HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 05/06/1974i
Council Meeting
Attendance
Invocation
Approval of Minutes
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
May 6, 1974
Regular meeting of the City
City of Petaluma was called
Mayor Putnam at the hour of
p.m.
Council of the
to order by
7:30 o'clock
Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Jr.,
Daly, Harberson, Mattei, *Perry,
Jr., and Mayor Putnam.
Absents None.
*Councilman Perry, Jr., arrived at 7:45
O'clock p.m.
The invocation was given by the Reverend
Henry Rankin, Two Rock Valley Presbyterian
Church.
The minutes of April 15, 1974, were approved
as recorded.
Agenda Item #5 Ordinance #1.137 N.C.S. amending Title 15,
Re Water Recon- Chapter. 15.112, Sections 15.12.090 and
nection Fees 15.12.100 thereof; to establish reconnection
Ord #1137 NCS fees was ordered published.
Agenda Item #6 Ordinance #1133 N.C.S. authorizing the leaseg�
Lease -- Federal of real property to the Federal Aviation
Aviation Administration for the period beginning
Administration July.1, 1974, and ending June 30, 1975, for
Ord #1133 NCS the sum of $5,375 per year was adopIted. (Re
(Second Reading) Water Pollution Control Facilities Project
area.)
CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Councilman Harberson
and seconded by Councilman Mattei adopting
the Consent Calendar, Agenda Items #1 through
#7. Motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Item #1
Petaluma Area Chamber of Commerce, Inc.,
�r
Chamber of Commerce
Annual Report for 1973 -74 submitted and
filed.
Agenda Item #2
Resolution #6590 N.C.S. endorsing Proposition
Proposition #1
#1 (California Park Bond Issue on the June 4,
�—
Res #6590 NCS
1974, ballot) was adopted.
Agenda Item #3
Resolution #6591 N.C.S. awarding contract
Caulfield Lane
(to C. R. Fedricks, Inc.) in accordance with
Overcrossing
plans and specifications entitled "Caulfield
�—
Approaches
Lane Overcrossing Approaches" was adopted.
Res #6591 NCS
Agenda Item #4
Ordinance #1136 N.C.S. authorizing the lease
Lease W /Santa Fe
of real property to the City of Petaluma by
Pomeroy, Inc.
Santa Fe- Pomeroy, Inc., for the purpose of
Ord #1136 NCS
temporary ponding of waste sludge from the
sewer plant for the two -year period July 1,
1973,; .through_ June 30, 1975, and thereafter
on a month -to -month basis was ordered posted.
Agenda Item #5 Ordinance #1.137 N.C.S. amending Title 15,
Re Water Recon- Chapter. 15.112, Sections 15.12.090 and
nection Fees 15.12.100 thereof; to establish reconnection
Ord #1137 NCS fees was ordered published.
Agenda Item #6 Ordinance #1133 N.C.S. authorizing the leaseg�
Lease -- Federal of real property to the Federal Aviation
Aviation Administration for the period beginning
Administration July.1, 1974, and ending June 30, 1975, for
Ord #1133 NCS the sum of $5,375 per year was adopIted. (Re
(Second Reading) Water Pollution Control Facilities Project
area.)
May 6, 1974
Agenda Item #7
Letter dated April 2, 1974, from Mike Tyrrell
Mike Tyrrell --
volunteering to do research on the City's
----- Growth Case
growth case, submitted and filed. This
letter was referred to attorney Robert
Anderson, the City's counsel on the case.
Agenda
By consensus, the Council approved to move -
Agenda Item #12 regarding the Bicentennial
Logo Contest awards for consideration at
this time.
Bicentennial Logo
Ud? F
Mr. Ken Colin, Chairman of the Bicentennial
Contest Award
Committee, appeared before the Council with
`- --
the awards to*be presented for the Bicenten-
nial Logo Contest: He introduced,Mr. David
Voss of the Sierra National Bank. Mayor
Putnam; with the assistance .of 'Mr. Voss,
made the following awards: Bronze medal-
(third prize) to Rob Hilligoss; silver'medal
(,second prize) to Diane Stander ; $ 100 savings
bond (first prize) to Jaki Hinman. Mayor
Putnam appropriately congratulated each
award recipient on behalf of the City Council.
