HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6.A 2/24/2014 Ag Itw4/#6 .A
2ALZ Lr
•
/85a
DATE: February 24„2014
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council-through City Manager
FROM: William Mushallo, Finance Director
•
SUBJECT: Public Hearing'to,Levyan Annual,Assessment for Fiscal Year 2014 for the
Downtown Petaluma Business Improvement:District and Approve Resolution
Establishing the LeVy for'the:2014 Annual Assessment for the downtown
Petaluma Business;Irnprovement District
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution Establishing the Levy for
the 2014 Annual Assessment for the downtown Petaluma Businesslmprovement District
BACKGROUND •
hi November 2000, the Petaluma City Council adopted Ordinance 2104 N.C.S., establishing the
Downtown Petaluma Business Improvement District (DPBID), codified as Chapter 6.04 of the
p „_ _ . .
Petaluma Municipal Code. A Board of Directors is established to administer the affairs of the
District. Under PetalumaMunicipal,Code section 6.04.100, the Board of Directors must present
the City Council with an Annual:,Report and related budget:information for review and approval
prior to adopting a Resolution-of Intention to levy an annual,assessment for Fiscal Year 2014.
The fiscal year-for the BID begins on January 1's`. Noticeof the Public Hearing was published in
the newspaper on February 13,;2014, and the mailing with Exhibits 1 and 2 was completed.on
January 29;:2014.
DISCUSSION
On January -27, 2014,` the City:Council-reviewed>the annual report and proposed'budget for the
2014 DPBID assessment and adopted..a Resolution of Intention to Levy an Annual Assessment
for Fiscal Year 2014. Per the'.DPBID Ordinance, the-City shall not adopt, modify or otherwise
amend; any Fiscal Year budget of the DPBID that is inconsistent in any way with the Fiscal
Year's budget as agreed to and:presented`by the DPBID Board of Directors except in the case of
a written majority .pr'otest, (regarding elimination or modification of any specific, budget item)
from the business:owners which will pay 50%0 or more of the assessments,proposed to be levied
as to any'spectfic'budget item_pursuant'to GC Section 36525 (b)._ In;such case the written protest
regarding arty specific budget^ tem shall be grounds to eliminate or modify the expenditure from
the District's proposed budget pursuant to the written protest; otherwise, the budget and levy
Agenda`Review:
City Attorney Finance Dire City Man
1
shall remain unchanged. .At°tonight'spublic hearing, the;C'oundil will hear any testimony for and
against the proposed levy, including, any protests, subsequent to which the Council should
determine whether or not to:approve the levy. Any correspondence received prior to distribution
of the City Council packet is, included as Attachment 6. Correspondence received after
distribution of the packet will be provided to the Council prior to,the:meeting. It should be noted
that the letter included in Attachment 6, received on February 11, 2014, asking to remove one
parcel from assessment benefit zone A, and place it in benefit,zone B is not vote for or against
the assessment. It is a request for DPBID boundary review and modification. Amending the
DPBID boundary to modify of benefit requires the Council to undertake the same process
that was used to establish the DPBID. It should be further noted that the BID Board has not
requested such an amendment.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
There is no cost:to the City for this program. The DPBID Board of Directors administers the
program. The DPBID Assessmentsare as follows:
32% Security $20,800
28% Marketing $18,200
20% Beautification $13,000
20% Administration $13,000
Total. $65,000
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution Establishingthe.Levy for the 2014 Annual Assessment for the Downtown
Petaluma Business Improvement District
2. Notice of Public Hearing
4. Draft copy of billing statement for BID assessments
5. Draft copy of letter to businesses to accompany billing statement
6. Correspondence
Z Items listed below are large in volume and are not attached to this report, but may be viewed in the
City Clerk's office.
3. Current.List-of,businessesbeingassessed.
2
•
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE LEVY.FOR,THE 2014.ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE DOWNTOWN PETALUMA BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2000, in accordance with. California Streets and
Highways Code Section:36500 et seq. ("the Act"), the Petaluma`City Council adopted Ordinance
2104 N.C.S., later codified as Chapter. 6.04 of the Petaluma.Municipal Code, establishing the
Downtown Petaluma Business Improvement District e'DPBID"), within the area described in
Exhibit 1, which is attached-to and made a part of this Resolution; and,
WHEREAS, Section 6:04.050 of the Petaluma. Municipal Code lists the types of
improvements and activities:that may be funded by the levy of assessments on businesses within
the DPBID as follows:
A. The acquisition, construction, installation or maintenance of`any°tangible property with
an estimated useful'life Offive years or more including, but not limited to, the following
improvements:
1. Benches
2. Trash Receptacles
3. Decorations
4. Facade Improvements
5. Permanent Landscaping
B. Activities including, but not limited to, the following;
1. Promotion of public events which benefit businesses in the area and which take
place.on.or in publicplaces within the area.
