Councilman Steve Glickman participated in the discussion by phone from an Arkansas hotel.

With the help of an outside facilitator, the members of the two bodies discussed several areas of tension that sometimes arise in planning commission meetings. Shawn Spano, a senior consultant with the nonprofit Public Dialogue Consortium, had conducted individual interviews with all commissioners and council members prior to the retreat. He used their feedback to identify topics and issues that cause tension.

Those issues included to what level of detail the commission should examine, if it should deal with the direct issues raised by an application or with more indirect policy issues, and if it should strive to be efficient or to use the maximum time allowable for public hearings.

The greatest specific concern was whether consultants' reports and recommendations given to the commission should be questioned.

Since 2002, Los Gatos has used the contracted services of Larry Cannon and his Sausalito-based Cannon Design Group to review architectural applications. The town also uses consultants for arboreal, noise and other technical reports.

Commissioners often question whether the consultants considered certain issues that arise during hearings. Others, particularly Chairman Phil Micciche, said they feel it is not the commission's role to challenge that type of data.

"What I wrestle with is whether we are quasi-judicial or technical," Micciche said. "We tend to, at times, become technical experts. I think we have to use common sense and judge and not focus on minutia."

Commissioner Lee Quintana, who usually raises many issues with applications, said she takes the information from consultants as recommendations and weighs them against other data and input.

"I call it a reality check," she said.

The council approved a resolution in December 2002 clarifying the role of the consulting architect and stating that commissioners must make specific findings in order to modify the architect's recommendations. Quintana said the commissioners have a right to question those recommendations because they can make the finding that "the consulting architect made a mistake of fact."

Councilman Joe Pirzynski said that the larger picture needed to be considered.

"Any one of us can come up with our own perceived factual deviation," he said.

Pirzynksi then cited the next finding, which is that there must be "compelling evidence" to warrant a modification.

Commissioner Michael Kane said his problem with Cannon's recommendation letters is that they contain little context, so it is sometimes unclear what level of scrutiny a project has received.

"Once he wrote a very detailed letter and it was a gift," Kane said.

Other commissioners said that perhaps more details and methodology should be included in consultants' letters so that some of the questions are put to rest. Community Development Director Bud Lortz said he would ask Cannon to do so.