The winners' designs were also presented for
viewing.
Mr. Colin also announced tha the first
prize was donated by the Bank of America;
the silver and.bronze medals by the Sierra
National Bank. He added that the first
prize winner's design will appear as the
logo.on. the Committee's letterhead and will
be the identity for the local Bicentennial
activities.
Agenda
Mayor Putnam announced that Agenda Items #9,
#20, and # - 2;4 were deleted Council con-
sideration at a later date.
Executive Session
The Council retired to an executive.session
at 7:45 o'clock p.m.,.to consider the C..I.A.
versus City of Petaluma case (growth control
. -
suit) with attorney Robert Anderson.
The Council reconvened at 8:30 o'clock p.m.
Agenda
A motion was made by Councilman .Daly .,and
seconded -by Councilman Perry, Jr., to move
Agenda Item #:29 concerning the appeal of the
C.I.A. suit for.consideration at this time.
Motion carried unanimously.
C..I.A. vs-City
"Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law"
,31F of Petaluma.Suit
and "Declaratory Judgment and Permanent
(Growth Control)
Injunction," both documents of District
Res #6592 NCS
Judge Lloyd H. Burke in the matter of C.I.A.
of Sonoma County, et al, vs City of Petaluma,
et al, submitted and filed.
Re Council consideration to a_ppeal.the
Court's. decision, Councilman Cavanagh,, Jr.,
read statement in opposition to the
appeal procedure. In his statement, Council-
man Cavanagh said that since the hearing ,of
1
May 6, 1974
C.I.A. vs City the case on January 14 -18, 1974, by the U.S.
of Petaluma Suit District Court Judge.Burke, he has had few
(Growth Control) opinions expressed to him from citizens not
Res #6592 NCS - directly involved with the opinion; but in
(continued) fact, he has sought opinions. He felt that
the so called "Petaluma Plan" resulted in
enormous amounts of adverse publicity to our
City. He disagreed with many of the findings
of fact as presented by the Judge in his
written order, but agreed with others. He
pointed out the fact that to get to this
point of time represents over $35,000 of the
taxpayers' dollars and the next uncertain
step of appeal would cost approximately
$25,000 as a starter and the appeal would be
long, costly, and frustrating. It was his
opinion to forget about an appeal and take a
more intelligent approach to the growth
situation and govern Petaluma the best way
possible.
Following opinions expressed by a number of
Council members to appeal the case, Resolu-
tion #6592 N.C.S. directing the taking of
appeal from the adverse decision in the case
of C.I.A., et al, vs City of Petaluma, et
al, was introduced by Mayor Putnam, seconded
by Councilman Perry, Jr., and adopted by 6
affirmative and l negative votes. Council-
man Cavanagh, Jr., voted "no."
The following communications were reported
received in support of appealing the Court
decision: Letter dated May 3, 1974, from
Mrs. Burna Bryant, 15 Seventh Street, Petaluma;
Chamber of Commerce Resolution #40; and
letter dated-May 6, 1974, from Bill Kortum,
180 Ely Road, Petaluma.
EIR -- Washington Washington Professional Park Environmental - �S
Professional Park Impact Report (preliminary), dated January
Res #6593 NCS 25, 1974, prepared by Applied Science and
Resources Planning, Inc., submitted and
filed.
Planning Commission Resolution #9 -74, dated
April 2, 1974, recommending to the City
Council the certification of the Environ-
mental Impact Report - relating to the Washing-
ton Professional Park and copy of Planning
Commission minutes, dated April 2, 1974,
submitted and filed.
Addendum, dated April 19, 1974, "Response to
Comments on the Draft EIR, Washington
Professional Park" prepared by Applied
Science and Resources Planning, Inc., sub-
mitted and filed.
Mr. Dennis Boehlje, Associate Planner,
presented a location map of the parcel
involved. 'He reported that the EIR was
certified by the Planning Commission as
being objective and.accurate and that
Applied Science and Resources Planning,
Inc., supplied information in its addendum
May 6, 1974
E•IR-- Washington
Professional Park
Res #6593 NCS
(continued)
clarifying several questionable points
raised by the Planning Commission.