2. Furnishing of music in any public place in the area.
3. Activities which benefit businesses located and operating in the area, including
but not limited to commercial shopping and promotional programs; and,
WHEREAS, under Section 6:04.100 of the Petaluma Municipal Code, the Board of
Directors established to govern the affairs of the DPBID must present the City Council with an
annual report and budget for review and approval prior to the City Council consideration of
levying a benefit assessment for-the following.fiscal year; and,
WHEREAS, the ';requirements of Petaluma Municipal Code Section 6.04.100 are in
accordance with the Act, which establishes annual procedures;governing the levy of assessments
pursuant to the Act,thcluding,preparation of an:annual report, adoption of a resolution of intent
,giving:notice,of a public hearing at which written and oral protests may be:made concerning levy
of:a an annual assessment, and adoption of a resolution approving the annual report and levying
the assessfi ehtstand,
3
WHEREAS, Section 36535 of the Act provides that public; hearings on levy of annual
assessments pursuant to, tile Act must be conducted in "accordance with Sections 36524 and
36525.of the Act, wfiich provide as follows:
A. The City Council shall hear and consider all protests against the establishment of the
area, the extent of the area; or the furnishing of specified types of improvements or
activities within the area. A protest may be made orally or in writing by any interested
person. Any protest pertaining to the regularity or;sufficieffey of the proceedings shall be
in writing and shall clearly set forth the irregularity or defect to which the objection is
made.
B. Every written protest'shall:,be filed with the City Clerk at or before the time fixed for the
public hearing•. The CityCouncilmay waive any irregularity:in the form or content of any
written protest and at'the public hearing may correct minor defects in the proceedings. A
written protest may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of the
public hearing.
C. Each written protest. shall contain a description of the business in which the person
subscribing the protest is interested sufficient to identify the business and, if a person
subscribing is not shown on the official records of the City as the owner of the business,
the protest shall contain or be accompanied by written evidence that the person
subscribing is the owner; of the business. A written protest which does not comply with
this section shall not be counted in determining^a majority protest.
D. If written protests are received from the owners of businesses:in the proposed area which
will pay 50 percent or more of the assessments proposed to be levied and protests are not
withdrawn so as to-reduce the protests to less than that;501 percent, no further proceedings
to create the specified parking and business improvement area or to levy the proposed
assessment, as contained in the resolution of intention, shall be taken for a period of one
year from the date'o'f the finding of a majority protest by the City Council.
E. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of
improvement activity within the area, those types,s of improvements or activities shall
be eliminated; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 36533 of the Act, the City Council has
reviewed and approved the 2014 DPBID Annual Report and Budget submitted by the DPBID
Board of Directors at the regularly scheduled and duly noticed January`27, 2014 City Council
meeting; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 36534 of the Act, at the regularly scheduled and
duly noticed January 27, 2014 City Council_meeting, the City Council adopted a Resolution of
Intention to levy the2014'annual assessment for the DPBID; and,
WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention ivas published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City at least seven,(7) days prior to the hearing; and,
4
WHEREAS, the 2014 DPBID?Annual Report proposes no:changes, in the boundaries, method of
assessment, or rate of assessment related to the DPBID; and the proposed DPBID 2014 Budget
establishes the following,budgetary,priorities with estimated reyenues.and expenditures:
32% Security $20,800
28% Marketing $18,200
20% Beautification $13,000
20% Administration $13,000
Total: $65,000
WHEREAS, the Annual Report of the DPBID is on file at the City Clerk's office for
public review and contains a full and detailed description of the DPBID improvements and
activities to be piovided Re the 2014 fiscal year, the boundaries of the DPBID and any benefit
zones within the DPBID, and the proposed assessments to be levied on businesses in the DPBID
for the 2014 fiscal year; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 36524 of the Act, on February 24, 2014, the
City Council held the public,hearing on the 2014 DPBID;annual levy and heard and considered
all protests against the annual leuy, the DPBID area, the extent of the area, or the furnishing of
specified types of improvements or activities within the area; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 36525 ofthe Act, following the public hearing
on February 24, 2014, all°written protests received and not withdrawn were tallied and the City
Council determined:that-written protests concerning the assessment; or particular improvements
or activities to be funded by the assessment, were not received from the owners of the businesses
in the-DPBID area that will pay 50 percent or more of the proposed:annual assessment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT' RESOLVED that the Petaluma City Council hereby
levies the assessment described in the DPBID Annual Report and Budget for Fiscal Year 2014,
which is attached and made part of this Resolution as.Exhibit 2, to pay for improvements and
activities within the DPBID in accordance with Chapter. 6.04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code
and the Act.
