Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2004-141 N.C.S. 07/19/2004 Resolution No.2004-141 N.C.S. of the City of Petaluma, California RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURE SUBMITTED AT THE NOVEMBER 2, 2004 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE MEASURE WHEREAS, §9219 of the Elections Code of the State of California authorizes the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt provisions to provide for the filing of arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Petaluma has added to the General Municipal Election to be held. November 2, 2004, the consideration of a proposed Advisory Measure Regarding a Rainier Cross-Town Connector and Interchange Project (attached as Exhibit A) to be placed before the voters; and, - WHEREAS, the ballot question to be voted upon at the Election is as follows: ADVISORY VOTE ONLY Do you support urging the City Council to pursue the design, environmental analysis, funding and construction of a cross-town connector and interchange connecting Petaluma Boulevard North with the intersection of Rainier Avenue and North McDowell Boulevard? NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS .FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Clerk is directed to transmit a copy of the measure set forth in the recital hereto to the City Attorney. SECTION 2. The City Attorney is directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure as provided in Section 9280 of the Election Code of the State of California. The impartial analysis shall be filed with the City Clerk by 3uly 30, 2004; the date fixed by the City Clerk. as the deadline for submitting said material. SECTION 3. That pursuant to Section 9219 of the Elections Code of the State of California, arguments submitted for or against the above measure shall not exceed 300 words in length, and shall be printed upon the same sheet of paper and mailed to each voter with the sample ballot for the election. Resolution No. 2004-141 N.C.S. SECTION 4. One of the following headings, as appropriate, shall precede the argument's wording but shall not be counted in the 300-word maximum: "Argument in Support of Advisory Measure or, "Argument Against Advisory Measure " SECTION 5. Printed. arguments submitted to voters in accordance with Section 9219 of the Elections Code shall be filed with the City Clerk, accompanied by the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the person(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and- signature of at least one of its principal officers. SECTION 6. Said arguments are due in the Office of the City Clerk prior to 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 13, 2004. Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (Adjourned) (Special) meeting fo m on the .........l.Q~'........... day of ........~Lil~' 20.Q4., by the following vote• r- •••~i•-•~~••'•••• • City Attorney AYES: Harris, Healy, O'Brien, Thompson, NOES: Mayor Glass, Vice Mayor Moynihan, Torliatt ABSENT: Noe J~ ~ ATTEST: ....1..:..................................................... City Clerk Mayor Council File Res. No. ,.:....2L109.-19.1........N.C'.5. Advisory lYleasure Submitted to the Voters oI'the Cite oi'Petaluma WHEREAS, +1ie Rainier Cross-Town Connector and Ir~texchange has been included in the General Plans of Petaluma from 1961 through the present and has a~eordingly formed the basis for much of the development that has occurred in Petaluma aver. the past four decades; and WHEREAS, the lack of an additional cross-town connector has created intolerable traffic congestion on the East Washington corridor, which can be exuected to become wars with further commercial development downtown and on the I<>enil~uorr~ site; a~~d u~IEREAS, plasu~ed improvements to the East Washington /Highway Z O1 interchange, including a ne`v northbound on-ramp, wr~ile helpful, are not. sufficient to provide the congestion relief required; and '~'I3EREAS, a -recent computerized. traffic analysis concludedthat across-town connector and interchange connecting P.ainier to Petaluma Boulevard North would provide four times more traffic relief to the East Washington co~zidor than would an inteicban:ge at Corona Road; and u~REAS, the construction costs of a Rainier Cross-To«m Connector and Interchange are estimated to be -comparable to those of a Corona Interchange; ar~d WHEREAS, i.n i 994 Petaluma voters defeated; by a rizargir~ of ~ °"/o io 41 °io, an initiative directing the CitS~ Cotulcii to "fix Washingtoi. first" rather tl-.an build the Rauuer Cross-Town. Connector and Interchange; and WHEREAS, in order to bring closure to t~iis long-nuuung dehate it i.s appropriate for the voters of Petaluma to once a^air_ weigh in directly on •ihe issue; NOW, TFIEREFORE, THF, PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF PETALTJIvLA do strongly urge and advise the PetaJ.urna City Council to pursue the design., envir~iuner~tal analysis, fiuiding and construction of a cross-town connector and. uiterchanLe connecting Petaluma Boulevard North with the intersection of Rainier Avenzae and North McDo~rell Boulevard. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF PET.~L,L'MA dorurtlier ~argF and advise the City Council to: (1) Malce appropriate designations of the Rainier Cross-Town Connector and .Interchange Project with the Sonc,i~za Courity Transportation Authorityr, the. Metropoli:tai~ Transportation Commission and Ca.i_Trans so that the project can be coordinated •~~ith the widening of Highway 101; Resolution 2004-141 N.C.S. Page 3 (2) Expeditiously complete at1 environmental impact report for the Rauuer Cress-Tov~m Connector and Interchange Project; (3) rinalize the design of the Rainier Cross-Town Connector and Interchange Project incorporatinb an at-grade railroad crossing if feasible, deteamine they precise footprint of land needed for the project and take steps to preserve the necessary right of way; (4) Prepare a financing plan for the Rainier Cross-Town Connector and Interchang:, Project that maximizes the contributions from property owners and businesses directly benefiting from the project via tl~e use of Benefit Assessment Districts and other appropriate mechanisms; (5) Not allov~~ the environmental impact report for any development prcpnsai to utilize the Rainier Cross-Town Connector and Interchange Project as assumed traffic mitigation until. such time as (1) all necessary environmental impact reports. have been certified, (2) all funds to construct the project have been identified and- secured, and (3) no substantial impedin~er~ts rernaitl to construction of the project; (h) Design the Rainier Cross-Town Connector and Interchange Project so as to fully mitigate all flooding impacts and to incorporate appropriate bicycle and. pedestrian pathways. Resolution 2004-141 N.C.S. Page 4