This being the time to hear protests and /or
comments on the subject E.IR,. the Mayor
declared the public hearing open. The City
Clerk announced that no written communica-
tions were received; and as no one appeared
to voice any objections or comments, the
public hearing was closed.
Resolution #6593 N.C.S. certifying the
Env;ironmertal Impact Report for Washington
Professional Park Development was introduced
by Counc °ilman Brunner, seconded by Council -
man Mattei, and adopted by 7 affirmative
votes.
3 Warning, and
Regulatory Signs,
Etc.
Res #6:594 NCS
Notice of "Warning and Regulatory Signs and
Related Equipment was duly posted and
published.
Report dated May 2, 1974, from David L.
Smith, Intern, of the four
bids received at•the bid opening April 18.,
1974, for the signs and equipment, submitted
and filed. The following bids were received:
Name
Amount
Vulcan Signs and Stampings, Inc. $5,982.37
Western Highway Products, Inc. $6,106.71
Bowman. Industries, Inc. $6,649.32
Hawkins- Hawkins Company, Inc. $8,067.06
Memo dated May 3; 1974, from Roy Kelly,
Public Works Superintendent, recommending
that the Council accept the low'bid of
Vulcan Signs and Stampings, Inc., submitted
and filed.
Concerning the matter of City personnel
making street name signs, Mr. Smith noted
that although the Street Division has the
capability of making the signs at a cost.
comparable with the low bid., the department
does not have the.manpower to complete this
task.
Resolution
for street
other - vela
Councilman
Harberson;
votes'.
#6594 N.C.S. awarding contract
warning and regulatory signs and
ted equipment was introduced by
Daly, seconded by Councilman
and adopted by 7 affirmative
Greenbriar Unit #2, Letter dated,April 1_9, 1974, from William
3W r- Phase I,. Mueller of Young America Homes requesting
Subdivision reduction of Neighborhood Park and Beauti-
Res #6595 NCS fication Fees for Greenbriar Subdivision,
submitted and filed.
Report dated May 3, 1974, from Frank Gray,
Director of Community Development, on Young
America.Home.s' -request re Greenbriar Subdi-
vision and* "Analysis of Greenbriar Subdivision
May 6, 1974
u
Greenbriar Unit #2; Park Dedication and-In-lieu Fees Calculations
Phase I, and the Neighborhood Park and Beautification
Subdivision Fund Calculations," submitted and filed. It
Res #65.95 -NCS was Mr. Gray's opinion that the maximum fees
(continued) should be collected for the Neighborhood
Park and Beautification Fund to be used for
the development of the linear park adjacent
to the subdivision.
In his report, Mr. Gray noted that the
developer does not propose to develop the
20 -foot linear park strip along the Washing-
ton Creek flood control channel adjacent to
this project.
Is �
Report, dated May 3, 1974, from Jim Raymond,
Recreation Director, on Young America's
request re Greenbriar Subdivision and recom-
mending against a reduction in the Park
fees, submitted and filed. Mr. Raymond
pointed out that the fees are needed to
improve the linear park.
1
Mr. Jon Joslyn and Mr. Jack O'Neel of Young
America Homes appeared before the Council on
behalf of Mr. Mueller to discuss details of
the request for reducing the fees in question.
They presented the following facts in support
of the reduction: Offered the use of the
recreation facility to be constructed in the
subdivision for public services, such as
polling places, meetings by civic organizations,
etc., absorbed the entire cost of improving
Park Lane at no expense to the City (City
being -the adjacent land owner), dedicated
the land for the street, dedicated property
along Washington Creek
Washington Creek Bridge
one -half of the cost.
was due to offset some
improving all of Park
the bridge. In asking
they also pointed out
was-indicated to them
a credit would be due
Lane.
and constructed the
contributing over
They felt that credit
of the costs for
Lane and for building
for the reduction,
that at one time it
-by City officials that
for improving Park
Following some discussion and consideration
of-facts, Resolution #6595 N.C.S. reducing
Neighborhood Park and Beautification Fees
for Greenbriar #2, Phase I, Subdivision was
introduced by Councilman Perry, Jr., seconded
by Councilman Mattei, and DEFEATED by the
following vote:
1
Ayes: Councilmen Brunner and Cavanagh, Jr.
