Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill AgendaChanges 12/01/2010A gevidcv CNa4Ve Er Ddetw-w City of Petaluma, California Memorandum City Manager's Office, 11 English Street, Petaluma; CA 94952 (707) 778 -4345 Fax (707) 778 -4419 E- mail: citlrrn ,-rtt,,ei.hetalurna.ca.us DATE: December 2, 2010 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: John C. Brown, City Manager ._ SUBJECT: Discussion and Possible Action on 'Request to Add an Item to the December 6, 2010 Agenda Pursuant to Rule Il (A)(3) of the City Council's Rules, Policies :and !Procedures. You have been requested, pursuant to Rule 'II (A) (3) of the Council's. Rules Policies and Procedures to add an item.to the agenda for the December 6, 2010' meeting: "Discussion and Possible action regarding letter to -Board of Supervisors concerning the proposed Dutra dsphaltplant" Attached is a copy of that request, submitted on November 30, 201`0 by Council members Renee and Healy. Also attached is a draft,, that was developed in cooperation between the Council members and me, for the Council's consideration should Council determine to act affirmatively on the request. Please contact me ifyou,:have any questions. NOV 2010 CITY CLERK PETALS To: John Brown Subject: Agenda Request Pursuant to Rule II(A)(3) of the Council's Rules, Policies and Procedures, the undersigned hereby request that the following item be added to the agenda for the Council's December 6, 2010 meeting: Discussion and possible action regarding letter to Board of Supervisors concerning the proposed Dutra asphalt plant. Dated: November 3Q2010. Dated: November 3,:: 2010 d December , 2010 Sonoma County Board of Supervisors 575 Administration Drive, Room 100A Santa Rosa, CA 95403 -2887 RE: City of Petaluma Comments on the Proposed Dutra Asphalt Plant Dear Chair Brown and Members of the Board of Supervisors: We write again to express our concerns about the proposal to locate a Dutra asphalt plant on property at 3355 Petaluma Boulevard South, just.outside of the Petaluma city limits. Our many technical concerns have been explained in detail in a series of previous letters, and we will not repeat those here: Instead, we write to touch on broader themes. First, we believe that the County continues to seriously underestimate the value and importance that the people of Petaluma place on Shollenberger Park. While there are some, outside of Petaluma who believe the park is merely a dirt trail surrounding a dredge spoils site, we respectfully suggest that attitude is most prevalent among people who haven't spent time there. In Petaluma, Shollenberger Park is both cherished and heavily used. Currently, our biggest challenges with the park are,the small parking lot and creating better linkages to other trails. Second, we continue to be very concerned that the current project design sends the wrong message as the signature" ;gateway feature for visitors entering Sonoma County. While Industry is surely a necessary and vital part'of a Healthy local economy, we believe most visitors to Sonoma County come to enjoy the beauty.;of our environment in its natural, cultivated, and built forms. 'The' entrance to our County, and to the City of Petaluma should enhance that experience,, not detract from it. Third, we would like to touch.on_ the recurring- theme of regional cooperation. In the;not too - distant past, several important successes were achieved when the different jurisdictions were able`to work together. Measure`M in 2004 for transportation funding, Measure F in'2006 reauthorizing the Open Space District; and Measure Q in 2008 for SMART are all examples of 'the virtues of enlightened cooperation. More recently, the theme of regional cooperation has tended to be raised only selectively. Thus, the Board of Supervisors recently and unilaterally made substantive policy changes to water policy without gaining b.uy -in from the water contractors. This is precisely the wrong manner for making such important regional_ decisions. Here, in Petaluma, this asphalt plant is an enormously important issue for this City, and yet the Board of Supervisors is still poised to give its final approval. The common theme here is one local jurisdiction taking actions it is entitled to take while ignoring the'strongwishes of another local jurisdiction and its citizens on an issue of great local importance. We remind you that there will be times, -as there have been in the past, when the shoe may be on the other foot and the County will -need jurisdictions such as ours to subsume narrow local interests toward broader regional goals. We suggest that if the County seriously wants regional cooperation, this asphalt plant .application is a good place to start. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Pamela Torliatt Mayor Teresa Barrett Councilmember Mike Healy Councilmember Tiffany Renee Councilmember David Glass Vice -Mayor Mike Harris Councilmember David Rabbitt Councilmember r° .