost,
I
want
to
emphasize
that
the
this
is
the
project
that
has
come
onto
an
accelerated
schedule.
The
council
is
aware
of
that,
and
it
represents
a
long
expected
and
anticipated
delivery
of
interest
to
the
community.
The
JPB
has
on
a
regular
and
continuous
basis,
provided
a
very
collaborative,
very
cooperative
and
very
proactive
relationship
with
staff
in
working
through
a
myriad
of
design
details.
We
fully
expect
that
both
the
need
for
that
type
of
work
and
the
cooperative
spirit,
and
fact
that
has
guided
that
work
to
date.
D
We
have
every
expectation
that
will
continue
through
the
complete
design
and
development
of
this
project.
With
that
said,
I,
and
without
disregarding
fully
acknowledging
that
again,
there
are
many
issues
that
are
not
nailed
down
at
this
time.
They
are
also
not
specifically
articulated
in
this
MOU
and
for
clarification
purposes,
just
to
re-emphasize
something
that
the
director
said.
D
I
think
the
directors
recommendation
is
clear
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
council
is
is
fully
informed,
that
this
document
does
not
deliberately
overlook
that.
There
are
numerous
interests
and
items
of
on
a
day-by-day
basis
to
resolve
and
to
troubleshoot
and
to
make
sure
that
this
project
is
what
we
expect
as
it
moves
forward
to
completion.
E
Appreciate
that
statement,
but
I'm
still
concerned
because
there's
two
statements
in
this
draft
MOU
that
seem
to
contradict
each
other
and
that's
during
this
in
the
description
of
the
scope
of
the
project
in
very
simply
states
that
the
details
of
the
project
are
more
specifically
described
in
the
jpv
65-percent
design,
drawings
dated
august
28
2009.
And
then
it
goes
to
paragraphs
later
that
the
JPB
acknowledges
that
there
are
several
unresolved
scope
issues,
the
65
isn't
yeah.
E
So
one
you're
saying
you
got
specific
details
of
the
project
and
then
not
and
then
another
statement
was
you
know
where
we're
expected
to
accept
that
they're
still
unresolved
issues,
so
I
think
we're
going
to
get
in
a
bind.
If
you
know,
if
we
start
using
now,
you
know
those
statements,
I
think
I,
don't
like
to
hear
the
details
of
the
pro-morsi.
You
know
I,
don't
like
words
that,
like
specific,
like
you
know,
and
then
several
unresolved
I
mean
there
just
seems
to
be
a
contradiction
there.
E
It
I'm
fine
with
the
whole
MOU
and
the
whole
relationship-
and
you
know
in
that.
That's
set
up
but
I
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
concerns.
Not
only
with
my
colleague
on
the
subcommittee,
but
also
with
the
former
members
of
the
CAC
and
the
greater
community
that
there
are
details
that
we
are
still
undoubtedly
probably
going
to
have
to
argue
in
to
invite.
For.
B
Those
architectural
issue,
wall,
design,
voi
treatment,
the
posse
park
and
utility
relocation.
They
are
still
many
outstanding
issues
on
this
project
which
were
not
agreed
to,
or
at
this
stage,
based
on
the
very
fast
straight
piece,
how
the
development
of
fir
this
design
is
taking
place
right
now,
yeah.
F
Repo
seventh
Avenue
I
gave
the
council
and
mark
Simon
a
copy
of
some
of
my
concern,
but
I'm
just
going
to
touch
on
to
because
I
don't
want
to
nitpick
what?
What
part
of
the
will?
The
original
CAC
play
to
assure
that
their
original
recommendations
are
meant.
They
talked
about
they.
The
original
CAC
recommendations
will
be
considered,
but
is
there
any
community
input
to
from
that
group
going
forward
or
whatever
they
have
turned
in
is
where
it
is,
and
there
will
there
be
any
any
follow-through.
F
My
bigger
question
is
and
I
think
Clara
showed
in
in
one
of
the
slides,
the
the
JP
be,
and
the
city
agree
that
certain
design
elements
as
presented
by
the
CAC
will
be
included
if
technically
feasible,
but
there's
a
second
reference
in
the
staff
package
that
says
technically,
feasible
or
financially
feasible
and
I
think
when
they
put
that
financially
feasible
in
there.