Noes: Councilmen Daly, Harberson, Mattei,
Perry, Jr., and Mayor Putnam.
Claims and Bills Resolution #6596 N.C.S. approving claims and
Res #6596 NCS bills #318 to #421, inclusive, and #2227 to
#2241, inclusive, was introduced by Councilman
Mattei, seconded by Councilman Harberson,
and adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
- -
� �
r
May 6, 1974
Program of Service City Manager Robert Meyer presented the
1974 -75 Program of Service for 1974 -75. He sug-
gested that Council members review the
report for discussion in early June.
Outside Sewer Fees City Manager Robert Meyer referred to a
breakdown of proposed annual charges and
conversion into monthly charges based on the
minimum 1964 annual charge of $75 per
single -family dwelling as a guideline for_
Council consideration to establish revised
outside sewer charges as ordered February
28, 1974,, by Judge Mahan of the Superior
Court of the State of California for the
County of Sonoma in the case of Harold W.
Wojciechowski,'e,t al, vs City of Petaluma,,
et al,_ Mr. Meyer asked for Council direction
so that an ordinance c.an be prepared and
become, effective on July 1st for. the next
outside sewer billing.
Copy of the City Man.ager's report on the
breakdown of the proposed outside sewer
fees, submitted and filed.
Copy of Judge Mahan's order submitted and
filed..
Some discussion followed and in regard.to a
question raised, it was the City Attorney's
opinion that the law permits charging more
for sewer services outside of the City
limits.than for services inside of the City.
The following addressed the Council regarding
the issue: Leonard Svinth, 1541 Mountain
View Avenue; Brand Johnson, 10 Highland
Road; Harold Wojcie.chowski, 831 Madison
Street; Rich;ard'Harm, 454 Purrington Road,.
Upon conclusion, the City Attorney was
directed to preare an ordinance with blank
spaces for the .charge_s. for Council considera-
tion at the May 20th meeting.
X37 T
Microfilm Equipment. Report dated May 3, 1.974,, from David L.
Res #6597 NCS Smith, Administrative Intern, and concurred
by Police Chief Larry Higgins, City Clerk
Lillian Nommsen,_ and :Building Official Henry
Anderson explaining that after resea >rch of
the available products from var'iousmicrofilm
companies, it was concluded that 3M Company
offers the only system that is completely
consistent with the City's needs,- submitted
and filed. The staff recommended in the
report that the Council authorize purchase
of the equipment from 3M Company for a total
sum of $1 plus freight and applicable
taxes.
Discussion followed and in answer to a
question raised regarding City Charter
Section 68 (requiring that public works and
purchases to be done and made by contract,
after calling for bids, when such work and
purchases exceed $3,000), it was the City
r
May 6, 1974
165
Microfilm.Equipment
Attorney's opinion that in view of the
Res #6597 NCS
report explaining the special needs, it is
(continued)
not necessary to go to competitive bidding
because demands for the system required for
the users would not meet the other manu-
facturers' equipment. Under these circum-
stances, competitive bidding is not required.
Resolution #6597 N.C.S. authorizing the
purchase of microfilm equipment from 3M was
introduced by Councilman Cavanagh, Jr.,
seconded by Councilman Brunner, and adopted
by 7 affirmative votes.
Intra -City Bus
City Manager Robert Meyer reported that the
Feasibility Study
Intra -city Bus Feasibility Study has been
received and will be presented by the consultant,
Kaiser Engine.er;s, at the May 20th Council
meeting pending confirmation of the date by
the Director of Public Works.
Population - -City
City Manager Robert Meyer reported that for
of Petaluma
the purposes of SB 90 and according to a
report-of the State of California, the --
official population of Petaluma as of
January 1, 1974, is 31,150.
