Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 03/26/19762 1 `- MINUTES OF MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA ;MARCH 26, 1976 COUNCIL MEETING A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Petaluma was called to order by Vice -Mayor Fred Mattei, at the of 8:00 a.m: ATTENDANCE Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Harberson, Hilligoss, Mattei, and Perry. Absent: Mayor Putnam. NOTICE OF CALL Notice of call for special meeting dated March 24, 1976, certificate of the City Clerk of delivery of said notice and consent of City Council for holding said meeting, submitted and filed. PURPOSE OF MEETING The meeting called to consider the following: Discussion of Transportation Development Act Claim and local bus system; arid, discussion regarding the annex- ation of approximately 107 acres located on McDowell Boulevard North, adjacent to Lucchesi Park - Qantas (former Millmeister Property). ALTERNATE TO ROUTE 71 As had been requested at the Council meeting of March �' & TDA CLAIM FOR -22, 1976, Finance Director John Scharer prepared a °-{1 1976 -77 summary of the recommendations regarding the alternate 4z RES #7332 NCS to Route 71, operated by the Golden Gate Transit Dis- r) it trict. A memo dated March 25, 1976, directed to the City Manager from Mr. Scharer was submitted and ordered filed. Mr. Scharer reviewed the memorandum and described the three alternates to the Golden Gate Route 71. If the City determined to select Alternate "A ", which would not provide a direct route to Sonoma State College but would require a transfer from Route 70, the TDA funds available to the City would be $169,000. If Alternate "'B" is selected, which would provide direct service from Petaluma to the College and additional service within the City of Petaluma, the City would receive $148,000. Mr. Scharer advised the Council he had checked with Mr. Don Head and John Morelli of Sonoma County regarding the question raised by the Council regarding property taxes and learned the pro- perty tax provision has been eliminated from the alternatives. Ridership was discussed by the Council, and Mr. Scharer advised the six month patronage on Route 71 was 71,521. He was unable to get a breakdown from the Golden Gate Transit District on the pick -up places of riders or how many riders started from the Petaluma point; however, they did note there were 70 college students residing in Petaluma who utilize the services of Route 71 to go to the college. Mr. Scharer further pointed out Alternate "B" would serve the North McDowell area where many requests had been.received for service from residents of the mobile home parks in the district: Mr. Scharer stated if the City agreed to Alternate "B ", it would be for a one -year contract. In answer to Councilman Perry's question as to who would,provide the buses for the system, Mr. Scharer indicated Sonoma County would purchase two of the buses, and Petaluma would provide one. City Manager Robert Meyer pointed out if the City did not utilize the funds for the purchase of the buses, the money would have to be returned. Mr. Don Head, Director of the Department of Public Works for Sonoma County, spoke to the Council regarding the three alternatives. He advised the Council the City of Santa Rosa had endorsed Alternate "B ", which would substantially decrease the level of service from Santa Rosa to the College. There were some ramifications, however, connected with Santa Rosa's use of UMTA Section 5 funds which precludes their entering into any agreement at this Mr. Head indicated Santa Rosa will review the matter when it'is feasibly possible for them to do so. Mr. Head further stated Alternate "B" would .serve the Cotati, Rohnert Park, Petaluma areas in a better way than Route 71. Any of the alternatives would result in a substantial savings going to the agencies involved. 2 1 March 26, 1976 ALTERNATE TO ROUTE Councilman Hilligoss questioned whether or not the 71 & -TDA CLAIM FOR number of runs to the College, or if the hours to 1976 -77 service the College could be adjusted to provide a more RES #7332 NCS economical system. The present proposal is to serve (Continued) Sonoma. State College from 8:00 a.m. until 10 :00 p.m. Mr. Scharer indicated they could take a survey of the ridership. It would mean someone would have to physi- cally travel Route 71 in order to determine where passengers embarked and disembarked, and.the hours the bus would best be utilized. Mr. Scharer stated Route 71 has been in financial difficulties in the last four months; however, no one seemed to want to take the lead in doing anything about it. He stated three weeks ago, the City of Petaluma and the County of Sonoma started work on the problem. If the City intends to file a claim for TDA funds., it must be done by April 1st. In order to institute Alternate "B ", it would take a little lead time in order to purchase the buses and establish the route. At the conclusion of the discussion, Resolution #7332 N.C.S. recommending an alternate to.Route.71 and authorizing the preparation of TDA claim for 1976 -77 was introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman. Perry, and approved by 5 affirmative, l,negative, and 1 absentee vote. Councilman Cavanagh voted "no ". The effectiveness of.Alternate "B" is to be reviewed prior to preparation of the 1977 -78 TDA claim. After the above resolution had been adopted, Mr. Scharer advised the Council the Byron.Fauss Agency had contacted him to purchase 3,000 tickets for the May 12th, 13th and 14th Dollar Days promotion. Mr. Scharer recommended the tickets for the event be sold for $.15 each. This would be a good introduction of the bus system, as well as help promote the Downtown Dollar Days. City Manager Robert Meyer advised the matter was before the Council in order for the staff .to receive direction whether or not they wanted to participate in this promotional event. A motion was made by Councilman 'Harberson, seconded by Councilman Brunner, approving the $.15 rate for the lot of 3,000 tickets for the May 12th, 13th and 14th Dollar Days promotion. Motion carried by 4 affirmative, 2 abstentions, and 1 absentee votes. At the conclusion of the discussion, Councilman Cavanagh requested the matter of $..10 tickets for school children be given some consideration and asked that a discussion be held on it at a later date. ANNEXATION THROUGH City Manager Robert Meyer reported the executive of- O q ) A1 REORGANIZATION ACT -- ficer of the Local Agency Formation Commission has PROPOSED__MILLMEISTER recommended to the members of the Commission that the SUBDIVISION Millmeister property be annexed to the City of Petaluma RES #7333 NCS and detached from the Penngrove Fire Protection Dis- trict under the provisions of the District Reorgani- zation Act, rather than City annexation -` procedures. Mr. Dorfman's memorandum dated March 17, 1976, to the members of the Local Agency Formation Commission was submitted to the City Clerk and is on file. The City Manager advised the Council the .advantage of annexation through this procedure is one of saving time for everyone involved. He did state, 'however, a representative from the City would b,e present at the Local Agency Formation Commission meeting to insure the, City Council',s recommendations were carried through. If the Commission objected to any part of the Council's resolution an objection would be raised and the matter would come back to the Council:. City Attorney Matt Hudson advised the Council the annexation would be limited to the guidelines set .forth in the annexation map on the subject property. At the conclusion of the discussion, Resolution #7333 N.C.S. agreeing-to use of District Reorganization Act for annexation of .proposed Millmeister- Subdivision and waiving written notice subject to certain limitations was in by Councilman Harberson, seconded by Councilman Hilligoss, and approved by 6 affirmative and 1 absentee votes. 1 1 March 26, 1976 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:04 a.m. 1 Mayor Attest: City GTerk 1