5
EXHIBIT'I TO'RESOEUTION
BOUNDARY MAP
Z gI .,.a t.1:
a i• -I� IF"•i°
3, 1
3 :1 I•!l13�11'i
g Y 8' 1 3i -,, 1 el iIii 0
. o pp .. ; ,l!!! ;:l.
= 1- 9 ;e I�0;i7 aY ia°
a 1)11110.1:la
m °
) hfr . 1
1' '�% yn
f j1 \ / ` tr n'
1 ) F 11 �'L' ! - r '"1 e ..,41:=171%;.,i rLl•
� r{- , ,.i f/ C r- t Jh�F C` , / I1, ;. 1,: ryt . • r-
.
./ 7..2 .-+ ;$ • ] l.'r J ( ,...,,C-76','",‘.4,+nn ; ?,,,,,,-;,,,,k, 4 ( : ' J k.g.c +'rL S C''�r r 1 { e 1r . \
, `ti <4r JK'w (:-=‘-'1 ry 40,4e ,„ resrlr r2-�S?/ ;. :. F �,+�",
•'? Y ( -� } l ;Pd. C> 7i— 4 Y � .+T•"`\
. r .! . r ` � rr p ` F� a zti
{4 ' 4;T ,,; • n i t € : dj 3<.r +�to Y '�a C r- � � TF'■ ).k./ '^ / / r t ! .. t + L . `` r4+ ,.J
,d r J r •_ 2...'��, .� L U y."'"^:c�f1r?a .i y -N L` nrC !tT J p• er,jC i /
Y e. 4 l `3 �s�v rfrV] s rs4'"7' .rr '7f� ,P4 � + J
L4 ,v•
.i 1 r�i:e- , t k' -a' :)�C�- c ri,".J,� /`w + rte/
_ )yh V'F'' ':• vzydt' rl 1, ■ " y + a r t�;" (-.27.y?..r�mac' i� •
- �'l y, i.f Li.* c .;)rA�J."<.).5-..'"(1617,-7.e.,./',-$:'<� 'f"" r-r _ y„ sC'F r l'i r� F Y H F C9 ,r f ('. rat/, ti • 7y
Y r ti 0 a� < rC 1M �, `+ c'V ells L�r F� t^
i3C. 1IP%` ':`y r? JL' '�\..11., >�1 ,5aC oi�\� Y-r�y..?r C1:�c.'L.w:
t V '' St r.0 n .! iF� 1, b- z,\`. fY\', +., A.,.y d,
-1 G- ,SC1 y^✓zl'< vL` ?\� �>+y f 6x'r/c l m ;' . b' v 1; `7,irA4
r _1 v 4
t,+C' Cri ,4 4jl}y A[t-,,5 � 7v .r,'� c¢nt c,c,,It 2" ��;�=cc.�� >i ti
''?: 'Sr i R? r....5s c v�`��.:,*k�h ., t. \J�jv,..,:c.....„, r+'.4 : / �
6
EXHIBIT 2 TO RESOLUTION
Types of Businesses Assessed
• Retail, Restaurant: and Antique Collectives: Businesses that buy and resell
goods or comestibles. Examples are clothing stores, shoe stores, office supplies
and antiques shops as well assbusinesses that sell prepared foods and drinks.
• Service Businesses: Businesses that sell services. Examples are beauty and
barbershops, repair shops, most automotive-orientated businesses, entertainment
businesses,such as;theaters; etc.
• Lodging: Includes;renting=rooms by the day or week to community visitors.
• Professional Businesses: Includes: Architects, Engineers, Attorneys, Dentists,
Doctors, Accountants, Optometrists, Realtors, Insurance. 'Offices, Mortgage
Brokers and most. other businesses that require advanced and /or specialized
licenses and/or'advanced:academic degrees.
• Financial'Institutions: Includes Banking, Savings„Loan and Credit Unions.
Assessment by'Type,of'Business Within Zones
ZONE A ZONE B ZONE C
Restaurants and.
Retailers (13'Eniployeesj $150 $100; $50
(4-6 Employees) $250 $166 $83
(7+ Employees) $350 $232; $116
Antique (1-3 Dealers)' $150 $.1'_00 $50
Collectives (4-6 Dealers) $250 $166' $83
(7+Dealers). $350 $232 $116
Service (t-3'Emp/Operators) $100 $75. $50
Businesses (4-6 Emp/Operators) $200 $150 $100
(7+amp/Operators) $300 $225' $150
Professional $125 $82 $41
Businesses
Financial $500 $500 $500
Institutions
Lodging(1-10 Rooms) $150 $150 $150
(11-25 Rooms) $250 $250 $250
(26±Rooms) $350 $350 $350
Note: Retail, restaurant and service businesses will be charged on size which will be
determined. by number of employees, either full time or the _equivalent made up of
multiples of part-time employees while Antique Collectives will be charged by number of
business licenses active within one location.