"Population of Sonoma County cities -- January 1,
1973 and 1974" prepared by the City Manager,
submitted and filed. Mr. Meyer briefly
reviewed the statistics shown thereon.
Cost of Election --
City Manager Robert Meyer reported to the '51s v
June 12, 1973
Council that the cost of the June 12, 1973,
Municipal Election was $16,809.16.
Census
City Manager Robert Meyer also reported that
after 1975, the State of California will no
longer certify any population for gas tax
purposes; and in order t6 obtain a certification,
an actual count will have to be made. The
City's share for a County -wide count will be
$10,948 plus 15/20% overhead.
"I" Street at _
City Manager Robert Meyer reported that
Olive Street
Director of Public Works David Young has
Reconstruction
submitted an application to the State Department
Project
of Transportation requesting funds under the
Highway Safety Act of 1973 - -Safer Roads
Demonstration Program -- covering reconstruction
of "I" Street at Olive Street for an estimated
amount of $35,800.
Revenue
City Manager Robert Meyer reported that
Sharing
Revenue Sharing Projects for 1974 -75 are to
Projects
be filed by the Council and received in
Washington, D.C., by June 24, 1974. The
total amount of the City's entitlement is
$324,389. The procedure requires holding a
public hearing which is to be published in
the local newspaper. In order to meet the
deadline, the Council will have to officially
act no later than June 10, 1974.
May 6, 1974
Mayors.' and City Manager Robert Meyer reviewed the
Councilmen's speakers scheduled at the :subject meeting on
Association of Thursday, May '9, 1974, in Sonoma. The Mayor.
Sonoma County and all Councilmen, except Councilman Mattei,
Meeting indicated to the City Manager that they
would be - attending the meeting..
Taxicab Rates Letter dated May 4, 1974, from Myrel A. Moss
proposing an increase in taxicab rate's
submitted-and filed.- Councilman Cavanagh,
Jr., Chairman of the Council Taxicab Committee,
informed the Council that the Committee has
not met-on the -proposal as yet.
Mr. Leo Nielsen df the Taxicab Company was
present to briefly discuss the proposal.
By gener :al concurrence of the Council, it
was agreed that the Committee review and
study the proposal for a recommendation
thereon to the Council on May 20, 1974.
Park Development At Councilman Brunner's request, the!Mayor
Fund directed City Manager Robert Meyer and
Director of Community Development Frank Gray
to explore the matter of developing an
amendment to the Park Development Fund
Ordinance (the ordinance which sets forth a
reduction in fees when a developer provides
a recreation facility) to allow for credit
when negotiation is made on other improve-
ments being furnished such as in a case
reported by Mr. Joslyn of Young America
Homes earlier in the meeting.
Petaluma Councilman Perry, Jr., reported that a
Cooperative program is being studied with the Petaluma
Creamery Truck Cooperative Creamery regarding the matter
Parking of parking their trucks on the streets.
Councilmari.CavanagY, Jr., added that a
serious accident- occurred in the vicinity of
the Creamery Friday evening at Upham and
English Streets due to poor sight distance
at the intersection.
Environmental
Director of Community Development Frank Gray
Quality
reported to the Council that currently the
Act of 1970
guidelines - adopted by the City in relation
Res #6598 NCS
to the California Environmental Quality Act
provide-that-projects that are administerial,
categor•ica•lly-- exempt, or an emergency have
18.0 day's statute of limitations. The amend-
ment to the CEQA Act provides that if -the
City will file a notice of exemption with
the County Clerk, that this statute of
-limi= tations can be reduced to 35 days. Mr.
Gray stated that the proposed resolution
covers the ,modf icatIons to the City' s
guidelines to provide for the 35 day .limita-
tion.
Resolution #6598 N.C.S. amending Resolution
#6533 N,.C.S.-to provided for notices of
exemption was introduced by .Councilman
Matte.i, seconded : by Counilman Daly, and
1
adopted by 7 affirmative votes.
