HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 04/14/19754'.27
MINUTES OF MEETING
OF CITY COUNCIL
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
APRIL 14; 1975
COUNCIL MEETING
ATTENDANCE
BID OPENING- -
SUBMERSIBLE
PUMP MOTOR
RES #6894 NCS
An Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of
Petaluma was called to order by Mayor Putnam
at the hour 7.:30 p.m.
Present: Councilmen Brunner, Cavanagh, Daly, Harberson,
Mattei, Perry and Mayor Putnam.
Absent: None.
Assistant Purchasing Officer David Smith reported to �Q
the Council two bids had been received for the sub -
mersible pump motor for the Magnolia Pump Station.
Bartley Pump, Inc., of Santa Rosa bid $3,950 and Les
Petersen Drilling & Pump Inc., Santa Rosa, bid
$3,760.88. The bid from Les Peterson was not accom-
panied by a bid bond.
City Attorney Matt Hudson reported the bid documents stipulate bids should be
accompanied by a cashier's check, certified check, bidder bond, or money
order made payable to the City of Petaluma in an amount equal to 10% of the
amount of the bid. He also advised the Council they would have the option of
waiving any informalities.
In response to Mayor Putnam's :question why Petersen did not submit a bond
with their bid, Mr. Smith reported he had contacted Mr. Petersen who advised
in the past his company has never been required to submit a bid bond for such
a small amount. However, Mr. Petersen did state if it was an issue they
would provide a bid bond. City Attorney felt the Council could waive the
irregularity on this item without jeopardizing the Council's position.
Councilman Cavanagh reminded the Council that when the bids were received on
automobiles prior to tonight's meeting, the Council would not accept the low
bid because it was a nonconforming bid, the reason being a bid bond had not
been submitted. Councilman Harberson felt if the Council went back and
modified the bid to allow the low apparent bidder to be awarded this bid, it
would be setting a precedent. In future bids if companies feel they can get
away with not complying with specifications, they would do it.
Some discussion was held about receiving bids for two separate motors when
the Council was under the impression only one motor was available in the
area. Mr. Smith stated one of the motors was located in Fresno and the other
in San Jose. City Manager Robert Meyer then asked if it would be possible,
under this bid, to purchase both motors as an additional motor would be
needed in the near future. City Attorney Matt Hudson said the call for bids
was for only one motor and the Council would have to go out to bid again for
the second motor.
At the conclusion of-the discussion and because the Petersen Drilling &
Pump, Inc. bid was a nonconforming bid, the Resolution 46894 N.C.S. awarding
the contract for the purchase of one submersible electric motor for the
Magnolia Pumping Station to Bartley Pump, Inc:,, 4000 South Avenue,
Santa Rosa, California, in the amount of - $3; , 950 was 'introduced by*Councilmari
Daly, seconded by Councilman Harberson,•and approved by 7 affirmative votes`.
PRESENTATION TO City Manager Robert Meyer reported to the Council he
MARY MACHADO had been asked to present a diploma to Mary Machado
on behalf of the Board of Directors of LaSalle University.
Mrs. Machado completed the requirements for a
General Accounting Certificate last year and further
continued her education through LaSalle University by
taking advanced accounting courses. It was for the
completion of the latter course of study the certificate
was being presented. Mr. Meyer offered his congratulations
to Mrs. Machado for completion of a very difficult
course. Mayor Putnam, on behalf of the Council,
commended her and acknowledged members of her family
who were in the audience.
April 14, 1975
DATE FOR City Manager Robert Meyer asked the Council's permis-
PRESENTATION-- sion to present the preliminary budget to them June
1 PRELIMINARY_ 16, 1975, . instead of May 1, 1975, as required by the
BUDGET Charter. A motion was made by Councilman Perry;
seconded by Councilman Mattei, setting the date for.
the presentation of the preliminary budget at June
16, 1975. Motion carried unanimously.
TRANSIT SYSTEM Director of Public'Works David Young reviewed the
AI t SURVEY.RESULTS; responses to the proposed Municipal Bus System ques-
GOLDEN'GATE BUS tionnaire which had been sent out in the water billing.
PROPOSALS He reported 10,520 living units were surveyed and
2,88.7 responses were received, indicating a 27%
response,. The questions were reviewed by Mr. Young
along with the comments contained- in_the report. A .
copy of the report is on file with the.City Clerk.
Councilman Cavanagh asked if the sampling and the percentages could be related
to the total population and Mr. Young said he felt that ridership be
somewhere in the neighborhood of 84 %. Mr. Young further stated that a 27%
response was indicative of a high degree of community interest -in - the idea of
a bus system.