7
ATTACHMENT 2
January 29, 2014
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2014 DOWNTOWN PETALUMA BUSINESS
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORT AND'RELATED'BUDGET; DECLARING
THE INTENTION TO LEVY`THE"2014 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE DISTRICT;
AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED2014 ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2000, in accordance,with California Streets and Highways
Code Section 36500 et seq.- ("the Act"), the Petaluma City Council adopted Ordinance 2104
N.C.S., later codified as Chapter X6'04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code, establishing the
Downtown Petaluma Business Improvement District ("DPBID"), within the area described in
Exhibit 1, which is attached to and made a part of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, Section 6.04.050 of the Petaluma Municipal Code lists the types of
improvements and activities that may be funded by the levy of assessments on businesses within
the DPBID as follows:
A. The acquisition, construction, installation or maintenance of any tangible property with
an estimated useful life of five years or more including, but not limited to, the following
improvements:
1. Benches
2. Trash Receptacles
3. Decorations
4. Facade:Improvernents'
5. Permanent Landsbaping.
B. Activities including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Promotion of public events which benefit businesses in the area and which take
place on or in public places within the area
2. Furnishing of music in any public place in the area.
3. Activities which benefit businesses Iodated and operating in the area, including
but not limited to, commercial shopping and promotional programs; and
WHEREAS, under Section 604.100 of the Petaluma Municipal Code, the Board of
Directors established to govern the affairs of the DPBID,must present the City Council with an
annual report and budget for review and approval prior to the City Council consideration of
levying a benefit assessment for the following fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the requirements of Petaluma Municipal Code Section 6.04.100 are in
accordance with the,Act, which establishes annual procedures governing the levy of assessments
8
pursuant to the Act;,:including?preparation of an annual report, adoption-of"a resolution of intent
givinganotice of a,public hearing,at'which'written and oral protests may be made:concerning levy
of an annual assessment, and adoption of a resolution;approving'the annual'report and levying
the assessment; and
WHEREAS, Section 36535 of the Act provides that public hearings on levy of annual
assessments pursuant to the Act must be conducted in accordance with Sections 36524 and
36525 of the Act, which,provide as follows:
A. The City Council shall, hear and consider all protests against the establishment of the
area, the extent of the area or the furnishing of specified types of improvements or
activities within the area A.protest may be made orally or in writing by any interested
person. Any protest pertaining to the regularity or sufficiency;of the proceedings shall be
in writing and shall ;dearly:set forth the irregularity or defect to which the objection is
made.
B. Every written protest shall be filed with the City Clerk at or before the time fixed for the
public hearing. The City Council may waive any irregularity in the form or content of
any written protest- and at the public hearing may correct minor defects in the
proceedings. A written protest may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the
conclusion ofthe,public hearing.
C. Each written protest shall contain a description of the business in which the person
g protest the rotest its interested sufficient to identify the business and, if a person
subscribing is not shown on the official records of the City as the owner of the business,
the protest shall contain or be accompanied by written evidence that the person
subscribing is the owner of the business. A written protest,which does not comply with
this section shall not be counted in determining a majority protest.
D. If written protests are received from the owners of businesses,in the proposed area which
will pay 50 percent or more of the assessments proposed to be levied and protests are not
withdrawn so as to reduce the protests to less than that 50 percent, no further proceedings
to create the specified parking and business improvement area or to levy, the proposed
assessment, as contained in„the-resolution of intention,.shall'be taken for a period of one
year from,the':date of the finding of a.majority protest by the City Council.
E. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of
improvement or activity within the area, those types of improvements or activities shall
be eliminated; and
9
WHEREAS, the 2014 DPBID Annual Report proposes no changes in the boundaries,
method of assessment, or rate of assessment related to the DPBID; and the proposed DPBID
2014 Budget establishes the following budgetary priorities with estimated revenues and
expenditures:
32% Security $20,800
28% Marketing $18,200
20% Beautification $13,000
20% Administration $13,000
Total:, $65,000
WHEREAS, the 2014 Annual Report of the DPBID is on.file,L.at the City Clerk's office
for public review and contains-a full and detailed description of the DPBID improvements and
activities to be provided_for-the 2014 fiscal year, the boundaries of the DPBID and any benefit
zones within the DPBID, and the proposed assessments to be levied on businesses in the DPBID
for the_2014 fiscal year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT subject to California Streets and
Highways Code Section 36510`et,seq. (the "Act") and a public hearing to be held pursuant to the
Act,the Petaluma City Council intends to levy the assessment described in the DPBID Annual
Report and Budget for Fiscal Year 2014 to pay for improvements and activities within the
DPBID which is att ached and made a part of this Resolution:as Exhibit 2 in accordance with
Chapter 6.04 of the Petaluma Municipal Code and the Act: The City Council reviewed and
approved the DPBID'2014 Annual:Report and Budget at'thcir January 27,.2014Council meeting,
at the Petaluma City.Council Chambers, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a public hearing will occur on February 24, 2014, at
7:00 PM,'atthe Petaluma City Council Chambers, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA, concerning
levy of the assessment proposed for the DPBID for fiscal year 2014: At the hearing, written and
oral protests may be made in accordance with CalifOrniaStrets and. Highways :Code Sections
36524 and 36525.