What
one
of
the
scenarios
is
the
JPB
is
going
to
come
back
and
say:
we've
only
got
so
much
money.
F
It
is
technically
feasible
to
do
this,
but
the
city
of
San,
Bruno,
cannot
say
you
got
to
spend
your
money
on
this.
The
JPB
is
going
to
say
we
would
love
to
do
this,
but
there's
not
the
money,
so
I'm
just
concerned
that
that's
going
to
be
used
as
a
scapegoat
and
say
the
recommendations,
whatever
they
are,
how
the
water
is
pumped
from
the
depressions
of
san
ber
of
san
mateo
avenue
or
san
bruno
avenue
or
or
Angus
back
into
the
storm
drain
systems.
F
There
there's
not
money
to
to
do
it
the
way,
maybe
that
it
should
be
done
or
or
the
CAC
suggested,
that
it
be
done
I.
I
guess
I
would
like
some
clarification,
maybe
from
JP
be
on.
Are
they
going
to?
How
are
they
going
to
wife,
technically
feasible
and
financially
feasible
when
they
make
these
kinds
of
decisions?
F
A
G
Good
evening,
I'm
mark
Simon
executive
officer
for
public
affairs
for
caltrain.
First
of
all,
me
just
congratulate
mr.
Elaine
and
congratulate
Larry
frenzel
on
remarkable
turn.
Thank
you
for
all
of
your
service
and
Jim.
Thank
you
for
all
this
free,
but
you're,
going
to
provide
the
caltrain
staff,
concurs
with
the
recommendation
of
the
city
staff
and
urges
the
board
to
the
council.
Excuse
me:
let's
meet
before
boards.
All
the
time
urges
the
council
to
approve.
The
resolution
has
described
by
your
staff.
We
have
been
working
and
we
appreciate
city
manager
jackson's
description
of
our
relationship.
G
Mr
ybarra
I
think
it's
significant.
This
is
for
sixty-five
percent
designed,
there's
still
I,
don't
think
was
ever
intended
to
be
something
you
wouldn't
bring
to
you
at
a
hundred
percent
design.
I
think
that
would
be
inappropriate
to
bring
you
essentially
a
done
deal.
Most
of
the
things
that
we
have
to
work
out
are
not
dissimilar
from
issues.
We've
already
worked
out,
sometimes
on
very
short
timeframe,
as
ms
fabry
described.
G
A
G
G
So
there's
no
question
that
will
be
one
of
the
factors
and
whether
it's
technically
feasible
is
one
of
the
issues
that
we
continue
to
address
with
the
city
staff,
and
there
are
times
when
they'll
convince
us
that
something
is
more
feasible
than
we
thought
it
was.
These
are
all
things
that
are
subject
to
negotiation.
As
for
the
role
of
the
CAC,
I
really
think
that's
up
to
the
council
and
staff
to
decide.
Certainly,
there's
no
question
the
CAC
an
extensive,
almost
unprecedented
participation
in
this
experience
in
this
design.
G
From
the
outset,
we
have
adopted
virtually
all
of
their
recommendations
and
I
believe
it's
really
the
responsibility
of
the
city
staff
and
the
council
to
make
sure
that
these
things
are
follow
through
on.
In
my
experience,
preparing
for
before
this
council.
Is
you
don't
need
me
to
tell
you
what
those
responsibilities
are
you're
very
mindful
of
them,
and
you've
been
very
aware
of
the
need
to
fulfill
them?
Thank.
H
Alice
Barnes
Fifth
Avenue,
honorable
mayor
councilmembers
boy
did
you
just
hear
him
say
quote
our
best
interests
and
he
did
mean
that
joint
powers
board
caltrain.
He
did
not
mean
the
city
council's
best
interest
or
San
Bruno's,
and
he
also
made
a
misstatement
and
when
he
said
that
the
recommendations
that
were
made
by
the
CAC
have
been
incorporated
in
the
sixty-five
percent.
I
sent
you
folks
a
letter
last
night
with
13.