Mr. Jerome Kuykendall, Assistant to the General Manager for Planning and
Research, and Bruce Richard, Senior Planner, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, and
Transportation District, were,present'at the meeting to review the proposal
made by the Golden Gate Bridge -, Highway, and Transportation,District.on a
five -route bus system for the City of Petaluma. A copy of this proposal
contained in the letter dated March 28, 1975, with an attached map showing
the various routes as well as the general schedule and.mileage and expense
report., are filed with the City Clerk.
For the benefit of the Council and the audience, Mr. Bruce Richard outlined
the routes proposed stating that the plan.calls for a radial system.with the _
center lieing•in the downtown area at the Greyhound Bus Depot. Mr.. Richard
stated when they prepared their proposal it became clear to them their present
equipment would not be able to service the west side of Petaluma and that
smaller buses would be required. The.-size and weight of their ,present equip-
ment would overburden the streets in the western section of the City. Ser-
vice could.be started rather quickly on the east side with their present .
equipment with two longer routes outlined for this section of the City. The_
routes proposed "for the western section of the City are shorter routes. Mr.
Richard explained the and time of various routes would.be from between -
8 to 18 minutes with the longer time being needed for the east side routes.
West Petaluma service would be� operated as soon as two or more. mid -size buses
could be purchased and delivered.. Mr. Richard explained some of-the advantages
they feel a dead -end route hats over a loop route. The dead -end system -would
allow the buses to keep on a regular schedule and give them a little leadway
at the end of the route if they encountered traffic difficulties. The disadvantage
of .the'de'ad -end route would be it would not service as many areas as a loop
route. However, passengers would not have to stay on the bus quite so long
as they would on a loop route system.
Councilman Harberson brought out the fact that the system completely ignores
service to the mobile home parks and one of the purposes for - instituting a
transit system was to serve the elderly'and many of the inhabitants, of the
mobile home parks are.senior citizens. Councilman Cavanagh then posed a
question whether or not the present Route- #71 which goes out Ely Boulevard,
could not be rerouted to go out McDowell Boulevard so as to service the
mobile home parks on North McDowell Boulevard. Mr. Richard also stated
Routes 470 and 480, which are presently in operation, go the full length -;of'
Petaluma"Blvd. at 30 minute intervals and .could service the north -south
ridership. The other . schedules are set up to operate every 30 minutes. Mr.
Richard then the hours of service and the schedules as outlined in
their proposal. Schedules are designed to have.a bus available every 30
minutes with the availability of. transfer to the intracounty system as well
as to'the system to San Francisco.
April 14, 1975
TRANSIT SYSTEM -- City Manager•Robert Meyer asked the schedule did
SURVEY RESULTS; not have a 5:00 a.m. starting time as the survey
GOLDEN GATE BUS indicated 11% of the riders would use the service
PROPOSALS that early in the morning.. Mr. Richard responded by
(Continued) stating they were of the opinion the service on the
east side of the community did offer this early
service. However, it was their feeling that most of
the people commuting were going to San Francisco. An earlier time
could be added to the west side service if required. He did advise the
Council, however, that starting two hours earlier would add to the cost of
the service and on the west side would depend upon the availability of the
smaller buses as the buses presently in service could not maneuver through
some of the areas on the side of the community. City Manager Robert'
'Meyer pointed out the idea of providing a transit service was to accommodate
the people of the community and not the commuters. Councilman Harberson
pointed out the routes proposed by the Golden Gate Transit System did not
service the shopping centers but 31% of the people responding to the survey
indicated they would use the buses for shopping. Mr. Richard explained that
if the district could get an agreement with the shopping centers to leave
ample room for the buses to maneuver and turn around, it could be arranged to
have service to the shopping centers.
The discussion then centered on the expenses for operating the system within
the City of Petaluma. Mr. Richard indicated 75% of.their costs are wages for
drivers. He reviewed the mileage and expense report attached to their pro-
posal. Mr. Richard further indicated that in order to operate a five -line
system five buses would be required. Included in the expense report are dead
head miles which would equal 20 miles one way for each bus each day, or 200
miles per day. If there was an area in Petaluma where the buses could be
stored, these dead head miles could be eliminated.
.Councilman Mattei then questioned whether or not the.Golden Gate Transit
District has experience in providing local service in other communities. Mr.
Richard indicated they do provide local services in Marin County and in the
city of San Rafael. Service has been in operation for approximately 3 -1/2
years, and in that time patronage has increased dramatically. They do feel,
however, the use for shopping.is not as high as.had -been expected.