City Clerk's Office
City of Petaluma
11 English:Street
Petaluma, CA 94952
htaccordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you require special assistance
to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk`'s Office at (707) 778-4360 (voice) or
(707) 778-4480 (TDD) Translators, American Sign Language interpreters; and/or assistive
listening devices for individuals with hearing disabilities will be available upon request. A
minimum of 48 .hours is needed to ensure the availability of translation services. In
consideration of those with multiple chemical sensitivities or other environmental illness, it is
requested'that you refrain from wearing scented products. The City Clerk hereby certifies that
this agenda has'been poste'd.in 'aecordance with the requirements of the Government Code.
1 754406.1
10
ATTACHMENT 3
This item is large in volume and are not attached to this report, but may be viewed at the City
Clerk's Office.
II
ATTACHMENT 4
DRAFT COPY OF BILLING STATEMENT FOR ASSESSMENTS
r.•4� ', % City of Petaluma,.CA
i 2014 Downtown Business Improvement District(BID)
- - - •vim ..
�� "_ -" Invoice . r
Remit To:'.Attn:'MuniServices • 438 East Shaw Avenue,Box 367 • Fresno,CA 93710
.__ _..
Phone: (866)240-3665•Email: glaam g lmuniseGages.sja • Website:.wwwsevds corn,
[Business Nana]
[DBA] Due on or before: May 31,2014
[A.ddressi] Delinquent: June 1,2014
1 52)
[City;State.Zp] Muni Services Account U:
f nration Information- YOUR RIP CATEGORY'
(Street Addresst:Street Address2] (Pre-print Category here]
[City,State Zip]
Downtown Petaluma Business.Improvement District(BID)Assessment Fee Table
Retail.Restaurant end Anbgee Cothecti s: Bu5nesses that blly and sewn gross or cgnescbles.-'Erampes are cbthhg scores.
slice stores office supplies and anomie seeps as well as businesses trial sell prepares rocas arts srr1ts..
service BuSttesSe8 Buanessa Out sell seMxs. Eamples are be3uq 310 pemeraMps.repat rnop;most aussnoltve
onentaled buinesses,entertainment businesses such as meaers,etc.
e mdines renting rooms by the day or weet to omnuvty onion.
Professional Bualnaseeb Inclines Ardutede:Engneers,Attorneys.Demsls,Goon Accambrit;Optometrists.Realtors.
insurance offices:Mortgage Bitters midmost Wier businesses that require advanced anger specle red(tenses anQtr achunced
academic .
Ftroncial Inotlbrbarla:•Includes Basting,Savings.Loan and Cmd1 unions. SimnelJur code=6998
rhimServicest •,se.=iti ra"T to . gr ClaieA , ,p Zone B : .:ZoneC , e•2.
°)sternal Code, P Description of Business 1 t'ee1W7 +r i -ii_rrT•!,- m
Retailers and Restaurants:
Sched 1.0 04 employees $1:0.00 3 100.00 $ 50.00
Schell l0 4-8 employee; 5 250.00 3.166.00 5 83.00
Sched 1.0 7+errpinyees. 5 350.00 3 23200 3118.00
unSerCvrocdeel'•R_ Desenphptr of Buseness`•"" °���7CneA e s. e&,.; ZonC_ .