H
Points
where
they
are
not
living
up
to
the
CAC
I'll,
give
you
one
real
quick
example.
Here
we
wanted
750
foot
long
platforms
on
First
Avenue,
that's
going
to
stick
out
atop
a
20-foot
wall
at
the
curb
for
four
tracks.
It's
going
to
stick
out
over
First
Avenue
ten
feet
and
suddenly,
in
this
sixty-five
percent
they
have
added
a
future
possibility
of
200
f50
more
feet.
H
H
Did
you
get
any
guarantee
or
warm
and
fuzzy
feeling
from
the
previous
speaker
that
they're
going
to
put
that
in
writing?
But
that's
an
error
and
you
will
never
see
those
250
feet
know
a
lot
of
these
unresolved
issues
are
not
being
put
in
writing
and
if
we
sign
this
MOU
based
on
a
seriously
flawed
project
design,
we
will
be
buying
into
it
and
we
won't
have
a
say
in
inspections
or
wall
or
landscaping.
H
I
truly
believe
they
will
be
collaborative,
like
our
city
manager
said
I
believe
that
we're
going
to
negotiate
like
mark
Simon
said.
Did
you
just
hear
how
many
trees
we're
going
to
have
on
First
Avenue?
There's
not
a
damn
tree
from
Angus
south
on
First
Avenue
and
the
reason
is
I
I,
better
quit,
but
I
do
leave.
H
Did
hear
you
but
the
the
problem
with
the
plan
is
we
on
a
CAC
we're
going
for
a
four
track
footprint
and
then
they
came
back
to
us
years
ago
and
said
we're
going
to
do
two
tracks
now.
They're
back
is
up
against
the
wall
and
they
need
that
10
million
dollars
so
we're
being
rushed
and
what
the
engineers
have
done
in
the
project
design.
Is
they
put
a
two
track
in
with
all
kinds
of
accoutrements
that
are
over?
H
On
that
other
side,
the
First
Avenue
sold
and
they're
telling
us
we're
going
to
have
a
phase
2
for
4
tracks
well
to
go
from
two
to
four
tracks.
They
will
have
to
demolish
millions
of
dollars
of
enhancements
as
structural,
at
whatever
they
will
have
to
demolish
that
and
then
build
a
four-track
folks.
H
They
if
they
lose
the
10
million
dollars-
I'm
sorry,
but
you,
taxpayers
and
I
taxpayer
are
going
to
save
more
than
10
million
dollars
at
not
doing
these
things
at
not
tearing
them
down.
I'm
sorry,
but
I
am
adamantly
opposed
to
this,
and
I
respectfully
ask
you
to
at
least
postpone
approval.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
C
You
I
think,
first
of
all,
after
the
last
comments,
I
think
we
need
some
clarification
on
exactly
what
is
happening,
because
my
understanding
is
it's
going
to
be
a
one,
complete
construction
phase
and
that
after
everything
is
built,
there
will
be
room
to
add
two
more
tracks.
My
understanding
is
not
that
they
are
going
to
build
something
with
two
tracks
and
then
come
back,
tear
things
down
and
add
a
second
set
of
tracks.
So
could
we
please
clarify
that
by
whoever
wants
to.
I
I
C
I
I
G
Let
me
add
separate
the
idea
here
is
that
by
the
time
we're
in
the
position
where
we
have
to
make
this
decision,
we
will
know
whether
high-speed
rail
is
coming
or
not
but
doesn't
come.
Then
we
shouldn't
build
four
tracks,
we
don't
know
yet
we
don't
have
the
money
we'd.
Rather,
if
we're
going
to
build
the
second
set
of
tracks
at
high
speed
rail
pay
for
it
not
us,
so
we're
designing
a
two-track
structure
that
can
be
expanded
to
four
tracks,
but
it
will
not
have
been
the
outset,
be
a
four-track
structure,
so.
A
F
G
C
The
cameras,
picking
up,
don't
worry
about
it.
So
therefore,
I've
been
looking
at
the
design,
the
sixty-five
percent
design
documents
and
for
anyone
who
hasn't
seen
them
there.