May 6, 1974
Residential Director of Community Development Frank Gray
Development presented "Priority List for Processing
Applications Developments," with schedule attached,
"Minimum Processing Time," for Council
approval, submitted and filed. He pointed
out that the list sets forth the date of
previous and'the date of each ap-
plication's state of readiness prepared in
accordance with Council direction to process
applications in the following order: (1)
Site design; (2) final maps; (3) tentative
maps; (4) rezoning; and (5) total procedure.
However, he noted one deviation-- Greenbriar,
Phases #1 and #2, and U. S. Equities' Alder -
wood Subdivision, Phases #2 and #3, are
being processed ahead of Debra Homes because
of the state of readiness. He also noted
that the minimum processing schedule will be
flexible in accordance with the applicant's
state of readiness.
In response to Councilman Daly, Mr. Gray
stated that the priority list does not
require any action by the Planning Commis -
sion, but only the approval of the Council.
Mr. Gray also pointed out that annexations
are not included in the list of priorities
and the Council concurred that annexation
applications will only be processed when the
Council decides to entertain such action
after the completion of the items on the
subject priority list.
The Council also concurred with approval of
the priority list and schedule of minimum
processing as submitted by the staff.
Penngrove Area Re: Council instruction January 28, 1974,
Sewer Service to Director of Public Works David Young and
Director of Public Works of Sonoma County
Don Head to investigate a method of providing
sewer service to the Penngrove area - -Mr.
James Gossett, the County's consulting
engineer, addressed the Council on the
subject. He explained the proposal of
connecting to the City's federally financed
trunk sewer (City's Madison Street trunk
line) with a 10 -inch sewer line to handle
the ultimate growth of the small area in-
cluded in the Regional Water Quality Control
Board's septic tank ban (Cease and Desist
Order to ban septic tanks by October 1976)
and to provide a firm limitation on the
capacity that the pipe would carry. He
stated further that the ultimate capacity of
this line would service 2,200 people. An
alternative to the proposal of connecting to
Petaluma would be to construct a small
treatment plant in the Penngrove area with a
capacity to handle the existing population
of 500 with an ultimate capacity of 2,200
people to serve the area defined in the
Regional Board's septic tank ban.
May 6, 1974
Penngrove Area Mr. Head also addressed the Council_ regarding
Sewer Service the health hazards.i_n the Penngrove area;
(continued) and,_i.t was.his recommendation that the,
service be provide,d Petaluma in order to
conform.to the Regional Plan.
In discussing the proposal, the question
was'raised by the Council of the City's
. legal position (,relative to the Court's
ruling on-the growth control suit) of
accepting the,proposal to provide outside
sewer service to the Penngrove area and
then the City.refuse to annex land adjacent
to the City,in,order, to control growth. It
was the City Attorney's opinion that if the
City determined. not to annex areas for a
period . of time based upon lack of capacity
of the present sewer plan and for .other
reasons, but in the interim period Penngrove
has been given service, the City cannot
refuse at a later date an annexation as
this could lead to more complicated litigation.
He further,added that he appreciated the
health .hazarrd approach,, but the implications
of the „present suit and the implications of
the possibilities as set forth in the
judge's Findings and Conclusions and Order,
it would be unwise,at the present time for
the C.ity,to.accommodate Penngrove.
Upon conclusion of_the discussion and
consideration of the matter, a motion was
made by:Councilman baly•and seconded by
Councilman Perry, Jr., denying Penngrove's
request..to connect to the City sewer system
because: of the Court's order on the growth
control suit. Motion carried unanimously.
Historic and Report dated:April 25, 1974, from Frank B.,_
Preservation Gray,Technical Advisor to the Mayor's
Article_ -- Select Committee on Historic and Cultural
Zoning Ordinance' Preservation, re modifications to the
Ord #1138 NCS proposed Article 1.7 of Zoning Ordinance
#1072..N.C.,S., submitted and filed.
Councilman Matted reported that the Mayor's
Select Committee, and members of the Chamber
of Commerce and Downtown Improvement Committee
met and resolved the questions that were
presented at.the last Council meeting on
the subject.ordnance; whereupon, Ordinance
#1138 N...C.S. amending .Zoning Ordinance
#1072'.N;::C.S:,. by adding Article 17 to provide
.for designation, preservation, and control
of the historic =and cultu=ral environment
and significant landmarks and district's was
introduced by Councilman Harberson, seconded
by Councilman,Matte :, and ordered published
by 7 affirmative .votes.