Antique Collectives:
Sched 2.0 0-3 dealers' 5 150.00 3 100.00 3 50.00
Sched 2.0 4-8 dealers 5250.00 $186.00 383.00
Sched 2.0 7+dealers $350.00 $232.W $11000
favniatatirg's .s. 7vu'e.A ;4. Zanar-1-I, 4. lone r:1.u '
.ofion of 8 me=s1;- "...a. _
:Irdemal Code.} n` _:r °.'- &dettdl, tote c.02 hl� 03
Service Businesses: �m
Sched 3.0 0-3 employeesloperatas 3.10000 ,575.00 $ 50.00
Schell 3.0 4-6 emptayeesloperatas $200.00 5150.00 $10000
Sched 3.0 7+errployeestoperators $30000 322500 $150.00
aunServrees - Descnpbon of Business',: ''"Zi A' ZoneB °"ZZ_e Gi
IInterral Code.ri ,„ mess.; r'e"y�15t"' :.,"i t.7Fiw7mr,, ,'*ir. r e,--lir- o
Schell 4.0 Professional Businesses: 5-:125 00 $8200 541.00
C.MunServir`vs'- . 13e5dniitid114f Ancmocs.s •'ZO�A "' ]liners'.." ' 'ZonEtiuvi `'
JidMnalC7idv� y v at"" u-w.,Z+^,A. h "-ur n fe.. + u n Pell IV
Sched S 0 Finarrcral institutions: $500.00 5 500.00- '5 500.00
Mi'miServices . ",E•4': IZoreA ,...y4, r2one8 , r " Zone C' :a
int nai Code='".'' ?Description of Business _ s t w.. a r-, ._02 kite •• =03
Lodging:
Sched BO, 1-10 rooms $150.00 5 15000 5 150.00
Sched 6.0 11-25 rooms $250.00 $250.00 3 250.00
Sched 6.0 '26+rooms 3 350.00 3 35000. 3 350.00
Enter#of employees,operators,dealers or rooms::
fErntiofres are weiared an no-tune Folio. Pa t-SW enp:yeas.vaun De added mgemer to per a turn-sure eg:nvartrul
From the table above,enter amount due: $
(mate axes Payable ra Tax Tu4 AllAunt)
burnanck moralist:Ere6a.as!1;2]IC,e•ie nsnl 4menM A Illetet.RVCES.LLL as t I aulawf Ma ad b tect a p i•=s16dt r•prewar.te1,mm•
pm lwts n_1• eta,t4F e'v. .IOSSEINKES,LLGn ma,etarta b e•neaunal bulk nibsW mewn-a b flea etelela d 5..tnei boa Pi...re liarN
nova tick:dry Sy.•,::a.art.n..mae,:oc:<a.s•+•aa;
Ia-
ATTACHMENT5
DRAFT COPY OF LETTER TO BUSINESSES TO ACCOMPANY BILLING STATEMENT
City of Petaluma.CA
�T
Downtown Business Improvement District(BID) . �S/ t N
r
MrniSennces;LLC as admit tervg agent /,*1t(}q
439 E Shari Avenue Box 387 l yt,lei .
• 1
Fresno,CA.93710
rvons
Business Name DRAFT
DBA
Addressl
Addiess2
City,State,Zip
MuniServices Account 0:
Dear Business Owner!'Talc Manager
"2014 CRY OF PETALUMA DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT(BID}"
The City of.Petaluma City Council partners with MuniServices.LLC for assiitanci in due collection of its Downtown
Business Improvement Disbt(BID}fees This mailing is to transmit tre 20141Dormtpvm;Busipess Improvement
()shirt fees invoice that is due on or before May 31.2014 and becomes delinquent on June 1,2014.
This invoice is based and is to be calculated on your zone location;type of business and number of employees. To
verify your calculatcn the City of Petaluma uses data from troe State Employment Development tEDD)regarding the
number of employees you reported to them. Please be aware that it is very important to check that you are
accurately calalaling on the correct number of employees. Please note that employees are calculated on full time
hours (part time employees should be added together to get a full time equivalent). Shouts you have any
guesbons regarding your.zoning,ot employee amounts, please contact,MuniServices-at`(8E41 240-3665 or emal
MuniServices Support at su000rtmmuniserviccs nom.
MuniServices Remittance Address:
,MuniServices,LLC•Attn: !Petaluma BID
438 E'..Shaw Avenue Box 367•Fresno,CA 93710'
(Make.Check•Payable To: Tax Trutt Account)
The assessment was established in November 2000,when the Petaluma City Councl adopted Ordinance 214 N.C.S.
estabbshing the D&mtcrvm Business Improvement District(BID).Thisiocairred'at the request_of the Petaluma
Downtown Association(PDA).palter an extensive public hearing process remised by State Law Outing the process,
local business owners who were to be inducted in the 810 had the opportunity to protest the formation of the&rstrict
and terminate the pruess liowevri,recagniz"vg the uHhry of the BID rvery few those the BID and the
PD
District was fanned. The A Board.serves as the BID Board of Direaars and administers the funds collected from
you by the City of Petaluma. The PDA does not have the authority to Change thNs ordnarre or grant exempEcris-
Acmdmg to the'2014 Annual Report of the BID. approved by the Petaluma City Council in February 2014,
assessment hinds will be used as foams:
32X. Downtown Security 5.20,800
28% Downtown Marketing 5;18,200
20% Downtown Beau5fication 5 13,000
20% AdnIII mean p3 coo,
Total: 5 65,000
Please support:the,Lbwntowm:Business improvement District by making,your tangly payment;as indicated on the
enclosed invoice.'Thank you for your continued efforts to naintan an economical),vibrant and„tbadive downtorm.
Sincerely Yours.
MuniServices:LLC
As administering agent for the City of Petaluma
1.3.