It's
a
pile
of
documents
this
thick
and
this
big
and
the
print
on
it
is
small.
It's
not
a
12.
It
has
to
be
a
10
font,
it's
small,
so
it
takes
a
while
to
dig
it
all
out
and
try
to
figure
out.
What's
going
on
so
I.
First
of
all,
I
applaud
the
human
during
the
CAC
group.
C
C
We
don't
want
anyone
coming
through
our
town,
doing
a
huge
construction
project,
two
tracks
for
tracks
whatever
and
then
coming
back
later
and
tearing
part
of
it
apart
and
adding
more
to
it,
so
that
that's
a
concern
and
we'd
like
to
hear
from
from
you
emphatically
that
that
is
not
going
to
happen.
That
is.
C
Ok,
so
that
makes
sure
that's
not
a
public
record.
Secondly,
I
understand
the
sixty-five
percent
planning.
It
I
understand
that
you
can
and
cannot
do
certain
things
right
now,
because
there's
other
decisions
that
are
being
made:
I'm
I'm
a
new
member
of
the
high
speed
rail
policy
committee.
There's
all
things
happening
with
that
and
I
understand
that.
There's
steps
that
you
can't
step
on
each
other's
toes
and
there's
phases
to
do.
Okay,
however
Mike
one
of
my
big
concerns.
C
Besides
the
fact
that
I'm
deeply
concerned
about
how
the
storm
drain
water
is
going
to
be
moved
back
and
forth,
my
parents
live
right
down
there.
I
also
want
to
know
that
any
engineering
decisions
that
are
being
made
now
and
up
to
the
hundred
percent
will
not
preclude
any
aesthetics
that
were
promised
in
landscaping.
C
But
I've
noticed
that
there's
nothing
much
printed
on
the
east
side,
and
also
it
doesn't
look
like
there
was
any
consideration
and
I
could
be
wrong
because
I
haven't
been
studying
the
plans
all
that
long,
any
consideration
to
moving
shifting
the
whole
thing
over
five
feet
and
allowing
for
the
landscaping
on
the
east
side
of
First,
Avenue
and
I
know
when
I
say
that
sounds
really
simple.
To
do.
I
I
realize
it
isn't
but
I'd
like
some
assurance
from
you
that
the
considerations
will
be
made
to
keep
First
Avenue
as
whole
as
possible.
A
C
I
I
Is
not
technically
viable
to
get
all
four
tracks
by
shifting
everything
to
the
West,
but
we
did
look
at
all
possible
alternatives
to
shifting
it
so
that
wasn't
viable
in
regards
to
planting
or
to
any
kind
of
treatment
along
first
avenue.
That's
actually
one
of
the
issues
that
we're
working
very
closely
with
the
city
right
now
on
the
city
is
specifically
brought
up
that
issue
as
being
one
of
the
items
they're
interested
in
is
possibly
incorporating
some
trees
or
some
other
kind
of
planting
along
there.
I
It's
specifically
excluded
in
the
MOU,
not
because
this
is
something
we're
not
agreeing
with
the
city
on.
Rather
it's
because
at
65
we
didn't
want
to
present
a
fez
accompli.
This
is
what
we're
going
to
do.
You
know,
love
it
or
leave
it
quite
the
opposite.
We're
working
with
the
city
you've
obtained
a
consult,
we're
working
with
that
consultant
and
with
a
staff
to
develop
exactly
what
that's
going
to
look
like.
So
we're
well
aware
that
that's
a
concern
that
city
has
and
that's
something
that
we're
we're
going
to
take
into
account
95%.
I
C
I
understand
all
those
things
and
it's
it's
hard
to
reconcile
what
you
just
said
to
some
of
the
plans
that
I
saw
that
show
a
three-dimensional
drawing
of
the
trash.
Can
that's
going
to
go
on
the
station,
so
I'll
take
your
answer
for
what
it
is,
but
I
really
hope
that
you
don't
come
back
and
and
tell
us
that
there's
not
going
to
be
landscaping
on
that.
First
avenue,
I.
G
Understand
your
concerns
that
you
don't
confuse
a
rendering
with
the
final
design.