With regard to.the expense of operating the system, Councilman Mattei agreed
that some type of transit system.should.be provided for the citizens for
their convenience and also to help alleviate the energy crisis. However, he
pointed out the cost of the proposal by the Golden Gate Transit District was
approximately $400,000 per year, which would add substantially to the tax
rate if outside sources did not continue to provide funds to operate the
system. Mr. Jerome KuykendalT then spoke regarding funding for transit
systems throughout the country. He indicated all entities are faced with the
same problem of finding sources of funding for the transportation systems
within their communities.. He said the Golden'Gate Bridge was faced with the
same decision 1970 when they started their transit system. The one thing
the Bridge District can do for the City of Petaluma, he . stated, would be to
allow the City to get into the bus business without creating its own facili-
ties and buying the equipment. The system proposed by the district would
provide the City the opportunity of trying something in the transit field to
see how it works and to evaluate it. Councilman Mattei indicated the City of
Petaluma could start their own system for about the same amount of money as
the proposal from the Golden Gate Bridge District. He further felt that it
could be operated less.expensively by the City because they would not pay the
salaries now being paid the drivers of the Golden Gate Transit System which
averages between $18,000 and $19,000 per year including fringe benefits.
Councilman Harberson pointed out the report prepared by the City staff indicated
the . cost for operating a system with a replacement cost was around $290,000
with UMTA and SB325 funds to carry the City through the first three years.
He asked then if UMTA funds could be applied to this proposal from Golden
Gate. Director of Public Works David Young replied this is one of the problems.
The City's preapplication to UMTA was returned asking the City to investigate
existing services. There is no guarantee the City will receive UMTA funds.
Mayor Putnam pointed out that the letter received from UMTA clearly indicated
they expected the City to explore the possibilities of having service provided
by the Golden Gate Transit District. If this were not feasible, they further
asked the City to look into the possibility of joining a county -wide transit
district or at least execute a joint- powers agreement with other communities.
430 1.
April 14, 1975 .
TRANSIT SYSTEM --
City Manager Rob.ert-Meyer stated the purpose of the
SURVEY RESULTS;
presentation by the Golden Gate Bridge District
GOLDEN GATE BUS
tonight was to take the first step as.required by
PROPOSALS
UMTA. The City still :has to hear from the -City of
(Continued)
Santa Rosa indicating what they would - .do. The County
has indicated they are not interested for at least
two years. There is a possibility still, of contrac-
ting the service out
to a. private party, and needs to be explored by the
City.. When all avenues have been explored and the information compiled, the
staff will bring the
matter back to the City Council. However, the Golden
Gate Bridge District
indicated in their letter of April in order to
implement the'east Petaluma service by June 1st, the District would need an
answer from the City by Monday, April 21, 1975. In the event a decision is
not reached by that date, service may be instituted later than June lst, and
the next most desirable time would be September 7, 1975.
At the conclusion of the discussion on the transit system, Mayor.Putnam
thanked' Mr. Kuykendall and Mr. 'Richard for their presentation.
OUTSIDE SEWER Ordinance No. 1171 N.C.S. introduced by Councilman
FEES Daly, seconded by Councilman Brunner, amending P:eta-
ORD #1171 -NCS luma Municipal Chapter'15.56, Section 15.56.060,
SECOND.READING providing for outside sewer fees, was adopted by 7
affirmative votes.
APPOINTMENT -- Mayor Putnam prefaced the adoption of the resolution
MRS. ELIZABETH by stating the City of Petaluma has not had a member
DALY, DIRECTOR, on the Board of Directors• of the Sonoma County Arts
SONOMA COUNTY Council and'she had asked the City Attorney to prepare
ARTS COUNCIL the following resolution. Resolution X66895 N.C.S.
RES X66895 NCS appointing Mrs. Elizabeth Daly to'the Board of Directors,
Sonoma County Arts Council, was introduced by Mayor
Putnam, seconded by Councilman Perry and approved by
6 affirmative votes,-Councilman Daly abstained.
Prior to adjourning the meeting, Mayor Putnam explained to the audience the
Council would be retiring to a study .session for the purpose of reviewing the
.Program of. Service for the Recreation Department. The session would be for
the purpose'of reviewing the presentation by' the staff to the City.Council of
the Program of Service for the fiscal- year 1975 -76. It would not be a general
discussion of any specific items of: -the Program. She invited those who were
interested to observe if they so desired.
ADJOURNMENT There being-no further business to come before the
Council, the meeting_ was adjourned at 9:02 p.m. to a
S'tud'y Session.
Mayor
Attest:
City C rk-