ATTACHMENT 6 G\h
CQT2ESPONDENCE RECEIVED Y
November 20,,201;3
NOV f 2013
Petaluma City Council MAYOR
Eleven English Street
Petaluma, California 94952 NOfr'a
iy 1013
:
cc '1)1A-!nez.•
Dear Mayor.Glass•and,Councilniembers: (�'Ey Clerk—
We are writing to address concerns shared by downtown retailers in advance of the City
Council's vote on the reauthorization of the Business Improvement District (BID) assessment on
December 2, 2013. We are a;gcoup(of,retailers who own small businesses with,storefronts in
downtownPetaluma. We are all required to pay the BID assessmem, and we are all directly impacted
by how that money is spent.
We share a compelling'interest in seeing a safe, beautiful,vibrant, and inviting downtown:
However, despite the fact that;each of us consistently pays the BID,we fail to see how that money is
used.to`improve downtown'.Petaluma. In fact, it seems that the downtown's general condition is
deteriorating. Vandalism, publics intoxication, parking problerns,.dirty`sidewalks, loitering, and
regular street closures all have quantifiable negative impact on-retail. These chronic problems lead
us to question how our BID funds are being allocated, and if there is a better way to use our money.
Many of us have addressed our concerns to the:Petaluma,Downtown Association (PDA),
hoping to-craft a resolution thatis"beneficial for business and the community as a whole. For the
most part, these questions have gone unanswered and the problems persist.
We hope that this letter,motivates the Council to investigate,both how the BID funds are
allocated and whether or not fife money could be used more effectively.We have compiled a list of
problems and concerns, and request that the Council considers each one before it reauthorizes the
assessment for another year The-frustration.that many of us feel over,the points listed below cannot
be understated. Much of this frustration stems from the fact that"we have not been able to solicit
clear answers to our questions or solutions for our problems from the`PDA. We believe that the
City Council provides our'last+clear chance of seeing any resolution to these issues.
Before the city Council votes to reauthorize the BID,we would like the city to take notice of the
following issues,,and,investigate each one:
1, Cleanliness. Our sidewalks are filthy and,most ofithe downtown buildings are tagged with
graffiti. The Keller'''Street parking garage is inhabited by flocks:of pigeons that leave
droppings all over the garage.On weekend mornings downtown;merchants often find
human waste and vomit in our doorways and on the sidewalks directly outside of our
businesses. Dirty sidewalks attract more litter, graffiti and vandalism. The condition of our
streets deters people from shopping and dining with us, and presents a public health hazard.
1
1414
Regular sidewalk.cleaning;graffitipatiols, and a permanent, humane solution to the pigeon
problem would grearly.improve.downtown.When we:approached'the;PDA about
scheduling regularsidewalk cleaning,we were.told(thatthere is.no:.money to do so. Despite
repeated requests„the PDA has not made any noticeable effort to secure funding for
sidewalk cleaning nor have they demonstrated why it is impossible:to'afford a power washer.
Basic cleanliness shouldbe.one of the PDA's main concerns, and the first priority for BID
funds.
The stated purpose of the'BID is'to use the funds for "Atuvtties which benefit businesses
located.and operating in the,atea.” Petaluma Municipal Code-G.04:050.B3(3). We encourage
the City Council investigate why is there no money to keep the sidewalks reasonably clean.
2. Signage.A percentage ofthe'BID funds should be allocated.toward putting up signage
advertising Downtown.Petaluma. No such signage currently exists. We would like the City
Council to investigate:options for-a downtownsignage;campaign.
3. Safety. There-is a growing transient population in Petaluniia,.and many of these people chose
to loiter downtown.Many of them keep large, unleashed=,dogs,.and some engage in
aggresstve:panhandling thatborders on harassment While we strongly believe.,that the civil
right of public assembly should he absolutely respected,,the increasingnumbers of transients
who are making downtown their home present quantifiable health and public safety risks.
We request that the City Council explore options on:how to make?tlic downtown safe and
inviting for all Spectffcally,.it'should explore the feasibility,of an Anti-Loitering Ordinance,
and of-regular police foot;pati:gls.
4. Special'Events. The frequency of street closures for specialevehts has a direct, and severely
detrimental, effect on retail. Currently, Kentucky Streetand Petaluma Boulevard lose five
rend sales days per year to special event street closures. Pourth4Streetrloses seven days per
year. It is unreasonable=and Outrageous that the downtown merchants are:forced to forgo
the.abili' totconduct regular:business so often,"withont"enloying'any quantifiable benefit.
Closed streets.keep customersaway from downtown. Further, the atmosphere at Some of
these'events so:fiightening.thatiris safer for a:retailer tb:lock their doors than risk being
open for business and either suffering loss or the,attending.harassment which often
accompanies public intoxication.