Okay,
you
know
there's
a
lot
to
be
done
still,
that's
the
whole
point,
but
there's
MOU:
it's
really
a
structure
for
us
to
go
forward.
It's
it's!
No
different
than
the
decision
you
may.
I
think
it
was
back.
Log
is
29.
According
to
the
slide,
this
is
essentially
memorializing.
K
A
Jerry
just
a
couple
of
quick
comments
in
general.
The
MOU
is,
is
fine,
I
understand
completely
that
you
don't
have
all
the
answers
now,
but
I
guess.
A
lot
of
this
has
for
me
to
do
with
a
matter
of
trust,
and
you
came
to
us
a
number
of
years
ago,
and
we
talked
to
you
about
deaths
occurring
at
that
at
that
site.
What
are
we
going
to
do
and
I
think
you
were
actually
based
on
prior
experience
with
this
prior
counseled?
K
You
were
actually
very
happy
that
we
were
willing
to
work
with
you
and
we
started
the
CAC
process.
Long,
laborious
hard
fun
process
and
I
have
to
congratulate
Robert
and
Alice
for
being
a
very
integral
part
of
that
whole
operation,
and
we
came
together
and
worked
with
you
and
developed
what
we
thought
was
going
to
be
a
real
first-class.
K
If
you
will
and
trying
to
make
this
happen
in
a
cooperative
way.
I
do
in
fact
think
it'll
all
work
out.
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
get
every
little
tiny
thing
that
we
would
want
on
the
wish
list,
but
we
have
assurances
and
elevators.
We
have
assurances
and
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we're
sort
of
in
question
even
just
a
few
months
ago,
so
I
just
want
to
bring
that
up.
Thank.
G
You
I
appreciate
that
I
know
that
was
so
similar
its
concern
expressed
by
councilmember
medina
the
last
time.
I
was
here.
It
is
an
issue
of
trust
and
it
works
both
ways.
We're
trusting
that
we
can
work
these
issues
out
in
a
way
that
allows
this
project
to
go
forward
in
a
timely
way.
The
thing
that
we're
very
nervous
about
is
the
same
tight
timeframe,
that's
troubling
to
everybody,
so
we're
taking
it
on
trust
that
that
there
isn't
going
to
be
a
month
of
delay
and
finalizing
this
agreement.
G
K
E
Maybe
we
need
to
put
you
know
we
could
need
to
go
over
some
of
that
stuff
from
the
PSR
and
you
know
and
and
see
what.
May
you
know
to
at
least
pacify
us
that
these
things
will
not
be
lost
in
the
final
design
that
they
go
within
the
MOU.
Along
with
you
know
the
drainage
issues
thanks
so
I
mean
I,
think
you
hadn't.
We
had
no
problem,
placing
the
elevator
issue
or
the
fountains
at
you
or
they
think
within
this
MOU.
E
G
J
Is
through
the
chair
I'm,
just
obviously
there
are
changes
have
been
made.
Their
questions
have
been
raised.
There's
things
that
should
be
placed
in
the
MOU.
Trust
is
an
important
thing,
but
there's
a
obviously
former
president
said
trust
but
verify.
Why
would
we
not
want
to
postpone
the
mou
for
two
weeks
to
allow
some
of
the
modifications
and
updates
to
it
so
that
it's
all
presented
before
us
in
its
entirety,
rather
than
going
forward
with
some
of
the
changes
already
have
occurred?
D
G
We're
just
worried
about
about
the
time
frame
yeah
two
more
weeks
and
then
is
it
going
to
be
two
more
weeks
after
that
and
at
what
point
does
it
get
to
the
point
where
we
can't
do
this?
One
of
the
elements
of
our
discussion
prior
to
the
Knights
resolution
was
a
commitment
from
the
city
that
this
was
not
going
to
take
a
couple
of
more
weeks
week.
We're
spending
a
million
dollars
a
week.
G
If
we're
not
going
to
get
these
things
done
and
done
quickly,
then
we
have
to
ask
and
I
hate
to
say
this,
because
I
don't
want
to
put
the
council
I,
don't
want
to
seem
like
I'm
putting
the
council
in
this
kind
of
a
position,
but
it's
the
position.