Historic and Ordinance #1139 -N. C..,S. amending the Petaluma
Cultural Municipal Code by adding Chapter 2.30 to
Preservation Title 2 to establish a Historic and Cultural
Committee Preservation Committee and delineating its
Ord #1139 NCS duties and powers was introduced.by Councilman
Harberson, seconded by Councilman Brunner;
and ordered published by 7 affirmative votes.
1
�I
1 69
May 6, 1974
Regulate Indirect Ordinance #1134 N.C.S. amending Zoning
Glare (Search Ordinance #1072 N.C.S., Article 22, Section
Lights) 22- 304.2, to regulate indirect glare (search`
Ord #1134 NCS lights) was introduced by Councilman Harberson,
(Second Reading) seconded by Councilman Mattei, and adopted
by 6 affirmative and 1 negative votes.
Councilman Brunner voted "no."
North Petaluma Councilman Daly reiterated his objection to
Annexation #6 the annexation by stating that he continues'��/
Ord #2135 NCS to be of the opinion that the City should --
(Second Reading) not annex any more property until all
infilling in the City is complete.
Ordinance #1135 N.C.S. annexing territory
described as North Petaluma Annexation #6
to the City of Petaluma was introduced by
Councilman Brunner, seconded by Councilman
Mattei, and adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Jr.,
Mattei, and Perry, Jr.
Noes: Councilmen Daly, Harberson, and
Mayor Putnam.
AB 2040 Because Assembly Bill 2040 has been revised
a number of times and will be before the
State Senate soon, Councilman Cavanagh,
Jr., requested Council reaffirmation of its
opposition to the Bill as expressed in
Resolution #6309 - N.C.S., dated May 21,
1973. A motion was made by Councilman
Cavanagh, Jr., and seconded by Councilman
Daly, that a letter be written reaffirming
the City's position. Motion carried unani-
mously. The City Clerk was directed to
send an immediate letter.to those listed on
the resolution;* `plus a 'copy to Senator
Behr.
Mayor's Select Mr. Dennis Pooler, member of the subject
Committee on -.. Committee, presented a copy of the statement
Historic..- :. of Fred Schram on behalf of the Mayor's
Preservation Select Committee on Historic Preservation
made before the Petaluma City Council
April 15, 1974.
Mr. Pooler also presented a written statement
to the Petaluma City Council for filing at
the May 20th Council meeting when the.
ordinance will be considered for adoption.
He added that he will be unable to attend
the meeting at that time.
The two statements submitted and filed.
Mt. View Estates Copy of letter dated-May 1, 1974, from ,569F
Subdivision Chief Building Inspector Henry E. Anderson
to Milt Hudis, engineer for the subdivision,
of an inspection made by the Assistant City
Engineer and the Building Inspectors of the
retaining walls in the subject subdivision.,
submitted and filed.
Memo dated May 6, 1974, from Chief Building
Inspector Henry E. Anderson to Director of
Public Works David Young of the corrections
and inspections to be made at the subject
subdivision, submitted and filed.
ME
May 6, 1974
Mt. View Estates Mr. Young reviewed the May 6th list for
Subdivision Council information.
(continued)
Mr. Richard:Nucian, real estate agent,__
appeared before the Council on behalf of
the buyers and asked whether the. homes are
only released when the entire subdivision
is completed. It was indicated to Mr,.
Nucian that the Council's policy is not to
grunt any occupancy permits until al -1,
public improvements are completed by.the
developer.
Adjourned Meeting City Manager Robert Meyer announced that an
adjourned meeting is necessary on May 13,
1974,.to act on the recommendation -of the
Water Commis the water rationing
plan for .the summer of 1974.
Adjournment There being no further business to come
before.the.Council, the meeting was adjourned
at 11:35, o',clock p.m. to an executive
session and to Monday, May 13,. 1974, at
7.:.30 o' clock .p:m.
Mayor,
Attest"
•
Cit Clerk