We request that the City Council explores ways to minimize the impact and frequency of
street closures; anduays of radically changing'the.attnospiere at certain events.
5. Accounting.There should be a complete'and transparent accounting of how the BID funds
are allocated. D'espitemany requests, no one outside of the Downtown Association Board of
2
15
1515
Directors has ever seen a complete accounting.of where our money goes, how many entities
contribute to the BID, or how the Money is allocated. We encourage`the City Council to
support a full audit'of'the BID,funds.
Thank you for your dmeand attention. We sincerely hope th'at this'letter sparks meaningful .
dialogue and action which will benefit the downtown.
Very Truly Yours;
:in., - :aJ •
:i 'i
•
Nancy' ' 1st.1 Leo' Dining and Culinary Essentials
C e-C
c).Angela J. eons, i Leoi Dining;and Culinary Essentials,
it t1
•
�L t C: t ��
I-Io4 Wi�k,Athledc•Soles\
U 1
Stacey Terzian Badfg 'a, STINK/'"' �ii
111IILJJ fig_
<(�c9 /
'cL
Lisa ICasch,Paperwliite
'
in'/'43,1^ 1
J. ncy *ghaidndui,Blush - .
to.* 4 i .`j r I\ C-c .ope CC; clot 3 t-a.)Arn:5
, 74'( r ev- — s L`j'� f
al/ti K. eoue, a - 014 cet
3
1616 -Kindly sign below,iisku. 1 the name of your business. de _../
4 -
-------,
4 , /, oKe 11 tl Poi ( _5-11^dib
, •- -- -'. 4-c1,--t-- e C x. 4 4-RD Lk A 0, c
comml CO,f Pi- 9y15--Zoio
i
,.. i A ' I
-__..z.,i 4 11
i1/41, 73:ic075:ci:
•
1
, 10,4
za i - -
__ /r
,4\4\ ay.,
--77
ti -
i_
—.-
n -idgiti /4('14€ ill colic, hathay, 13oR //ye
Ba4k-ex., /9-r71-a-kiv
etolr,,,fit.
1,4-
•
• eUruary 9, 2014
RECEIVED
FEB 112014
RE: 2014 Downtown>Petaluma,,Business Improvement District and Proposed Annual Assess&IV CLERK
To the Petaluma City Council, F�
ir
I
an a Petaluma business owner, running a psychotherapy practice in the River House Budding on Weller (04i
Street, across the river from downtown. I am writing to`request an,adjustment to the Business
Improvement District map that singles my building out among every other building on the block, to pay
a higher annual fee. Every building on.the;Block is in Zone B, except:formine. As you may agree, Weller
Street is not exactly the heart'of.downtown,though it does have a view of downtown from across the
river. We do not benefit from the foot`traffic and other traffic that,blesses.other business that are
downtown in Zone A. The rest of Weller Street is Zone B. That is,consistent with other Zone B
businesses that are close to downtown, but not truly in the heart of town.
For some reason, a piece of Zone A reaches.out across the river and'grabs just-the building where my
business is located—the River House at,222 Weller Street. My guess is that the original intent was for
Zone A to reach out and include the anticipated development of the lot between Weller Street and the
bus terminal'on Copeland Street(still an empty lot). It'looks like the pre-existing buildings on Copeland
Street were also carved out of.-Zone A, and put in:Zone C. This also makes sense as these buildings are
even further from downtown. The(River House was formerlya restaurant, but for several years now has
been a mix of business offices. It may be in 1990 when the;zones;.were first;created; it was imagined
that the restaurant would somehow benefit from being close to;downtown. Time-has proven otherwise.
A series of differentigood restaurants:were all there briefly, only to go'out of business. I imagine part of
the reason they went out of business is because the River House is;not really in the heart of downtown,
is geographically cut off from downtown and does not benefitas;a Zone A business would benefit. My •
guess is that in 1990, the City Council knew that the non-restaurant businesses were clearly not in Zone
Alin that they were separated from downtown by the river. I imagine they guessed the restaurant
would somehow reap the benefits, despite the river separating itfrom downtown:
I am requesting that the City Council recognize that the reach of:ZoneA`to'include 222 Weller Street, is
not fair to the businesses.at the Rider Houser Would you please revise the Zone map to indicate every
building on Weller Street, between Street to the South and EastWashington,to the north, as being in
Zone B? Currently every other business is in Zone,B. Were really just talking about extending the
ektent-of Zone;B.on Weller Street just one more building down. I think it is fairand appropriate to make
the-property-at 222 Weller Street,consistent with the rest of the block,which appears.to me,to be
properly zoned.
Thank you for-your:consideration of this request.
Regards,
vat/
.7gfig /Via
Donald Wailach, MFT
222 Weller Street#205 C7 75L&C g'rovt,'_.evt
Petaluma;CA 94952
don@donwallach.com
707-583-2305