We
are
in
that.
If
we
don't
move
forward
on
this,
then
there's
some
question
about
whether
or
not
we
can
get
this
done
in
a
way
that
meets
the
deadlines
we
have
and
that
meets
the
requirements
that
we
need
to
meet
and.
J
I
appreciate
what
you
said
so
if
the
council
were
to
give
you
or
I
gave
you
my
word
and
say
trust
us
that
in
two
weeks,
when
you
came
back
that,
we
would
feel
that
everything
would
be
fine
to
prove
is
that
that
time
frame
of
the
two
weeks
is
still
of
a
considerable
challenge
and
a
problem
for
the
current
project.
It's.
G
It's
a
concern.
I
mean
we're
talking
we're
trying
to
we're
talking
the
city
about
days,
not
weeks
to
try
and
get
this
mou
resolved
and
the
remaining
issues
that
we
have
to
get
to
get
this
thing
signed
resolved.
That
leaves
still
other
issues
that
we
will
continue
to
work
on,
but
it
is
troubling
to
us
that
we're
not
able
to
get
moving
on
this
in
we
get
working
very
hard
already
excuse.
A
C
You
I
understand
the
point
of
the
two
more
weeks,
but
they've
made
very
public
statements
and
we
have
it
on
record
and
I
know
we'll
have
it
in
the
minutes
that
they're
asking
us
to
trust
them.
They're
asking
us
to
work
with
them.
We've
had
people
listening
very
closely,
all
the
council's
listening
we
can
and
if
I'm
understanding
right,
we
can
add
things
tonight
to
change
this.
C
If
we
need
to-
or
we
can
add
a
line
saying
including
the
considerations
that
we
that
were
voiced
tonight
or
let
that
be
part
of
the
minutes
and
just
move
on
I,
don't
I
didn't
make
my
comments
with
the
intention
of
delaying
things.
I
only
made
them
my
comments
to
make
public
and
to
assure
people
that
you
are
working
with
us,
we're
working
with
you
and
that
those
things
weren't
swept
under
the
rug
and
forgotten
it's
a
very
small
part
of
our
town.
C
K
A
Was
just
going
to
mention
that
or
say
that
I
think
staff
has
a
real
good
idea
of
what
the
CAC
wants.
What
has
been
done,
what
the
concerns
are
and
the
reports
that
have
come
back-
aren't
surprising
that
the
JPB
has
been
very
cooperative
and
were,
and
working
and
diligently
to
get
things
done.
And
yes,
I
understand
that
you
have
an
interest,
and
so
I
know
that
you
understand
that
we
also
have
an
interest
and
you're
going
to
have
to
hit
some
kind
of
medium
ground
and
everyone's
not
going
to
get
everything
they
want.
A
But
I
think
it
is
a
real
time
constraint.
That's
been
placed
on
them
because
of
the
funding.
That's
there
and
I.
Don't
think
that
we
have
any
problem,
or
at
least
I,
don't
have
any
problem,
giving
the
city
manager
authority
to
enter
into
the
mou,
making
those
necessary
changes
and
if
she
can't
get
those
changes
made
then
we'll
see
in
two
weeks.
Okay
I
mean-
and
you
don't
want
to
be
here
in
two
weeks-
work
a
little
bit
later
and
get
her
more
satisfied
and
get
a
signature
quicker.
A
J
Regina
I
can
appreciate
what
what
is
being
said.
Maybe
that's
why
you're?
The
mayor
of
course,
is
I
understand
your
situation,
that
we
have
our
situation,
we're
not
going
to
get
everything
we
want
and
it's
going
to
work
both
ways,
and
we
understand
that
we
spoke
before,
and
obviously
actions
speak
louder
than
words.
J
I
can
go
along
with
what
the
mayor
is
saying
is
that
we
could
enter
into
the
agreement
with
those
changes
and
modifications
made
to
the
MOU
by
the
manager
and
if
it
doesn't
meet
the
expectations
and
what
you've
heard
here
this
evening,
then
I
would
agree
you're
back
in
two
weeks
and
I
think
then
the
trust
factor
will
really
be
tested
on
both
sides.
I.